Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Leonard JamesEnsorsChrists 1995
Leonard JamesEnsorsChrists 1995
Reinterpretation
Author(s): Mark Leonard and Louise Lippincott
Source: Art Journal , Summer, 1995, Vol. 54, No. 2, Conservation and Art History
(Summer, 1995), pp. 18-27
Published by: CAA
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
CAA is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Art Journal
SUMMER 1995
FIG. 2 James Ensor, The Entry of Christ into Jerusalem, 1885, graphite and
ContW crayon on paper, 87/8 x 61/2 inches. J. Paul Getty Museum, Malibu.
SUMMER 1995
fully filled in the lines of his extensive drawing and was sists of deliberately chosen and juxtaposed caricature por-
certainly not prone to bursts of spontaneity or change. In fact, traits whose proper identification will be essential for
aside from the changes within the inscriptions of the banners, unraveling Ensor's meaning. That the "grandmotherly" pro-
there are virtually no major pentimenti to be found within file in the lower right represents Sade indicates how rich the
Christ's Entry into Brussels. In a detail from the lower right of possibilities may be. Furthermore, it seems likely that in this
the painting (fig. 3), it is possible to see that bordering colors essential area of the canvas, Ensor's hodgepodge of painting
of paint do not overlap, or as in the profile of the head, even techniques-from thin washes (as in the depiction of Sade) to
touch. Ensor simply left the bare ground visible between the elaborately decorative impastos to loose, broad strokes-
outlines of the underdrawing. The silhouetted effects of the may also have been carefully considered and should be
forms are heightened by this careful and controlled handling treated as meaningful. Are they, in fact, parodies of contem-
of the paint. porary avant-garde styles? At the same time, it remains to be
In the upper center of the picture, in the very heart of determined whether those areas of enormous, sloppy brush-
the boisterous distant crowd scene, is a small detail (fig. 4) work, such as the banner and the green platform, belong to
that illustrates the importance of the underdrawing to the Ensor's program or simply resulted from his last-minute rush
underlying conception of the picture. A head of a figure to cover blank canvas in time for the exhibition at Les Vingt.
peeks out of the crowd, and a banner waving in the breeze A notable discovery occurred during the course of
bisects the tiny face. It would not have been unusual if Ensor cleaning the center of the picture. The central figure of
had blocked in the entire head and then painted the flag on Christ appears to be a self-portrait of Ensor, and it would be
top of the background figure. However, Ensor chose to paint reasonable to expect that this area of the picture was painted
the head of this figure in two pieces; in the early stages of with exceptional care.8 In fact, after completing the under-
underdrawing, the face was sharply divided by the planned drawing Ensor applied a thin layer of yellow pigment to this
presence of the flag. In light of the fact that this is a area in a triangular shape (fig. 5). The bright yellow color
thumbnail-sized detail within a fourteen-foot canvas, Ensor's (which was most likely chrome yellow, a pigment that has
unwavering faithfulness to his own underdrawing is remark- been identified in several other locations within the picture)
able. It is apparent that the composition of Christ's Entry into heightened the entire area with an intense vibration. This
Brussels was developed fully before any paint was applied to technique is consistent with Ensor's obsessive fascination
the surface. with the religious and spiritual powers of light; in this case,
The implications of this discovery for future interpreta- the concept of Christ's halo (or aureole) as both a physical and
tions of the painting present a research nightmare. The spiritual source of light and power has been underscored by
foreground multitude no longer can be dismissed as a hallu- the preparatory layer of yellow paint.9 Today it is important to
cinatory collection of grotesques. Instead, it probably con- take into account the fact that the chrome yellows used in this
ART JOURNAL
iiii iiiii~i~iS A W
Ilk...
)}MW
iii! iAkt
:!A,
iV
it appears as if some of the banners in the painting were sentiments expressed in the Fanfares Doctrinaires banner, a
covered with writing that was subsequently painted over. key element in the composition at the left center (Ensor
This is clearly the case with the large yellow banner at the left originally painted the words Toujours Reussi in this banner in
center. In the etching this banner is inscribed with the words red and then reworked them in blue).
Les Charcutiers de Jerusalem; in the painting at least four Fortunately, cross-section samples were helpful in pro-
lines and quite a number of words appear to have been viding some important clues as to the nature and extent of
painted out (suggesting that, although the banner must have these few reworked areas. For example, a cross section taken
carried some sort of inscription, it never was identical to the from the area of overpainted lettering in the large yellow
etching). Unfortunately, X rays were not helpful in de- banner revealed a layer of red paint (vermilion) sandwiched
ciphering the overpainted slogan. between two layers of chrome yellow and lead white. The
A similar change occurred in the placard carried by chrome-yellow layers are similar, suggesting that the rework-
the large figure at the bottom center of the picture. In the ing is an early, original change rather than a later
etching, the words Vive Anseele et Jesus are proudly dis- intervention.
played; in the painting there are simply blank white stripes A few areas of the picture other than the banners were
in the corresponding positions. There are some descriptions found to have been overpainted, although once again this
of the painting from the early part of this century that suggest work was most likely done by Ensor himself. Many of the
that this slogan was painted out by Ensor himself.17 Once areas containing Prussian blue apparently developed flaking
again, X rays could not isolate the inscription from the heavy problems early in the life of the picture; these appear to have
layers of lead-white paint in this area. been retouched by the artist. A cross-section sample of the
Infrared reflectography proved to be equally fruitless blue paint from the Death figure in the lower left was taken,
in deciphering the inscriptions in these two banners because and two distinctly different layers of blue were found. The
the lettering in both cases was executed in a red-colored lower layer is a pure Prussian blue, and it contains a number
paint (which does not reflect light in the infrared range and of drying cracks, which are the result of natural aging. The
thus does not register with infrared viewing techniques). An upper layer (which is also Prussian blue, but in this case it is
infrared vidicon uncovered some changes in the inscriptions mixed with lead white) covers these cracks, indicating that it
contained within the banner at the far right of the composi- was applied after the lower layer had aged to some extent. The
tion. To the naked eye, the inscription reads (in blue paint) repaint was applied in a broad and generous fashion; it covers
Vive Jesus Roi de Bruxlles (the misspelling of Bruxelles is much of the original as well as the intermittent flake losses.
Ensor's own), although it is apparent that some reworking has In 1940 the Death figure was apparently damaged by bomb
occurred. An infrared vidicon reveals the words Vive Jesus fragments; Ensor still retained possession of the picture at
S. . ces reformes . . . libertes doctrinaires (other words occur, this point, and it is entirely possible that the repaint was
but they are illegible). These words may have echoed the applied by the artist himself.'8
ART JOURNAL
Christ's Entry into Brussels underwent a major series of flake losses that may have been applied during the 1950
treatments in the early 1950s, when the canvas was wax lined treatment were easily distinguished from the "original" co
and the thick varnish layer was applied. 9 All evidence points rections because they were applied on top of colored fills
to the fact that the picture had remained unvarnished up until Cleaning presented a complicated technical problem
that time. 2() the original paint was found to be soluble in nearly all of th
Upon its arrival at the Getty, the surface of Christ's traditional solvents that could have been used to remove the
Entry into Brussels was buried beneath a tobacco-brown- varnish. However, after much trial and error, a solution to th
colored layer of old varnish and grime. Fortunately the sur- problem was devised that made use of a solvent gel system.23
face of the picture compared favorably with the clarity and As an added bonus, this solution allowed for a saturated an
vibrancy of the paint surfaces found in the best examples of unblanched paint surface after cleaning that did not requir
Ensor's work.21 The picture was free of the types of abrasions revarnishing.24 Now that the picture has been restored to a
usually associated with past attempts at cleaning. No major unvarnished state, as apparently Ensor had wanted it, it w
24
damages were found; a few small paint losses were scattered not have to be recleaned (other than routine dusting) in th
across the surface of the picture, and these were due to past future.25
incidents of flaking, scratches, and small tears.22 Cleaning produced a number of dramatic changes in
%I
i!!i!'ii41,
..... 49Li~ ~i!i
WN
A4!
171
4N,.
471..1
SUMMER 1995
the visual impact of the picture. The simple intensities of the ing. The lining canvas was removed, as were many pounds of
colors were restored, and the complicated effects of Ensor's wax-resin adhesive. During this procedure, a French cus-
compositional devices were revealed. The alterations were toms stamp discovered on the reverse of the original fabric
especially significant in the background, where high-keyed indicated that the picture was unlined when it went to the
pinks, blues, and yellows emerged to create an atmospheric Ensor exhibition in Paris in 1939. A new lining canvas was
perspective and surprising effects of spatial recession. Dur- prepared, and the picture was relined in two stages.27 This
ing the early stages of cleaning, the degree of change was treatment successfully removed all of the distortions of the
startling. However, any doubt about possible overcleaning surface.
was laid to rest when a full-scale copy of the picture made in Relining also brought about a significant visual
1929 (fig. 7) reappeared.26 The copy was commissioned by a change beyond simple elimination of the irregularities of the
Belgian firm that was considering issuing tapestry reproduc- canvas. Ensor's brushwork literally leaped forward, with a
tions of the image. The tapestries were never executed, but crisp, animated presence that had not been perceptible pre-
the copy still survives. It was executed by Haesaert in viously, and a surprising increase in the sense of depth and
gouache and oil on paper and supervised and corrected by movement resulted. After relining, Christ's Entry into
Ensor himself. It documents the visual state of the picture in Brussels was attached to a new stretcher, and the minor paint
1929, before the surface was varnished. When details from losses were filled and retouched.28
the copy were compared with the same details from the The final issue to be resolved was the frame. The
original, it was readily noted that, despite the obvious differ- picture arrived at the museum in a thin, crudely gilded and
ences in quality, the intensities of the colors were remarkably patinated molding. In a few areas the gilding had flaked away
similar. to reveal paint, suggesting that this molding had originally
Although the surface of the painting was not partic- been painted off-white. Comparisons of this molding with
ularly fragile, the picture had an unpleasant, lumpy appear- photographs of the framed Christ's Entry into Brussels when it
ance that resulted from pools of wax-resin adhesive trapped was still hanging in Ensor's house (fig. 9) supported the
between the original and lining canvases. After the cleaning, belief that the frames were identical in profile. The discovery
it became evident that something would have to be done to on the back of the frame of a Paris customs stamp similar to
rectify these extreme distortions of the surface. A raking that on the back of the original canvas indicated that it had
light photograph (fig. 8) dramatizes the disturbing, wrinkled been with the picture since at least 1939. Cross sections
effects produced by lumps of wax trapped behind the original confirmed that the frame still bore its original coat of white
canvas. As the wax-resin adhesive aged, it had also become paint, and that it had been gilded not once, but twice,
increasingly brittle, resulting in delamination of the canvas perhaps in a misguided effort to embellish the plain painted
at the edges. molding. It was possible to remove the gilding and to restore
These structural problems were solved through relin- the damaged surface of the frame to a close approximation of
ART JOURNAL
FIG. 9 Anthony Maurice, James Ensor Playing the Harmonium in His Drawing-Room Studio, 1933, gelatin silver print, 9/4 x 1111A16 inches. J. Paul Getty Museum,
Malibu.
FIG. 10 Willem de Kooning, Woman VI, 1953, oil on canvas, 68/2 x 581/2
inches. Carnegie Museum of Art, Pittsburgh, gift of G. David Thompson.
SUMMER 1995
5. Fiber samples were identified with the optical microscope. Prior to rernmoal of the
revarnishing. With a solvent gel system, however, it is often possible to recapture a
lining canvas, there had been some speculation about a horizontal seam running saturated surface, eliminating the need for revarnishing.
down the center of the picture. However, this apparently was the result of the Cleaning involved more than removal of dirt and discolored varnish. The surface
25.
impression left by a join in the protective paper facing used during the previous of the painting must have been covered with a protective tissue paper facing when the
canvas was lined in the 1950s: fragments of this paper facing were still scattered
lining: evidence of this irregularity disappeared during relining. When Ensor origi-
across the painting. The discolored varnish was all on top of these facing paper
nally painted the picture, the canvas was not stretched but was simply pinned to the
remnants, and when the paper was removed, the paint surface was found to be
wall of his studio. The painting was frequently rolled for storage and transportation
unvarnished, once again indicating that the picture was not varnished before the early
and was not permanently stretched until 1920 (the fabric impression from the reverse
1950s.
of the canvas can be seen impressed into the impasto in a few places). See Haesaerts,
"Quand James Ensor peignait." 31. 26. The copy was made for the Manufacture Nationale de tapis, tapisseries et tissus
d'art De Saedeller. It was recently exhibited in the Ensor exhibition in Munich at the
6. This head has been tentatively identified by members of the Paintings Department
Kunsthalle der Hypo-Kulturstiftung, March-May 1989. Ldia Schoonbaert et al.,
of the Getty Museum as the Marquis de Sade, based on comparisons with known
portraits. Janes Ensor, exh. cat. (Munich: Hirmer, 1989), 196, cat. no. 73.
7. Paul Haesaerts, Janmes Ensor (New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1959), 129. 27. The lining was done faceup on a vacuum hot table, using minimal pressure and
8. Gert Schiff, "Ensor the Exorcist," in Art the Ape o/ Nature: Studies in Honor o1heat. The p)icture was reline(d with a synthetic adhesive iBeva) to a new piece of
H. W. Janson (New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1981), 725. Belgian linen. Relining was necessary because of the fact that the original canvas
alone could not adequately support the weight of the thick paint.
9. Gisele Ollinger-Zinque. "Les Aureoles du Christ ou les sensibilitds de la luminre
28. A light weight Starofix aluminum stretcher was used. Retouching was carried( out
de James Ensor," Bulletin des Musdes rovaux des Beaux-Arts de Belgique, nos. 3-4
(1968): 197. with watercolors on top of gesso fills. Some final glazing was done with Lefranc and
10. Chrome yellow (lead chromate) is a pigment that darkens or turns brown with Bourgeois restoration colors in order to match the surface of the original.
aging. This phenomenon has also occurred within Vincent van Gogh's SunI/lower29. The overpaint and gilding layers were removed with a methylene chloride and
paintings. See Rutherford Gettens and George Stout, Painting Materials: A Short
water-based
give solvent
the effect of age.gel. The surface was reworked with egg tempera, and patinatett to
Ernt'yclopedia (New York: Dover. 1966). 106-7.
11. The four figures in this group have been identified as portraits of Ensor's familh 30. Mc(ough, "James Ensor's The Entry of Christ into Brussels." 25.
(from left to right: his sister, his mother, his grandmother, and his aunt). See Schiff,31. The painting was examined by Louise Lippincott with the assistance of Will
"Ensor the Exorcist." 719-37. Real, chief conservator, Carnegie Museum of Art.
12. The pigments found in the painting were vermilion, chrome yellow, organic re(d
(most likely a synthetic alizarine), red earth, emerald green, Prussian blue, synthetic
ultramarine, carbon black, and lead white. The pigment identification was (lone by
MARK LEONARD, conservator of paintings at the J. Paul
Getty Museum, is co-author of Looking at
Michael Schilling of the Getty Conservation Institute by means of polarized light Paintings: A Guide
microscopy and energy-dipersive X-ray fluorescence analysis. to Technical Terms (J. Paul Getty Museum and the British
13. Media analysis was carried out by Michele Derrick of the Getty Conservation
Museum).
Institute through infrared spectrometry.
14. Haesaerts, "Quand James Ensor peignait," 30-31. Haesaerts does not state the
,ur(e of this inf~ormation, but it is likely that it came from Ensor himself. LO UISE LI PPI NCOTT, associate curator of paintings at the
Getty
15. The lead contained in the white paint absorbs the X rays, thus preventing changes when the Ensor was purchased and restored, is now
within the intervening layer from registering the X-ray film.
curator offine arts at the Carnegie Museum of Art, Pittsburgh.
ART JOURNAL