Vol. 159 / No. 1373
Vol. 159 / No. 1373
NO VISITOR TO Canaletto & the Art of Venice at The
Queen’s Gallery, London (to 12th November), will be disappointed. The Queen’s
Gallery could have been designed to display this generous selection from the
collection of Joseph Smith, Consul at Venice, which was acquired in 1762 for
the young George III by his ‘advisors’ – it seems rather ungenerous that the
King’s mentor, the 3rd Earl of Bute, is denied specific credit in the catalogue:
as he subsequently wrote, he ‘was permitted to act as for [him]self ’.
The exhibition begins with Canaletto’s sparkling pictures of
ceremonial highpoints of Venetian life, the return of the Doge after the Ascension
Day celebrations and the regatta on the Grand Canal. There follows a splendid selection
of the unrivalled collection of drawings by Canaletto that the consul acquired,
ranging from early studies for compositions he commissioned to mature
presentation drawings. The gulls seen in several of the earlier sheets remind
us that Canaletto’s Venice was not a place of silence. Pride of place must, however,
go to the two almost miraculously economical views of the island church of S.
Elena (c.1740; cat. nos. 115 and 116; Fig.54) that are the closest visual
precedents for Guardi’s early views of the Lagoon.
There follows a selection of drawings by Canaletto’s
Venetian contemporaries, among whom Marco Ricci shines. Fortunately, because his
drawings were less highly prized in the past, these remain on their original mounts,
unlike the Canalettos, which were lifted from theirs, presumably at the time of
K.T. Parker’s pioneering catalogue of Canaletto’s drawings in the Royal
Collection (1948). Beyond is a section of prints, including splendid
impressions of Canaletto’s own etchings and books. Smith himself backed the printer
Giovanni Battista Pasquali, whose edition of Palladio was published in 1768 and
so was not part of the library acquired with the consul’s collection in 1762,
although he may have owned it. One book that Smith cannot have possessed, since
he died in 1770, is the 1772 edition of Ariosto’s Orlando Furioso. It is
suggested that this was ‘probably intended for the British market in
particular’: it was in fact subsidised by Lord Bute, who envisaged an edition
of his favourite Italian poetry, and presumably sent the book either to the
King or to Queen Charlotte, to whom he would dedicate his Botanical Tables in
1784.
As is well known, Smith took no consistent interest in two
of the great Venetian painters of his time, G.B. Piazzetta and G.B. Tiepolo. His
taste for their contemporaries, Sebastiano and Marco Ricci, Rosalba Carriera
and Francesco Zuccarelli, is impressively demonstrated in the first of the two
large galleries. Sebastiano Ricci’s Adoration of the Kings (1726; no.9), a
direct homage to Veronese, dominates. But for posterity the pastels of Rosalba and
the gouaches of Marco Ricci are more seductive. The three pictures by the
latter are of fine quality, but his classical capriccio (c.1727–29; no.34)
reminds us that, perhaps on account of their size, the King allowed the two
masterpieces of this genre that he had bought from Smith to be disposed of.
Marco’s capriccio is tellingly juxtaposed with the sparkling pair by Canaletto
(nos.143 and 144), the dating of which is still not absolutely clear.
Canaletto is inevitably the hero of the exhibition. In the
small room that follows, the two subtle interiors of St Mark’s (c.1725–30 and
c.1755–56; nos.72 and 73; Fig.55) call for close inspection, as does the
equally refined Campo di Santi Giovanni e Paolo that they flank (c.1735–38;
no.74). The final room is a worthy climax. Ahead are the six large canvases of the
Piazza and the Piazzetta, a vertical quartet and a horizontal pair, surely
commissioned for a single room, which show that Smith was among the first to
recognise Canaletto’s emergence as a view-painter in 1723–24. To the left is
the wondrous sequence of twelve canvases of the later 1720s (nos.58–69) that
lead the viewer down the Grand Canal, happily hung in their proper sequence.
Opposite these are the five upright Roman views of 1742 (nos.76–80), bravura
statements based on drawings that Canaletto had made in 1720: these too must have
been intended for a specific interior. The star on the entrance wall is the
large Grand Canal with S. Maria della Salute, towards the Bacino, which is
dated 1744 (no.75; Fig.53). That Smith acquired this majestic restatement of a
subject Canaletto had already realised for him implies that he fully understood
that the artist might repeat a view but was never prepared to supply precise
replicas. Altogether less happy are pictures of the Piazza and the Piazzetta of
the same year, which make one suspect that the artist suffered something of what
might now be termed a mid-life crisis – either because of a fall-off in commissions
or because of an uncomfortable awareness that his nephew Bellotto could work
more quickly and thus efficiently. Bellotto progressed by leaving Venice, and
Canaletto himself was galvanised by his move to London in 1746.
The very handsome catalogue opens with an excellent essay by
Lucy Whitaker, ‘Venice in the Eighteenth Century’.1 Rosie Razall’s ‘Consul
Smith and his Circle’ offers a survey of what is known about Smith, drawing
inevitably upon the pioneering work of Frances Vivian. Smith had, of course,
been associated with Canaletto for over twenty years before the Duke of
Richmond secured the consulship for him in the teeth of the Duke of Newcastle’s
support for a rival. His appointment must thus be seen in the context of
political patronage. It might have been appropriate to refer to the revealing
passages about Smith in the correspondence of Andrea Memmo, published in Andrea
di Robilant’s A Venetian Affair (2004). Although much has been authoritatively written
about Canaletto in recent years some errors are repeated from earlier literature:
Sir Robert Harvey was not a patron of Canaletto – his family acquired their
celebrated set of pictures en bloc with Langley Park in 1788 from the 4th Duke
of Marlborough, as this reviewer first suggested in this Magazine in 1999;2 and
it is not true that the consul’s hold on the painter meant that Marshal
Schulenburg ‘was unable to obtain paintings by Canaletto himself ’, as in 1736
he secured the great view of the Riva degli Schiavoni now in Sir John Soane’s
Museum, London, which surely outshines any of the pictures by the artist that
Smith himself owned.
The Queen’s Gallery does not borrow works from other
collections. In the context of the exhibition, however, it might have been
appropriate to have included at least one of the volumes of measured drawings
of Venetian palazzi made for Smith that passed to the British Museum with the
gift of the King’s Library. These drawings testify to the deep appreciation of
Venetian architecture that clearly also informed Smith’s championship and
personal patronage of Canaletto.
1 Catalogue: Canaletto and the Art of Venice. By Rosie Razall
and Lucy Whitaker. 392 pp. incl. over 380 col. ills. (Royal Collection Trust,
London, 2017), £45. ISBN 978–1–90974–414–09.
2 F. Russell, in his review of J.G. Links: A Supplement to
W.G. Constable’s Canaletto, Giovanni Antonio Canal, 1697–1768, London 1998, the
burlington magazine 141 (1999), pp.180–81.