A failed exhibition?

About the exhibition “Augustin Rouart in his world, with Julie Manet, Berthe Morisot, Maurice Denis…”, visible at the Villa Montebello museum in Trouville-sur-Mer until September 22.

Those who are being dressed for winter by the magazine L’Oeil are the Villa Montebello museum and the painter Augustin Rouart (1907-1997), the subject of an exhibition in Trouville-sur-Mer that is still visible until September 22, but whose title, while it has surely enticed art lovers and critics, has inevitably disappointed more than one, so misleading is it. Yes indeed… When you read “Augustin Rouart in his world, with Julie Manet, Berthe Morisot, Maurice Denis…”, you expect not only to see many paintings by these contemporary artists of the period in question, but also to learn more about the man whose reputation is, it must be said, quite confidential. However, the visitor to the Villa Montebello museum in Trouville-sur-Mer finds neither! “In total, there is one painting by Maurice Denis, one by Julie Manet, one by Berthe Morisot and one by Henry Lerolle,” writes Isabelle Manca-Kunert in an article that is all the more amusing to read this summer since it is not so common to come across negative reviews in the pages of this art magazine. “All the rest are paintings by Augustin Rouart (1907-1997) exhibited without any scientific discussion. It is surprisingly a rather lax exhibition for a museum. Visitors are left to their own devices since they will find neither a detailed label nor a room panel to learn a little more about the artist being highlighted. And yet, rightly so, he is not one of the best known.” » It is of course the “rightly” that drives the point home and makes me smile… The journalist only spotted “a few decent paintings” in the exhibition, in addition to finding it distressing that the only device animating the exhibition route was “a series of kakemonos reproducing sometimes an enlarged detail of a painting, sometimes a snapshot of the painter holding one of his paintings framed with his monogram, imitating that of Albrecht Dürer.” In short, according to her, even the big art galleries are now making more efforts at mediation. And according to my grandmother, who was not an art critic at all, you can’t catch flies with vinegar.

So what happened in Trouville to lead to this failure? The journalist’s explanation is ultimately quite simple. “Apart from a few interesting paintings, such as Le Nageur and Le Petit Pêcheur, the rest of the route is lacking in skimming. In the still life room, a few paintings are valid, alongside others depicting vases filled with flowers and fruit arranged without talent or originality. This is the problem when a museum exhibits in bulk and without critical scrutiny the works proposed by a rights holder. " Bam, take that in the teeth ...

If Rouart had been rediscovered and appreciated in academic or critical contexts, obviously, it could have indicated an authentic recognition of his talent. Give rise to documented cultural mediation. And increase the rating of his works of art for sale on the art market at the same time. However, his revaluation here seems to be wanted only by his rights holders. Which is not a bad thing in itself, let's be clear. The dynamics of posthumous promotion are legitimate and often bear fruit. Sometimes, artists who are unfairly less known or undervalued during their lifetime or in the decades that follow benefit from a belated revaluation, and the efforts of rights holders can play a role in this revaluation. But there has to be real artistic and critical interest for it to take off. And it is rarely the beneficiaries who can judge this…

It is common for the descendants of an artist, whether family members or other heirs, to seek to promote the work of this artist after his death. This is often done for several reasons. The beneficiaries wish to preserve the cultural and artistic legacy of their ancestor. They seek institutional and critical recognition, sometimes in the hope of seeing it enter important collections. Finally, it is undeniable that the market value of the work created by the great-grandfather or great-uncle can also be a significant motivation. Better visibility and recognition can indeed increase the value of works on the art market.

In the case of Augustin Rouart, it seems that the efforts to organize exhibitions and promote his work were partly motivated by a desire to make him known to a wider audience and to reposition him in the history of art. Except that the evaluation of an artist is not done only by exhibitions, but also by their critical reception and the art market. Augustin Rouart never achieved the same recognition as his contemporaries such as Maurice Denis or Berthe Morisot, that is a fact. Several factors can explain this. Unlike contemporary artists of his time for example, he did not benefit from the same visibility in the major artistic or institutional circles. His style, although technically solid, was perhaps not innovative enough to mark a break or a notable evolution in the history of art.

Nevertheless, we can recognize in Rouart a real technical mastery, particularly in drawing and the use of colors. His compositions are often well structured, and he uses color expressively. Although he was influenced by movements such as post-impressionism and symbolism, he nevertheless developed a personal style marked by a sensitivity to light and a poetic atmosphere. As for his themes, we see that Rouart often focuses on intimate scenes, portraits and landscapes, reflecting a personal vision of the world that can touch some viewers… but seem much more conventional to others. I will not pass judgment on the value of Augustin Rouart’s paintings. When it comes to art, there has always been something for everyone, and I hope that it will always be so. However, I will allow myself to regret that the exhibition does not offer enough historical and artistic contextualization on Augustin Rouart and his relationships with the other artists presented. I would have loved to understand the way in which Rouart integrated himself into the artistic landscape of his time, his exact influences, and how he interacted with contemporary artistic movements.

In short, although the exhibition “Augustin Rouart in his world, with Julie Manet, Berthe Morisot, Maurice Denis..” can be praised for its ambition to highlight a lesser-known artist and to forge links with major figures in French art, it seems legitimate to me that it should also be criticized for its lack of thematic coherence and contextualization, as much as for its disappointing scenography. Yes, we museum visitors really like to learn…

Article written by Valibri en Roulotte