Showing posts with label jewellery. Show all posts
Showing posts with label jewellery. Show all posts

Thursday, February 23, 2012

The 1853 Dublin Exhibition of Art-Industry

Illustration: Central Hall of the Dublin Exhibition, 1853.

With the publicity surrounding the ground-breaking Great Exhibition held in Hyde Park, London in 1851, publicity that has made it as enduring an event today as it was one hundred and sixty one years ago, it is often tempting to think that it was the only significant event of its kind in Britain for some time after 1851. However, another international exhibition was held a mere two years after London, this one in Dublin.

The Exhibition of Art-Industry opened in Dublin on 12th may 1853 within the Irish Industrial Exhibition building which had been especially commissioned and built for the occasion. The Exhibition was in fact a grander version of exhibitions that had been running on a regular basis for a number of years and were part of the Dublin calendar of events. However, previous exhibitions had been limited to products that had been produced in Ireland, not internationally.

Illustration: Items from the Hall of Irish Antiquities at the Dublin Exhibition, 1853.

Apart from the fact that the Dublin Exhibition building was only a quarter the size of the original Crystal palace building in London, the event was very similar in many respects to the Great Exhibition of 1851. That exhibition was used very largely as a platform to project the image of Britain to the world; the Dublin event equally gave Ireland the chance to project its own unique identity on to a potentially international stage. 

Although all or most of the internationally staged exhibitions of the last century and a half have used the event to highlight the achievements or flavour of a particular nation or region, they have usually been organised by sovereign states. The Dublin event of 1853 gave what was perceived by many in Europe and North America as a subjugated sovereign state, the opportunity to have a voice independent from Britain and more importantly London. In this respect, the feel and flavour of the Dublin Exhibition was very different from that of London. The Roman Catholic Church for example, played a much higher profile than it would have been allowed to have done in London, and although Pugin's Medieval Court was both tolerated and indeed popularised and admired by the crowds, it was contained and portrayed by the press as being shorn of any real Catholic influence or idealism.
Illustration: Contemporary Irish jewellery inspired by the Celtic traditions of Ireland shown at the Dublin Exhibition, 1853.

Interestingly, there was a Medieval Court at the Dublin Exhibition, and although Pugin himself had died the previous year, his collaborator John Hardman produced the Medieval Court for Dublin. It is highly probable that had Pugin lived he would have been enthusiastically involved in the Dublin exhibition along with its more overt Catholicism. An interesting description of the Medieval Court from a London perspective can be found in a copy of The Civil Engineer and Architect's Journal for May 1853:

The medieval court has been fitted up with great care and elaboration. Window of stained glass, representing a number of figures of saints, serve to throw "a dim religious light" on altars, crucifixes, paschal candlesticks, credence tables, priests' vestments, lecterns, chalices, ciboriums, monstrances, triptics, and other "furniture" of a Roman Catholic church. Mr Hardman of Birmingham, who has the charge of this department, has had the roof painted and gilded with various designs suited to ecclesiastical decoration, so as to give to the medieval court almost a sacred character in the eyes of Roman Catholics, who enter it with looks of reverence that ill accord with the fiery glances of puritanical visitors.

As with the previous exhibition of 1851, the Dublin event was a strange combination of the contemporary industrial and the traditional craft. many of us would not necessarily see this as being a natural or comfortable combination, but many in the mid-nineteenth century saw no real problem in both admiring the significant strides made by Victorian technology whilst also admiring the traditions of the decorative arts.

Illustration: Contemporary and antique Irish jewellery at the Dublin Exhibition, 1853.

The Dublin Exhibition therefore highlighted in a series of exhibits, features of traditional Irish decorative life that was very much part of the pre-English and Scottish interference in Ireland, namely its Celtic heritage. One of the obvious contributors to the history of both European and world decorative art, Ireland was seen by many as the natural home of Celtic decoration and ornament. Therefore, examples of Celtic art that were both traditional and of contemporary inspiration were included in the exhibition. Some examples of the intricate Celtic inspired jewellery work that was on display at the exhibition are featured in this article.

On reflection, the Dublin exhibition was perhaps not as internationally successful as the organisers would have hoped and wished. On the whole the London press gloated on the fact that the Dublin event lost money and was under-represented internationally. They seemed at great pains to portray Dublin as an after-event to the London exhibition of 1851. Many in London found the idea of any form of subsequent exhibitions as a pointless exercise as the feeling was that the earlier exhibition had defined the contemporary moment of the mid-nineteenth century and that that moment had been largely seen as British, and as an international industrial event there seemed little point in Dublin restating the facts that had already been made. However, the Dublin press were equally exuberant and positive that an event on such a scale had been organised entirely within Ireland. There were in fact significant entries from France, Belgium, the Netherlands, some of the German states including Prussia, as well as the United States. The British Empire was also represented, particularly India which made as impressive an impact on the public as it had in London in 1851. English and Scottish textile companies were particularly well represented as a number saw the event as a means of competing with the relatively large Irish textile industry. Significantly, what much of the London press perhaps failed to understand was the significance that could be accrued through self-publicity by holding an event on an international scale as well as the potential in trade. Therefore, international exhibitions have been held constantly since that point in the mid-nineteenth century and are the mainstay for many industries today.

Illustration: Contemporary jewellery and copies of antique Scottish jewellery at the Dublin Exhibition, 1853.

As far as Dublin, and more importantly Ireland as a whole was concerned, the feeling was that they were heavily unrepresented as far as trade and industry were concerned. That they were politically and socially subsumed within the artificial empire-making conglomerate that had become the United Kingdom, was blatantly clear, that the identity of their trade and industry was also largely hidden within the UK, was perhaps not so clear. Ireland was often portrayed and imagined by London as little more than a backward colony of the British Empire suitable only for raw recruits for its empire-building army, and although technically seen as an important and integral part of the United Kingdom, practically it was often treated as being near non-existent.

Although much of Ireland was not to see any real practical disengagement from the United Kingdom and the British Empire until well into the twentieth century, events such as the 1853 Dublin Exhibition of Art-Industry did produce the beginnings of a separation of identity on the world stage, if not in London. The event and others like it across Ireland began to create a contemporary awareness in the concept of Ireland as a state rather than a region, and a state that could contribute towards the contemporary world, whether through the traditions of its own unique decorative crafts, or its contemporary industry and technology.


Further reading links:

Monday, May 2, 2011

Lace Design Work of Paul Haustein

Illustration: Paul Haustein. Lace design, c1911.

Much of the surviving work by the German designer Paul Haustein is in metalwork, much of it produced during the Art Deco period and therefore he is often identified as being a designer of that period specifically. However, Haustein was born in 1880 and had a long and fruitful career before the Art Deco era dawned.

Haustein was in Munich during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, a particularly richly creative period of the Bavarian city's life. He was also a member of the Darmstadt Artists' Colony along with the likes of Richard Riemerschmid and Peter Behrens, his speciality at the time being that of goldsmith. However, Haustein, like so many artists, designers and craftspeople of his era, worked a number of disciplines, not all of which were sympathetic or complementary to their favoured discipline. In some respects, this widening of creative interest and adaptability proved to be a fascinating and expanding experience for the decorative arts of Europe. That it was widely common throughout the nineteenth century, and indeed well into the twentieth, is fortuitous as it allows us to experience creative work from disciplines and genres that sometimes broke rules that were set by the medium itself. By coming from a different direction and with a number of unusual tools and a different set of vocabulary, a designer could well move the discipline on to a different format, even if only at a personal level. However, some experiments were produced on a much larger scale, by groups of individuals rather than the single. Admittedly, the cross-discipline scenario of the nineteenth century did not always achieve what it set out to, however, more times than not it has left a distinct advantage to future generations, allowing them to understand through examples, how cross-discipline relationships can work creatively.

Illustration: Paul Haustein. Lace design, c1912.

Shown in this article are two examples of lace work produced by Haustein in the early second decade of the twentieth century. Both are relatively complex with some of the work appearing as if in a form of filligree. To some extent, this can be explained by the fact that throughout the same period as the production of these two lace designs the designer was also producing both metalwork in the shape of candlesticks, bowls, chalices and candelabra as well as delicate and involved jewellery. Interestingly Haustein was also involved in marquetry work, sometimes on a small scale, but often on much larger and grander scale, during this same period. It would be surprising if none of these disciplines were to affect the production of these particular lace designs. There is to some extent a link between the delicate work of small scale metal and jewellery work and that of the discipline of lace craft. Both are produced by intensive and focused labour, often worked on an extremely small and personally intimate level.

What is particularly interesting is how far Haustein's surface pattern work, to some extent at least, seems influenced by the approach he used in his metal and jewellery work. Surface disciplines the designer worked in were as wide-ranging as rug work, embroidery and wallpaper design, and all showed significant elements of filigree type work or at least an element of open work that can easily be associated with forms of relatively delicate metalwork. This is not to say that Haustein was a metal worker who merely repeated the format in other disciplines, some of which worked, others not. It is more a case of a creative individual who had both innate skills and a unique vocabulary of his own, engineering and using those tools in disciplines that were perhaps unused to them. The designer would have complemented and worked within the rules of each discipline to a certain extent. However, it is the creative approach from outside the traditional craft that is truly the inspiration for others.

Illustration: Paul Haustein. Jewellery design, c1912.

The idea of cross-pollination and cross-discipline is a truly expansive and creative experience. That it was relatively common throughout the nineteenth and well into the twentieth centuries, is shown by the wealth of unusual approaches to particular craft traditions and gave rise, at least in the broad discipline of textiles, to innovations in the textile craft and art worlds that are still with us today. In fact, much of what we see and associate as standard cross-discipline work today, is the product of many small and large scale experiments and creative overlaps, such as the work of Paul Haustein. These experiments were and are invaluable lessons in widening the scope of the personal exploration of all craft disciplines.

Further reading links:
Art Nouveau Jewelry
305 Authentic Art Nouveau Jewelry Designs
Art Nouveau Jewellery from Pforzheim (English and German Edition)
Art Nouveau Jewelry: A Practical Guide to Its History and Beauty, with Pictures of Over 150 Pieces of Jewelry and a Compendium of Internati
Jugendstil Guertelschlieýen / Art Nouveau Buckles: Sammlung Kreuzer / The Kreuzer Collection
The Art Nouveau Style
European art nouveau jewelry,
IMPORTANT ART NOUVEAU JEWELRY & OBJETS DE VERTU APRIL 24, 1971
Modern Style: Jugendstil/Art Nouveau 1899-1905
Jugendstil.
Art Nouveau: Utopia: Reconciling the Irreconcilable (Taschen's 25th Anniversary Special Editions Series)
ART NOUVEAU (LCT)
Art Nouveau Designs (Design Source Books)
Art Nouveau (Dover Pictura)
Art Nouveau: An Anthology of Design and Illustration from "The Studio" (Dover Pictorial Archives)
Art Nouveau (Art and Ideas Series)
Art Nouveau Decorative Ironwork
Art Nouveau, 1890-1914