4 AUGUST 1990, Page 37

Exhibitions

The Edwardians and After: the Royal Academy 1900-1950 (Royal Academy, till 21 October) Painters of the British Impressionist Period 1880-1940 (David Messum, till 6 October)

Name-

Giles Auty

Exhibitions occur sometimes which seem vague or even self-contradicting in purpose. This is not to say they may not, like The Edwardians and After, be wonder- ful to look at. Edward VII, who gave his name to an era, died, as even a handful of today's schoolchildren may know, in 1910. In short, his reign accounts for only 20 per cent of the timespan of the current exhibi- tion yet manages nevertheless to provide the show with its title. Sir Lawrence Gowing picked the paintings from the Royal Academy's permanent collection, formed largely from diploma works don- ated by Academicians on election. The show began a tour of four major galleries in the USA in September 1988. For Lon- don the show is augmented by sculpture from the same source, bringing the total of works on view to 84. I imagine most of the works and many of their makers will have been unfamiliar to American gallery-goers and I wonder what they will have con- cluded from this somewhat shapeless event. Perhaps some kind American read- er who has seen the show would enlighten me?

In Britain familiarity with at least some of the artists is no problem: Sargent, Sickert, Spencer, Orpen, Lavery and Au- gustus John have seldom been under- exposed here. Yet quite a few of the remaining 69 artists will be by no means well known outside the art business. Who knows about Reginald Brundrit, for exam- ple, or Maurice Greiffenhagen, or even the good Sir Herbert Hughes-Stanton?

For me, the principal mystery of the show and its selection lies in what kind of reaction the organisers intended. Are we expected simply to admire the works or to display a kind of tongue-in-cheek tolerance towards the foibles of the past? Should we hold up our heads, reflecting proudly on the increased internationalism and intellec- tualisation of British art during the second half of our incomplete century? Or are we being asked to mourn, perhaps, a very evident decline in present-day artistic com- petence when comparison is made with our forebears, as we limp on towards the second millenium? Given the limited vision of many present-day exhibition organisers the show probably lacks any such clear-cut objectives.

My suspicions were aroused nonetheless by the unnecessary inclusion of a number of works of questionable merit designed, perhaps, to show past academic attitudes as regrettably reactionary or hypocritical. According to the catalogue, Frank Dick- see's 'Startled', a sentimental and titillating painting wherein riverside nymph and nymphet flee from a boatload of passing Vikings, cladding themselves meanwhile in a pair of handy lace curtains, was painted in 1892. This puts the painting eight years outside the exhibition's declared ambit. Why was it included then, unless to hint at how unenlightened the Academy was in the bad old days? Frederick Elwell's The Royal Academy Selection and Hanging Committee 1938' may well have been inserted for similar purposes. The Academicians seated at a well-laden table look somewhat stodgy and sanctimonious. They have just rejected Wyndham Lewis's portrait of T. S. Eliot.

The fact remains, however, that those who comprised this and most other pre-war hanging committees were much more accomplished artists than their counter- parts today. Meredith Frampton's 'Still Life' seems to be held up similarly as an example of near-fascist painting values.

The Mill Pool at Painswick', 1945, by Charles March Gere, at the RA But who would deny his abilities as an artist? Wonderful portraits by Harold Knight, Ethel Walker and others point up widespread present-day deficiencies in this sector. And when was a landscape last exhibited at the Academy with half the atmosphere and energy of Sir John Ames- by Brown's The Raincloud', painted in 1915? Marvellous paintings by John Nash, Stanley Spencer, Walter Sickert, Bertram Priestman, Tom Monnington and Julius Olsson and fine sculpture by such as Gilbert Ledward and Sir George Frampton help rub in the lesson that present-day Academicians have little cause for com- placency.

David Messum, whose sumptuous Lon- don premises are at 34 St George Street, WI, first made a name nearly 20 years ago as the reviver of interest in neglected Newlyn School painters. Since then he has extended his field to include artists whom he and others care to call British Impress- ionists. The present show includes two very fine works by Dod Procter and a delightful small panel by Lamorna Birch from the former group and excellent paintings by George Clausen, Wilfred de Glehn and Alexander Jamieson from the latter. One of Jamieson's paintings from 1910 is of the exterior of Lincoln cathedral, site of a recent, controversial exhibition of contem- porary artefacts. Artists were happy enough in those days simply to record the glory of such grandiose church buildings from the outside.