Arts Essay

Twee, treacly and tearful: Pre-Raphaelites at the Walker Art Gallery reviewed

27 February 2016

9:00 AM

27 February 2016

9:00 AM

Dear, good, kind, sacrificing Little Nell. Here she is kneeling by a wayside pond, bonnet pushed back, shoes and stockings off, while she rests her blistered feet. She scoops a palm of water with cupped hands and tenderly washes those of her grandfather: her feckless, gambling, on-the-lam grandfather. It is an old Oscar Wilde chestnut, but one would have to have a heart of stone to look at William Holman Hunt’s portrait of Charles Dickens’s saintly ‘Little Nell and her Grandfather’ (1845) without laughing.

Likewise Arthur Hughes’s ‘The Woodman’s Child’ (1860), a portrait of a tousle-haired country mite sleeping in the woods, attended by a squirrel and robin, their red coat and breast so sweetly matching her own little ruby socks. Bambi, one imagines, is waiting to gambol into frame.

The Pre-Raphaelites assembled for the Liverpool Walker Gallery’s Pre-Raphaelites: Beauty and Rebellion show do lay the pathos on thick. Titles are twee, treacly or tearful: Daniel Alexander Williamson’s ‘The Startled Rabbit’ (1862); James Campbell’s ‘Twilight — Trudging Homeward’ (1857) and ‘Waiting for Legal Advice’ (1857); John Ingle Lee’s ‘Sweethearts and Wives’ (1860).

Faced with all this Little Nellery, you thrill to the vampish Lady of the Lake in Edward Burne-Jones’s ‘The Beguiling of Merlin’ (1872–7). In clingy, pleated violet and lavender silk she is very beguiling indeed. Looking at Merlin, though, you wonder why she bothers. Lounging on a blossom bough, one hand dangling above a pool of irises, gold-sandalled ankles crossed, he is as drippy as Eddie Redmayne’s Danish girl. Too many of the paintings collected here share Merlin’s languid lack of energy. There’s no vim, no vigour, no get up and go.


Man of Sorrows (c. 1860) by  William Dyce © Scottish National Gallery

Man of Sorrows (c. 1860) by William Dyce © Scottish National Gallery

The Christ in William Dyce’s ‘Man of Sorrows’ (c.1859) doesn’t suffer the agony of his Passion wounds — compare him with Albrecht Dürer’s hunched, head-in-hands, nail-pierced and thorn-pricked ‘Man of Sorrows’ — but peacefully catches his breath on a rock while walking the Scottish Highlands. The model in Arthur Hughes’s ‘In the Grass’ (c.1864) lies supine, ‘caressing her breast with a bluebell’. William Holman Hunt’s model in ‘Il Dolce Far Niente’ (1859–66) — the sweetness of doing nothing — slumps apathetically in her chair.

Were the Victorians really like this? Lolling about stroking their clavicles with bluebells? Julia Rae, wife of the banker and collector George Rae, certainly wasn’t. ‘It is a grand thing,’ George Rae wrote, ‘to be the owner of more Rossettis than any other man: but it has its drawbacks. The number of persons who desire to see them is increasing… Well — I think of having a Catalogue printed. I must either do this, or allow my wife to be walked off her legs, or talk herself into chronic hoarseness, in performing her part of show woman.’

Rae and his wife were just two of the busily effective Liverpool patrons who bought and encouraged the Pre-Raphaelites — and opened their homes to those who wished to see the paintings. The Walker Gallery exhibition is arranged around these Merseyside patrons: John Miller (whose fortune came from cotton, timber and tobacco); Frederick Richards Leyland (steamships); Humphrey Roberts (timber, the docks); George Holt (shipping, maritime insurance); and William Hesketh Lever (soap powder). Hanging the show on these far-sighted Liverpool patrons gives intelligent purpose to an exhibition that might otherwise run the risk of being just another outing of the Pre-Raphs.

While one admires their enterprise and energy, one questions their taste. What possessed Lever to buy William Holman Hunt’s lurid ‘May Morning on Magdalen Tower’ (1890) with its candyfloss sky, dewy choristers and gothic columns carved from Brighton rock? Perhaps he admired the choirboys’ Lever-soap-powder-white surplices.

Another of Holman Hunt’s Liverpool successes was ‘The Finding of the Saviour in the Temple’ (1862), bought by George Holt. While the temple is lavishly done — somewhere between a souk and a seraglio — the moneylenders are a lacklustre bunch and the Christ-child a preening upstart, making eyes at the painter and ignoring his mother. Compare him with the wonderfully truculent Christ in the Simone Martini painting ‘Christ Discovered in the Temple’ (1342) that opens the exhibition. The Sienese master is included to illustrate what it was that the Pre-Raphaelites admired in art before Raphael: decorative surfaces, richness of colour, gorgeous drapery.

Martini’s Christ is a surly, scowling, thwarted teenager, furious to have been returned to his parents when he was just hitting his stride. There is more energy and conviction in this sulking figure than in all the balletic, tunic-and-tight-wearing heroes of Burne-Jones, Holman Hunt, Millais, Rossetti and the rest of the Pre-Raphaelite brothers.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10


Show comments
  • Eleanor Fitzsimons

    Of course our response to art is highly personal and the Pre-Raphaelites incorporated their fair share of sentimentality, and a little more perhaps, into their work. Laura Freeman is very well qualified to comment, however, it did make me smile to see her invoke Oscar Wilde before pouring scorn on Edward Burne-Jones’s The Beguiling of Merlin, a painting that Wilde absolutely adored. He had a copy hanging in his rooms in Oxford and described it as ‘full of magic’. Wilde’s description of the Merlin figure, from his review THE GROSVENOR GALLERY, 1877, published in the Dublin University Magazine is as follows:

    ‘Stretched upon a low branch of the tree, and encircled with the glory of the white hawthorn-blossoms, half sits, half lies, the great enchanter. He is not drawn as Mr. Tennyson has described him, with the ‘vast and shaggy mantle of a beard,’ which youth gone out had left in ashes; smooth and clear-cut and very pale is his face; time has not seared him with wrinkles or the signs of age; one would hardly know him to be old were it not that he seems very weary of seeking into the mysteries of the world, and that the great sadness that is born of wisdom has cast a shadow on him. But now what availeth him his wisdom or his arts? His eyes, that saw once so clear, are dim and glazed with coming death, and his white and delicate hands that wrought of old such works of marvel, hang listlessly’

    Wilde’s conclusion? ‘Were this Mr. Burne-Jones’s only work it would be enough of itself to make him rank as a great painter’.

  • Aethelflaed

    Love the Pre-Raphaelites, and look forward to going to see the exhibition. The reviewer might do herself a favour and try and find something positive or interesting to say – otherwise, why on earth did she bother going. As someone with a degree in Art History, she must have gone with a closed mind to start with, why would anyone be interested in that? Art does tell us about the way people saw the world of their day, and it is chauvinistic to stick ones nose in the air, and pretend ones own tastes are so much more superior – invariably they are not.

  • Miss Floribunda Rose

    I find pickled sharks and unmade beds rather twee, to be honest.

  • John Hinchliffe

    Quite a few of these artworks have been literally moved from two rooms away. And it costs seven pounds to get in to see the pictures we can see for free at any other time.
    Liverpool Museums have recieved £140,000,000 in the last decade so why charge to get in. Art that we own should be free.

Close