The PENLEY artists.
Attributing the work of minor artists, particularly British nineteenth century, can lead to erroneous assumptions which are thereafter not challenged. Such is the case with the Penley family. Years ago, when I was full-time at Cheltenham Art Gallery, I became intrigued by watercolours attributed to Aaron Edwin Penley. At that time I had many other things on my mind and I did not give the subject much concentrated attention ? although I did add some further works to the existing collection of Penley works. Some years later I was called back to Cheltenham in a temporary capacity to catalogue the works on paper collection ? something which has claimed my attention over the subsequent years.
A lesson I have learnt is that nothing beats exploring in detail the actual, physical, work ? by which I mean examining every mark and inscription on back and front. When examining in close detail the Penley watercolour works I began to realise that revealing information was contained on the reverse of the work ? in particular that the name of the listed artist Aaron Edwin Penley was not that on the reverse of the work but a ?Edwin Aaron Penley?. In comparing the works of these two signatories I began to discern a possible difference between the works by Edwin Aaron and Aaron Edwin ? in terms of favoured size of paper and of technique. These differences were not obvious if one assumed that a work bearing the signature ?Penley? was the officially accepted Aaron Edwin. My first thoughts in those early days had been that Aaron Edwin sometimes used the alternative signature of ?Edwin Aaron? or ?E A? Penley. ? or that someone else had added the name. My later more concentrated attention in exhaustively cataloguing the collection revealed some information to which I had not previously paid much attention. It was recognising that one work bore a date after Aaron Edwin had died, listed as 1870, that I realised that we were dealing with more than one Penley.. In consulting the usual art reference books and articles, other sources like the Dictionary of National Biography and the catalogues of major collections, I found no reference to anybody other than an ?Aaron Edwin Penley : 1806-1870?. Being mainly otherwise engaged my pursuit of a solution to this problem did not go away but was put on the back burner. An unexpected breakthrough came when I came across a family history search and report by an Australian family whose roots had been in nineteenth century Britain and who counted amongst their forebears a Penley family. Family histories can be very complicated and raise a lot of unanswered questions ? this family tree was particularly complicated but had been well researched, giving a number of clues as to where I could find more information relevant to my pursuit of the Penley case. Unravelling the clues provided me with the following :-
PENLEY, Aaron Edwin. 1807-1870.
Born Rye, Sussex ? died Lewisham, London. Son of William Penley (d. 1838). Brother of William Henry Saulez/Sawley Penley (1793 ? 1866) a Drawing Master at Reading. Uncle of Edwin Aaron Penley (1828 ? 1893) Artist and Drawing Master. Father of Claude Penley (b1841) landscape painter. Specialised in landscape painting but also Portrait Painter and Water-Colour Painter to King William IV and Queen Adelaide. Drawing Master at Cheltenham College 1846 ? 1849.. Landscape Drawing Master at Royal Military Academy, Addiscombe and Woolwich. Member of New Water-Colour Society. Exhibited RA, BI, SS, NWS. Author of Author of ?A System of Water-Colour Painting? 1850, published by Winsor & Newton. ?The Elements of Perspective? 1851. ?The English School of Painting in Watercolours? 1861; ?Sketching from Nature in Water-Colours? 1869. Exhibited New Watercolour Society and RBA.
1 : An Unknown Seated Gentleman : 1844 : w/c : 29.6 x 24.6 : 1948.160.
2 : Huts at Dunevaggon : 1856 : drawing : 28.4 x 36.7 : 1978.975.
3 : Lake Landscape : 1862 : w/c : 16.6 x 26.6 : 1971.46.
4 : Lake Scene, Menaggio, Lake of Como : : w/c : 18.4 x 25.9 : 1972.116.2.
5 : Cadenabia, Lake of Como : : w/c : 17.8 x 25.7 : 1972.116.1.

PENLEY, Edwin Aaron. 1828 ? 1893.
Born Southsea, Hampshire, died Richmond, Surrey. Son of William Henry Saulez/Sawley Penley(1793 ? 1866), Drawing Master at Reading. Grandson of William Penley (d 1838). Nephew of Aaron Penley(1807 ? 1870). Landscape painter and Drawing Master. In 1851 lived and worked in Reading. In Tasmania in 1858. In 1861 living and working at 3 Wellington Street, Cheltenham, Glos. By 1891 living and working in Kingston, Surrey. In 1861 mentioned as being honoured for the invention of ?Improvements in the construction of Drawing Boards?. Exhibited RBA, RHA.
1 : Lakeland Scene : 1859 : w/c : 35.2 x 57.6 : 1972.56.1.
2 : Mountains and Lake with Castle and Cattle : 1859 : w/c : 35.1 x 57.7 : 1972.56.2.
3 : Patmos, Dodecanese : 1860 : w/c : 10.5 x 32.4 : 1973.22.
4 : Ruin with Cottage and Figure : 1861 : w/c : 10.7 x 32.8 : 1966.53.
5 : Mountain Scene : 1861 : w/c : 20 x 48.4 : 1948.6.
6 : View near Cheltenham : 1861 : w/c : 20.2 x 48.2 : 1957.13.
7 : Highland Landscape : 1862 : print, lithograph : 27.2 x 59.6 : 1936.59.
8 : Mountainous Lake Scene : 1873 : w/c : 10.4 x 28.3 : 1978.974.
9 : Mountains and Lake with Cottage and Figure : 1873 : w/c : 11.1 x 29.6 : 1978.973.
One thing is clear, the uncertainty of life as a Drawing Master!!
David Addison. November 2013..

And now for something different!

ChristChurch Cathedral, Oxford.

In case anyone should wonder why a Blog carrying at its head the picture of two churches  yet recently appears to be solely concerned with Art Appreciation at the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford  then let me explain, if not apologise!

Those two churches are the two parish churches, Ipsden and North Stoke, for which I have the privilege of being parish priest. They are part of the Langtree Team of parishes (see the Langtree Team website) headed by a Rector, Revd Kevin Davies and within which I am a Team Vicar. The other image at the top of this blog is of a famous painting (Uccello’s ‘The Hunt’) at the Ashmolean Museum – an institution for which I regularly lead adult Art Appreciation groups.

Is this a case of a cleric dabbling in Art History or an Art Historian dabbling in the Church? A reasonable question. A quick ref to my brief ‘BIO’ on this site might go some way to providing an explanation – that I am not a ‘dabbler’ in either spheres!

A basic belief of mine is that human life and its contexts are all interrelated – and that historical appreciation is essential for understanding and tackling our contemporary world. The insularities of Art and Art History and of the Church and Religion are false divisions. That is why my main thrust as an art historian and art curator, and as a Priest, has been to speak to those who are in the world at large. In my small medieval churches I regularly remind people that the present needs to understand the past.                                                                                                                     The other day I was on duty at our Cathedral of ChristChurch in Oxford as a ‘Day-Chaplain’; it is a large and ancient historic building – and I was struck again by how relevant the ancient was to the modern and the evidence of the constant evolving and sharing  of human knowledge and experience. A favourite spot for me in the Cathedral is the stone slab in the floor of the south aisle which commemorates John and Charles Wesley – an item which causes many visitors to pause and then ask the question why Methodists are commemorated in an Anglican Cathedral. The point is that the Wesleys, apart from having been students at ChristChurch, were Anglican priests and remained so all their lives – the separation called ‘Methodism’ was not their doing but others who followed. They wished to reform the Anglican Church but not to separate – bring the Church back to the realities of the present but not to throw out the past.   That memorial slab stands close by the pulpit in the Cathedral and this present and past unity was emphasised when on that day I included in the hourly prayers, pronounced to the visitors, a prayer for the victims of the bombing at the Boston Marathon which had occurred the previous day. Immediately after I was approached by several American visitors to thank me for publicly praying for their countrymen – one couple said, with tears in their eyes, that this was the first they had heard of the bombing; that ancient church had conveyed a very contemporary  and relevant message and a sense of solidarity and human sympathy which goes beyond divisions of religion or geography or of time.

Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.

Religion is not the confine of the ‘Religious’ or the ‘Church’ – and likewise Art is not the confine of esoteric art historians or art galleries. Putting it crudely – Religion is not for the religious and its institutions – Art is not for artists and art historians – both art and religion, if they are to mean anything, are for ‘Everyman’. Personally I cannot separate Art and Religion – they are both part of what I am.

David Addison.

ASHMOLEAN MUSEUM, OXFORD.

Art Appreciation sessions led by David Addison.

‘The Art of Still-Life’ : Fridays May 3^rd to 24^th : 4 afternoons 2pm-4pm.

Still-Life painting, including Flower Painting, may not appear the most exciting subject matter for a painting – but it has been around for a long time meaning that it was something that patrons clearly wanted. The fact is that Still-Life has hidden depths – a wealth of content, meaning and practice. This series seeks to explore, question, and critically appreciate those mysteries.

STUDY DAY : ‘Discovering Saints and their Worlds’ : Tuesday 25^th June : 10.30am to 3.30pm.

What are Saints? Why are there Saints? We shall tackle these questions, and more, in this day exploring works in the Ashmolean collection. We shall attempt to cast aside any assumptions and prejudices and attempt to critically examine the works and their worlds. We might also discuss whether ‘Saints’ have any place in our World to-day.

AFTERNOON TEA LECTURE : ‘The Slade School Phenomenon’ : Tuesday 11^th June : 2pm to 3.30pm.

British Art of the early twentieth century has recently gone through a critical reappraisal and appreciation. The uniqueness and individuality of British artists inspired by contemporary French practice and thinking would not have emerged without the foundation, in 1871, of the Slade School of Fine Art. The staff and students of the Slade quickly shook the foundations of traditional British art teaching, appreciation and practice.

All these require booking through Ashmolean Education Department.

ASHMOLEAN ART APPRECIATION report for March 2013

In spite of the seemingly permanent wintry weather over the past few weeks the Art Appreciation activities have provided some warmth at the Ashmolean. The major and continuing aim of this strand of Ashmolean educational work is help people to explore in depth works of art in the gallery collections – to confront and get to understand a real object, in this case mainly paintings.

 Study Day : ‘What is a Painting ?’.

The Study Day at the end of February asked the question ‘What is a painting?’ for which we again had the expert help of the Ashmolean Conservation department.  Here we discovered such things as pigments and their origins and history and types of support, including wooden panels and stretched canvases.  We learnt about the different properties of tempera and oil paint and the preparation of grounds, particularly gesso.  We then moved on to the public galleries selecting a few works to examine them as physical objects using our knowledge given us by the Conservation department – from early Italian tempera on panel works to works using the later discovery of oil painting on canvas.

Another major strand of our day was to explore the different ‘contexts’ of works – physically, as in fragments of altar-pieces, to the essential role of a patron, be it an individual, a Church’, or an organisation, be it secular or religious, or the ‘shop-window’ of a large exhibition like the Royal Academy Summer exhibition. Our art appreciation work generally emphasise the need to understand such contexts. The emergence of the painter from being a skilled artisan to the late nineteenth century appearance of the ‘Artist’ is important – most of the paintings in the Ashmolean galleries are works as accepted by a patron – only in works from the later nineteenth century do we see the producer, the artist, initiating a work.

The third major strand of the day was to explore the subject matter of a painting – exploring its intended meaning, not always clear to us to-day, and the cultural and social context in which it was produced.

‘Exploring Modern Art’ – 4 week afternoon series.

This series set out to explore what is meant by ‘Modern Art’ with reference to the Ashmolean collections. The Department of Western Art were extremely helpful in providing us with access to the reserve collection of paintings and the twentieth century print collection.

Current art historical criticism now ‘pigeon-holes’ Modern Art as the period from about 1870 to about 1970 – the subsequent period, yet to be firmly defined, includes ‘Post-Modernism’ and ‘Contemporary Art’.  Reflecting the Ashmolean collection it was the British dimension that was a constant thread – comparing and contrasting with the major international ‘movements’ within Modern Art. As a basis we considered the major accepted influential Movements and some major artists in the ‘Foundation’ period up to about 1911, referring where appropriate to Ashmolean works :-

• Impressionism  : Claude Monet
• Neo Impressionism : Degas, Seurat
• Post Impressionism : Van Gogh, Gauguin, Cezanne.
• Fauvism : Matisse, Derain, Vlaminck.
• Expressionism : Edvard Munch, Schmidt-Rottluff, Kirchner
• Analytical Cubism : Braque, Picasso.
• And smaller movements such as Futurism, the early work of Picasso, Mondrian, Kandinsky, etc.

The impact of WW1, particularly on British Art, was explored, the influence of  ‘International’ strands (‘Modernism’) during the post WW1 period and the rise of ‘Abstraction’.  A particular strand we explored were the two British Print Revivals – the work of people like Griggs and Stanley Anderson in the 1920’s and 1930’s and the post WW2 experimental printmaking with major influences like the Curwen Gallery, the newly formed Print-makers Council,  the Society of Painter-Printmakers,  and individuals including Graham Sutherland, John Piper,Valerie Thornton, and Birgitt Skiold.   (We hope to concentrate in more detail in another course on British Printmaking)

We finished with an afternoon exploring and discussing the works (up to c1970) in the Ashmolean ‘Modern Gallery’ – from early Kandinsky and Picasso through Stanley and Gilbert Spencer and Mark Gertler, to Ben Nicholson and Barbara Hepworth.