On one of his tumblr speedruns through the treasure houses, art historian pwlanier stuck a red heart on this atmospheric painting of Niagara Falls by John Henry Twachtman. It’s in a private sale at Christie’s, and as the lately retired auctioneer Jussi Pylkkänen would say, it’s a lovely thing.
I know almost nothing about Twachtman, except now I learn he visited Niagara twice and painted it multiple times. And this painting looks like it was made around the same vantage point as the one at the Smithsonian, but this tighter one, with less geology and more mist is more interesting.
More interesting still is the smaller Twachtman Niagara Falls painting Christie’s sold last October. It’s only 17 x 14, an even lovelier thing. It’s not quite as vibrant as the extremely similar one they sold in 2001. Was Twachtman in 1893 making studies of even the minutest changes in light on Niagara, like Monet was doing at Rouen Cathedral in 1892? Emerson is squealing, I’m sure.
Alas, he was not. Or not over this. Because though Niagara was Twachtman’s Rouen, that he painted at least fourteen variations of, this is the same painting. And whoever bought it in 2001 cleaned it with a scrub brush? Left it out in the sun for 23 years? I do not know. But I guess if you can wait 25 years, it’ll only get more ephemeral and atmospheric, and the price will continue to drop commensurately. Meanwhile, in the control group, the Brooklyn Museum is probably storing theirs in the dark.
Hmm, just when I think the narrative arc is complete, it seems the Christie’s painting was described in 2003 as turning up in an attic of a Twachtman family member, but the Christie’s provenance has 18 years of dealer and collector ownership befor then. Is that just the pace at which information trickles out among 19th century painting collectors?