Queen City Heritage

Bust of Marquis de Lafayetteby Frederick Eckstein, 1825.Cincinnati Art Museum, TheEdwin and Virginia IrwinMemorial. (Figure 1)

Winter 1999 Cincinnati Artists and the Lure of Germany

Cincinnati Artists and theLure of Germany inthe NineteenthCentury

John Wilson

At the civic and emotional center of thecity of Cincinnati stands a graceful, monumentalbronze allegorical figure of water. Water showersfrom the palms of her hands at the end of her out-stretched arms. Residents know the figure well; theplaza on which it sits, Fountain Square, has drawnCincinnatians for over a century to celebrate sportingand military victories, and continues to draw contro-versy as disparate groups of all political persuasionsexercise their right of freedom of speech under theFirst Amendment to the Constitution. During thecity 's Oktoberfes t -an homage not only toCincinnati's lost heritage as a brewing center but alsoto its sister city link with Munich-as crowds listen tobands and celebrate the end of the stifling Cincinnatihumidity, a glimpse of the fountain reinforces thefeeling that there are few places in North Americathat bring German life and culture so clearly to mind.

The sculpture, The Genius of Water,dedicated in 1871 and known in Cincinnati as theTyler Davidson Fountain (after the brother-in-lawand partner of the donor, Henry Probasco) is the workof August Von Kreling (1819-1876). Its presence inCincinnati is emblematic of the almost unquestion-able focus on Germany by Cincinnatians for artisticmatters in the nineteenth century. Occasionally,Italy, France, or Great Britain would draw artistsfrom the city for their training, but Germany, in par-ticular Diisseldorf and Munich, attracted Cincinnati'sartists for the quality of their art schools and theresources of the collections.

Cincinnati's German heritage and largeGerman-speaking districts had much to do with theattraction of German art schools. Germans had beena part of Cincinnati almost since its founding in

1788; the German Johan Heckewelder wrote the firstaccount of Cincinnati and the surrounding area in1792. By 1840, 30 percent of the city's populationwas German-speaking, prompting city officials topublish ordinances in both German and English, andprompting the usual social discrimination. Germanssettled into various neighborhoods, the most celebrat-ed of which was "Over-the-Rhine," so-named becausethe immigrants jocularly referred to the Miami-ErieCanal that ran east-west north of downtown beforecurving south to the Ohio River as "The Rhine." Toget to the neighborhood from downtown, one had togo "over" the Rhine.

While German artists were among theearliest to work in Cincinnati, the first of note wasFrederick Eckstein, one of a family of artists, and whohad trained at the Academy in Berlin under JohannGottfried Schadow.1 Eckstein arrived in Cincinnatilate in 1823 from Philadelphia where he had livedsince 1794 and where with Charles Willson Peale hehelped to establish the Pennsylvania Academy of theFine Arts. Teaching at the school belonging to hissisters-in-law, Eckstein instantly became the mostnotable artist in the city. Eckstein had exquisite tim-ing, making a life mask of Andrew Jackson during thegeneral's visit to Cincinnati in 1825, which wasexhibited at the visit of the Revolutionary War herothe Marquis de Lafayette that May. Eckstein mod-eled a bust of Lafayette as well, despite the fact thatthe marquis was only in Cincinnat i for a day.Eckstein evidently made sketches and notes fromwhich to model a bust (Fig. i), noted as "a good like-ness"2 and he may well have fashioned it not to sell,but to show off the abilities of the artist as no othercasts have survived and the original remained withthe family unti l 1957, when the Cincinnati ArtMuseum acquired it.

Traditionally trained in Europe, Eckstein

John Wilson earned masterand doctoral degrees fromthe Courtauld Institute of Art,University of London.Formerly curator of paintingand sculpture at theCincinnati Art Museum, he

has recently publishedAmerican Art in the Procter &Gamble Collection: TheHistoric Cincinnati Collection.

Queen City Heritage

Summer Pastorale (View ofKallenfels) by Thomas W.Whittredge, 1853.Indianapolis Museum of Art,Daniel P. Erwin Fund.(Figure 2)

Winter 1999

undoubtedly aspired to bring similar training toCincinnati, a city already with pretensions as a centerof learning. He lobbied for the establishment of aEuropean-style academy of art not only to trainartists, but to exhibit their work, casts, and the workof foreign artists living and dead, and to provide lec-tures on a wide variety of art-related subjects.Formally established in 1827, The Academy of FineArts was dead the next year when popular sentimentfavored a more practical academy, which later becamethe Ohio Mechanics Institute.1 Yet Eckstein's influ-ence should not be underestimated. He was the firstmaster of Hiram Powers, the United States's mostimportant neo-classical sculptor, and of ShobalClevenger, a sculptor of considerable promise whodied young. His efforts influenced most artists work-ing in Cincinnati at the time, and he is known, notunjustifiably, as the father of Cincinnati Art.

The first artist of any consequence toleave the Cincinnati area and study abroad wasThomas Worthington Whittredge. Already an estab-lished artist in Cincinnati, Whittredge left in 1849with a $1,000 letter of credit and several commissionsfor paintings in hand. Though his autobiographyclaims he originally intended simply to travel inEurope, wi thout taking any formal lessons,Whittredge could not have been unaware of the signif-icance of Diisseldorf when he left the United States.5

In Diisseldorf he worked with Emanuel Leutze, renteda garret from Andreas Achenbach while avoiding for-mal lessons, and later studied with Carl FriedrichLessing and Johann Schirmer. Whittredge quicklyabsorbed the Diisseldorf manner and most of the workhe sent back to Cincinnati reflected the current workof Lessing and later Schirmer.6

Whittredge traveled much while livingin Diisseldorf. He later recalled, "I frequently went tothe Hague, Dresden, Berlin and Antwerp with anoccasional short visit to Paris to see the pictures, butfor the most part I kept my studio in the old town.My summers were spent in Westphalia, in the Hartz[sic] Mountains or in the more immediate neighbor-hood of Diisseldorf."7 Much of the work Whittredgesent back to Cincinnati contained motifs from thesetravels, especially trips to the Harz Mountains in late

Cincinnati Artists and the Lure of Germany 5

summer 1852 or the dramatic landscape nearKallenfels in the Nahe Valley. Frequently Whittredgemixed sites in the same painting for artistic effect,and his scenes ranged from somewhat romanticizedvistas of the towering rocks, such as his SummerPastorale, View of Kallenfels (1853, IndianapolisMuseum of Art, Fig. 2) painted for E. J. Mathews ofCincinnati,8 to his View of Kallenfels (Cincinnati ArtMuseum, Fig. 3) of July 1856, which emphasized notonly the rocky mound of Steinkallenfels as it casts ashadow on the village, but also the bleak hills beyondthe wooded copses. This picture also contains whatappears to be a funeral procession as it makes its wayto a walled cemetery.

Whittredge also used the Nahe Valleylandscape as a setting for other works, such as ThePilgrims of Saint Roch (private collection, California),a painting of such significance to the artist that herecalled it as one of his major works half-a-centurylater in his autobiography.9 This painting is set atRochusberg, above Bingen, where the Nahe meets theRhine.10 The banners held by the figures headingdown the hill suggests that the painting may illus-trate the return of pilgrims after the procession andMass, part of the annual festival of St. Roch, held thefirst Sunday after the August 15 feast of theAssumption. The painting emphasizes the high openplains, which lends even more solace to the grove oftrees and the shrine where the pilgrims rest. Lessingpainted similar views of the Nahe Valley, which alsomade their way, undoubtedly via Whittredge, toCincinnati , and which likewise take on a moreromantic and mysterious air, such as the Landscape(1862, Cincinnati Art Museum), painted two yearsafter Whittredge had returned to the United States.

When the influence of the Barbizonschool reached Dusseldorf, Whittredge's workchanged accordingly. Anthony Janson has noted thatJohann Schirmer began to work in a Barbizon mannerwith a part icular ly German sensibili ty, andWhittredge's paintings fell into line with Schirmer'smethod.11 Two of the works that Whittredge sentback to Cincinnati are distinctly in this style: TheMill, 1852, and Landscape in Westphalia, 1853 (bothin the Cincinnati Art Museum).12 Whittredge painted

Queen City Heritage

View of Kallenfels by ThomasW. Whittredge, 1856.Cincinnati Art Museum, Giftof Mary Hanna. (Figure 3)

Winter 1999 Cincinnati Artists and the Lure of Germany

The Mill by Thomas W.Whittredge, 1852. CincinnatiArt Museum, Bequest ofReuben Springer. (Figure 4)

The Mill (Fig. 4) for Reuben Springer, one ofCincinnati's greatest patrons of the arts, and he paint-ed Landscape in Westphalia (Fig. 5) for George WardNichols, instrumental in founding what became theArt Academy of Cincinnati. Both paintings featuretowering oak trees as central motifs, and Whittredgeappears to have been somewhat celebrated inDusseldorf for paintings of this sort. FriedrichWilhelm Von Schadow, president of the DusseldorfAcademy, praised him, "You who paint nothing sowell as our Westphalian oaks!"13 Janson relatesWhittredge's travels to Dessau to see the famous oaksand the importance of study of oak trees to Lessing'straining of his students.14

Whittredge's work after he returned tothe United States continued to recall his Dusseldorftraining. His Crossing the Ford, Platte River,Colorado (1868, reworked 1870, The CenturyAssociation, New York) combines tree portraiturewith Lessing-style romanticized figures, in this caseAmerican Indians, with a distant mountainous back-drop. The painting has been described as "an equilib-rium between the principles of the Hudson RiverSchool aesthetic and the logic of composition, draw-ing, and coloring [Whittredge] had assimilated duringhis five years in Dusseldorf."I5

The elusive Benjamin McConkey preced-ed Whittredge to Europe, though not to Germany.Born in Maryland about 1821, McConkey was inCincinnati by 1845 when he exhibited four paintingsat the Firemen's Fair.16 He may have come from afamily of some wealth as Whittredge recalled thatMcConkey had "a fortune at his command."17 BySeptember 1845 he had signed on as a pupil ofThomas Cole "on the same terms as Mr Church. $300per annum."18 McConkey exhibited seven paintingsat the American Art Union in 1846 and in August andSeptember of that year he traveled with Cole to theShawangunk Mountains, the Catskil ls , and theAdirondacks in New York. By May of 1847 he wasback in Cincinnati acting as something of an agent forCole with the Western Art Union.19

McConkey may have already been toRome and was set t led enough in Paris whenWhittredge arrived in September 1849 to have "a large

Queen City Heritage

acquaintance" and he introduced Whittredge "intosociety of fast, extravagant people."20 He andWhittredge soon traveled to Dusseldorf where theyboth joined Leutze in preparing Washington Crossingthe Delaware. Practically nothing is known ofMcConkey's training in Europe; he is said to havebeen in Florence in 185121 but was back in Cincinnatiin 1852 when he was elected to the Literary Club. Hedied three years later.

Only five paintings by McConkey areknown, an oval self-portrait (completed by JamesHenry Beard in 1855) and a vertical mountain land-scape at the Literary Club, Cincinnati; MohawkTerritory (1849) in the Shelburne Museum, Vermont;a small landscape exhibited at the American ArtUnion in 1846 in the Cincinnati Art Museum, and alarge Landscape Composition exhibited with thattitle at the American Art Union in 1852 in a privatecollection in Cincinnati. The latter, 105.1 x 156.8cm., is a Rhineland-inspired scene with a lake, moun-tains, castle, and small figures that might be consid-ered the sort of romantic landscape one would get bycombining Thomas Cole and Lessing around 1830-1850. Unt i l the discovery of further works byMcConkey he is likely to remain a tantalizing foot-note of American art.

German artists continued to be active inCincinnati, but their work was primarily devoted topainting altarpieces. William Lamprecht, born nearWiirzburg in 1838, was the most celebrated of theseartists. Gerdts has suggested that he was active inCincinnati in 1853, when he was as young as fifteenyears old.22 Lamprecht was indeed studying inMunich from 1859 t 0 1^^7, when he was inCovington, Kentucky, where he was the principalpainter of altarpieces for the Verein fur ChhstlicheKunst formed by Brother Cosmos Wolf (1822-1894),himself a Schwabian-born sculptor who had trainedwith Johann Petz (1818-1880) in Munich. TheInstitute supplied painted altarpieces for churchesacross the Nor theas t and Upper Midwest, butLamprecht is perhaps best known for being the firstmaster of the young Frank Duveneck. Lamprechtreturned to Munich in 1901 and the date of his deathis unknown.

Winter 1999 Cincinnati Artists and the Lure of Germany

Landscape by Thomas W.Whittredge, 1853. CincinnatiArt Museum, Gift of MariaLongworth Storer andMargaret R. Nichols,Marquise de Chambrun.(Figure 5)

IO Queen City Heritage

The Whistling Boy by FrankDuveneck, 1872. CincinnatiArt Museum, Gift of theArtist. (Figure 6)

Winter 1999

The influence of the German altar

painters, who were as active as any artists save maga-zine illustrators during the Civil War, may have hadmuch to do with the continued focus on Germany forthe advanced training of Cincinnati's native artists.Thomas Corwin Lindsay (1839-1907), one ofCincinnati 's most prolific artists, studied inDiisseldorf around i860 and his- early work reflectsthe same Barbizon-inspired landscape training seen inWhittredge's paintings from the early 1850s.However, from the mid-1890s his work degeneratedseriously and stories of him trading paintings fordrink abound.

Silesian-born Henry Mosler (1841-1920),the son of a Berlin lithographer, emigrated to NewYork in 1849 and to Cincinnati in 1851/3 when hestudied with James Henry Beard, a Cincinnati painterknown for his portraits, genre scenes and animalpaintings. By 1861 Mosler was an artist-correspon-dent for Harper's Weekly during the Civil War. In1863, after recovering from an illness, Mosler leftHarper's to pursue training in Diisseldorf with thegenre painter Albert Kindler (1833-1876) and the his-tory painter Heinrich Miicke (1806-1891). Heimmersed himself in the Academy student life anddeveloped friendships with German artists.

Surviving from this period are Mosler'sfigure drawings in the Cincinnati Art Museum andChildren Under a Red Umbrella (1865, Terra Museum,Chicago). Mosler's work reflected the naturalism anddetail-oriented work taught by the Academy and it waspraised by German critics. Mosler returned toCincinnati a celebrated artist and engaged with someenergy in the city's reviving artistic life. He was one ofthe founders, served on the council, and exhibited inthe first exhibition of the Associated Artists ofCincinnati in 1867-another futile attempt at a formalart academy-and later served in some capacity at thenew McMicken School of Design, directed by theThomas Couture-trained conservative ThomasSatterwhite Noble (1835-1907).24 Barbara Gilbert hasdemonstrated how Mosler's entire career was influ-enced by his training with Diisseldorf genre painters,and when he returned to Europe in 1875 for twentyyears, his work was celebrated for that reason.25

Cincinnati Artists and the Lure of Germany 1 1

Mosler eventually settled in Paris, butfirst spent two years in Munich, already the majorcenter for contemporary art, formally focused on theAcademy and informally on the rough avant-garde

realism of Wilhelm Leibl, himself influenced byFrench realists. Mosler, already an established artist,arrived in Munich simply to take an active role in thecity's art world. It is crucial to understanding Moslerthat when he did begin to study formally in Munich,he studied not the avant-garde but with Leibl's elders,Karl Von Piloty (1826-1886) and Alexander VonWagner (1838-1919). Piloty especially influencedMosler, whose work recalled much of the elder artist'shistorically accurate but melodramatic narrative andgenre scenes. Once he settled in Paris, Mosler's workconsisted almost entirely of scenes of the crucial cere-monial moments in the lives of Breton peasants: birthand baptism, courtship and marriage, dying and death.He was the first American artist to have his workacquired by the French government. Mosler returnedto the United States in 1895, settling in New York,and died in 1920.26

The most celebrated of Cincinnati'sartists to work in Germany was Frank Duveneck.Born to Westphalian immigrants who had settled inCovington, his first language was German and his lifecentered around the German-speaking communitiesof Covington and Cincinnati.27 Duveneck's first for-mal training was as an assistant to Lamprecht, travel-ing with him to decorate churches in the Northeast.Cosmos Wolf proposed to Duveneck's parents that hestudy in Munich to improve his abilities as an altarpainter. The Academy had classes specifically devot-ed to religious painting taught by Johann VonSchraudolph (1808-1879), who probably had beenLamprecht's own teacher.28 After three years of con-sideration, he enrolled at the Academy in Munich inJanuary 1870. Instead of registering in one of themore traditional classes as Wolf would have expected,Duveneck was one of the first group of studentstaught by Wilhelm Diez (1839-1907), who taughtwork more akin to the French realist artist GustaveCourbet. Diez emphasized direct study of old mas-ters, in particular Dutch and Flemish pictures, and anever-increasing experimentation of technique.

1 2

Duveneck, who had never experienced any instruc-tion of this sort from Lamprecht, eagerly absorbedDiez's method.

Piloty and Diez both emphasized thehead sketch as an important exercise and some ofDuveneck's earliest mature works are head sketches,-they likewise remained part of his oeuvre his wholecareer. Judging from the reoccurrence of particularmodels over the years in Munich School student paint-ings, the classes were obviously taught to paintassigned characters.29 The Old Professor (1871,Museum of Fine Arts, Boston), an image of the apothe-cary Clemens Von Sicherer (who posed for other artistsas well), demonstrates that Duveneck's talents formastering Diez's instructions were prodigious.

Diez's concern with technique meantthat he had less of a concern for color. He emphasizedmodeling, lighting, and brushwork to the extent thatcritics noted the cool tones used, describing it as''gray." Duveneck mastered this technique early onas well; his Caucasian Soldier (1870, Museum of Fine

Queen City Heritage

Arts, Boston) displays an extreme subtlety of color.Michael Quick has suggested that this painting mightbe dated later than the bold "1870" inscribed at upperleft because of the great similarity to a work byAugust Holmberg of 1871. However, other works byDuveneck are richer in color than the CaucasianSoldier. These date from as early as 1871, confirmingan account from 1880 by Isidor Krsnjavi of Duveneckboldly breaking with Diez's insistence on "gray-paint-ing" which took place early in Duveneck's time inMunich, shortly after he proved he could work asDiez taught. As Krsnjavi recounted the story:

Diez was a bitter enemy of all "sweetcolors," for which he could forgive not even thebest artists. All his students aimed at a "finetuning" of their painting, so that the entireschool eventually deteriorated into completegrayness. The timid souls could only feel good,and safe from "sweet colors," by painting effectsof dimness. The talented American, Duveneck,was the one who decided to stage a decisive revo-lution against this state of affairs. He coveredhis canvas in pure cinnabar, put some brightwhite on it, and painted a head in this key. Toour current way of thinking it shone dreadfully,naturally making all previous studies seem evengrayer than ever. We all ran together to see it.Diez was delighted. He made a real cult ofDuveneck and hung up in the studio this epoch-making head while we all went to buy cinnabar.Now we worked on impressive effects,- the gray-painting was out of date.30

Duveneck advanced to Diez's composi-tion class in October 1871, in which students paintedfinished works of art. Diez emphasized the paintingof genre pictures, or realist subjects unlike the idealmythological and religious subjects traditionallyexpected. From this environment, and with the back-ground of Diez's earlier instruction, came Duveneck'searly masterpieces. The Whistling Boy (1872,Cincinnati Art Museum, Fig. 6) is a bravura display ofbrushwork, tenebrous colors that are far from gray,and a gritty urban subject typical of realist sensibili-ties. While the face of the boy is more finely mod-eled, the figure's body is created by a flurry of blocks

Head of a Girl by FrankDuveneck, 1873. CincinnatiArt Museum, Kate BanningFund Purchase. (Figure 7)

Winter 1999

of paint, seemingly slapped on with both sides of abrush. The face, however, betrays something of atimidity in technique that disappears by 1873.

This alia prima painting was likewisetypical of the work of Leibl, who was only four yearsolder than Duveneck. Leibl's study in France and hisdevotion to the work of Courbet and the impression-ist Edouard Manet, made him something of a prophetwhen he returned to Munich. It is unclear how close-ly connected Duveneck was to Leibl or his close fol-lowers, known today as the Leibl-Kreis, but he wasextremely affected by the German artist's work andsaid later in life that Leibl "had more influence over

me than any of the other men in Munich, although Inever studied with him."31 Duveneck mastered thebold, sketchy side of Leibl's work and many paintingsbear striking resemblances. The Head of a Girl (1873,Cincinnati Art Museum, Fig. 7), with the head ren-

Cincinnati Artists and the Lure of Germany 13

dered with the same energy seen in the figure of theWhistling Boy, is worked up to the same degree asLeibl's Ein Italianer of 1869 (Cologne, Wallraf-Richartz-Museum).32

Apart from the bold head sketches(found in the works of all the Leibl-Kreis),Duveneck's most formidable homage to Leibl is hisportrait of Ludwig Lofftz (c. 1873, Cincinnati ArtMuseum, Fig. 8), then a contemporary of Duveneck'sin Diez's classes. The portrait is well modeled,strong, rich but restrained in color, and reflects anunderstanding of Leibl's methods seen in portraitssuch as that of Johann Heinrich Pallenberg (1871,Wallraf-Richartz-Museum). A contemporary relatesthe tale that it was painted "in one sitting, lasting allday and to the point of exhaustion of both painter andsitter."33 While a technical examination bears out thealleged speed of execution, Duveneck was not con-cerned with the slashing brush marks most normallyassociated with Leibl's alia prima painting, and theday-long sitting enabled the artist to make the workmore finished and refined than a more typical aliaprima sketch.

Duveneck was undoubtedly one of thebetter painters in the Academy, but he may haveembellished his success. Letters to his parents inCovington are the only evidence for the claim that hemade 1200 Guilden by painting marketable picturesin the summer of 1872, that the Munich artist FranzVon Lenbach offered him a place in his studio, andthat he had been awarded a place in the Vienna WorldExposition.34 He may have been delaying his returnhome by pointing out how successful he was, andhow much his future depended on his remaining inMunich. By April 1873 letters from his father dis-played a noticeable irritation in the artist's delay inreturning home to be a religious painter and on 17December 1873, Duveneck was welcomed home toCincinnati at a reception given by Cincinnati 'sartists.

Duveneck resumed his career as a reli-gious painter over the next two years, but worked in aproscribed and unadventurous manner. He returnedto Munich in August 1875 after two successful exhi-bitions of his work in Boston-at the Boston Art Club

Portrait of Professor LudwigLoefftz by Frank Duveneck,ca. 1873. Cincinnati ArtMuseum, John J. EmeryEndowment. (Figure 8)

Queen City Heritage

The Cobbler's Apprentice byFrank Duveneck, 1877.Bequest of Charles Phelpsand Anna Sinton Taft, TaftMuseum of Art, Cincinnati,Ohio. (Figure 9)

Winter 1999

and at the dealer Doll and Richards-which establishedhis reputation in the United States. The success ofthese two exhibitions must have spurred him toreestablish himself in Europe, not only by returning toMunich, but also as an independent artist rather thanas a student. He took on his own students, primarilyAmericans (he brought with him from CincinnatiJohn Henry Twachtman and Henry Farny), and beganhis life-long career as a teacher in the Munich tradi-tion, which took on its greatest significance early inthe next century in Cincinnati.

Duveneck's work displays both flamboy-ant brushwork, particularly in landscapes, portraitstudies and his rare still-lifes, as well as the somewhatmore disciplined finished work such as that seen inthe portrait of Lofftz. The Turkish Page (1876,Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts), paintedalongside William Merritt Chase working from thesame model, demonstrates an appreciation for theflamboyant and exotic with a more advanced use ofthe rich colors avoided by Diez. Duveneck's two laterexercises in the Whistling Boy subject, The Cobbler'sApprentice (1877, The Taft Museum, Fig. 9) and HeLives by His Wits (1878, private collection) likewiseare painted with this richness.

One notable change in Duveneck's sec-ond Munich period is the emergence of landscape as asubject matter. The inspiration was undoubtedlysummer excursions to Polling, but especially theexposure to the work of Frank Currier (1843-1909), anartist who rivaled Duveneck in the freedom of hisbrushwork. Currier had studied at the RoyalAcademy in Munich, had settled near Schleissheim in1873 to paint landscapes and became something of amentor to the colony of American artists that settledin Polling in 1877. Duveneck's landscapes owe muchto Currier's slashing brushwork, seen to greatesteffect in his large The Brook, Schleissheim, Bavaria(c. 1875, Cincinnati Art Museum). Duveneck's workis more fluid in its treatment, as in his Beechwoods atPolling (c. 1876, Cincinnati Art Museum), which dis-plays a sensitivity to the viscosity of the oil paint andless concern for painterly dramatics. A similar treat-ment is seen in Duveneck's self-portrait (c. 1877,Cincinnati Art Museum, Fig. 10), which is created out

Cincinnati Artists and the Lure of Germany 15

of undulating rich marks of the brush, the strokes ofindividual hairs sometimes visible.

The work of Duveneck's two Germanperiods is the result of an absorbent mind taking in aconcentrated artistic culture led by two forceful per-sonalities, Diez and Leibl. Duveneck had the misfor-tune to make his most original work-his work inGermany-in a style that was European in orientationas well as transitional and limited in its influence. Itwas this work that caused Henry James to observe an"unmixed, unredeemed reality," and John SingerSargent to remark in the early 1890s "after all's said,Frank Duveneck is the greatest talent of the brush ofthis generation."35 Sargent may well have beenlamenting the taming of Duveneck's brush after hisyears in Italy as well as his virtual disappearance fromthe artistic mainstream after the death of his wife in1888. He returned to Cincinnati in 1890 while con-tinuing to travel and work widely. He concentratedon teaching, bringing the instruction of 1870s Munichto Cincinnati from 1890 to his death in 1919.

Duveneck 's American students inGermany were known collectively as the DuveneckBoys (although he had classes of women as well). Fewachieved any celebrity beyond the confines ofCincinnati, and none worked in a Munich style intheir maturity. John Henry Twachtman, one ofAmerica's most exceptional impressionist painters,painted at least one Munich-style head sketch, but itis in his landscapes that one observes the freedom ofDuveneck's influence. Henry Farny, known almostexclusively today for his images of American PlainsIndians, made a number of trips abroad and traveledextensively in Europe for several years before joiningDuveneck in Munich. That he spent some time inDiisseldorf is known from a drawing of a soldierinscribed with the city's name.36 Farny studied underDiez with Duveneck, returning to Cincinnati in 1873,and followed Duveneck back to Munich in 1875.37

His most well-known effort in a Munich style is TheSilent Guest (1878, Cincinnati Art Museum, Fig. 11),a carefully-drawn, precisely-impasted and certainly"gray" rendering of an old gentleman sitting at a tav-ern table with a glass of beer. Farny's later career asan illustrator is anticipated in this work by his careful

16

handling of the paint. A number of artists fromCincinnati, such as Joseph DeCamp, Louis Ritter, andTheodore Wendel, only made their way to Munich atthe end of Duveneck's stay there, and his impact ontheir careers is more important from an Italian stand-point. Indeed, they made their careers in NewEngland after returning from Europe.

Munich remained a significant destina-tion for Cincinnati art students even after Duveneckleft for Italy, and most artists of any consequence whotrained in the city spent some years at least workingin Munich if not enrolling for classes at the RoyalAcademy. These artists suffered both from theabsence of Duveneck's personal energy, and fromstudying with artists of lesser daring than Diez orLeibl. Louis Henry Meakin's Old Munich MarketWoman (c. 1883, Cincinnati Art Museum) is typical:boldly composed and tightly cropped, it is a timidly-painted image of a working woman, hunched over andunder an umbrella. Only the hands and the basket offruits and vegetables at lower right are painted withany degree of life. Meakin studied in Munich underNicholas Gysis (1942-1901) and Lofftz (1845-1910, andwhose portrait he drew while in Munich) from 1882to 1886, as did Edward Potthast (who returned toCincinnati in 1885). Both worked later in life in animpressionist style that owes little to Munich. JosephHenry Sharp and John Hauser both studied in Munichin the 1880s and followed Farny into a career of paint-ing Plains Indians, but, as with Meakin and Potthast,vestiges of their Munich training are imperceptible.

World War I virtually ended the flow ofCincinnati art students to Germany. Cincinnatistreets were renamed or translated to English equiva-lents and the city turned its back on its German her-itage, a situation that remains to this day. However,even a cursory look at Cincinnati's visual art, reflect-ed in the prominent placement of the Tyler DavidsonFountain, offers testimony to an extraordinary influ-ence of the city's German heritage.

This article was originally written forand published (in German translation) in the cata-logue to the exhibition, ViceVersa: Deutsche Maler in

Queen City Heritage

Ameiika, Amerikanische Maler in Deutschland,1813-1913, held at the Deutsches HistorischesMuseum, Berlin, 27 September to 1 December 1996.The original English manuscript has been slightlyedited for this publication.

1. The best account of Frederick Eckstein is still Ophia D.Smith, "Frederick Eckstein, The Father of Cincinnati Art,"Bulletin of the Historical and Philosophical Society of Ohio, 9(October 1951). See also William Gerdts, Art Across America:Two Centuries of Regional Painting, IJ 10-1920, 3 volumes,(New York, 1990), volume 2, 179-81. Frederick Franks, whoopened a Gallery of Fine Arts in Cincinnati in 1826, has beendescribed as a German (by Robert Vitz, The Queen and theArts: Cultural Life in Nineteenth-Century Cincinnati, [Kent,Ohio, and London, 1989], p. 34; and by Ophia D. Smith, "ASurvey of Cincinnati Artists: 1789-1830," Bulletin of theCincinnati Historical Society, 25 [January 1967], 9, who claims,without attribution, that he trained in Munich and Dresden)and a Swede (by Donald Smalley, introduction to FrancesTrollope, Domestic Manners of the Americans (London, 1832,New York, 1949), (xxxiv), and as a "Swedish-born, German-trained painter" by Gerdts, op. cit. above, volume 2, 180).There is little if any documentation on Franks and it must alsobe considered that he is the English artist who painted thetwenty-two watercolors today in the British Museum, who diedin 1844. Franks owned or managed the Western Museum inCincinnati at some point, but if he was indeed the FrederickFrancs who died in 1844, he was not the Swede who ran themuseum when Frederika Bremmer visited the city in 1850 (cf.Smalley, op. cit. above, xxxiv, and Frederika Bremmer, TheHomes of the New World: Impressions of America, [New York,1854]).2. National Republican and Political Register, 24 May 1825.3. The best account of the rise and fall of Eckstein's Academy ofFine Arts is in Smith (1951), op. cit. at note 1 above, pp. 272-79.4. For the most complete examination of Whittredge, in partic-ular his period in Germany, see Anthony F. Janson,Worthington Whittredge, (Cambridge, Mass., 1989).5. John I. H. Baur, ed., The Autobiography of ThomasWorthington Whittredge, (New York, 1969), p. 21-22.6. Janson, op. cit. at note 4 above, p. 37.7. Baur, op. cit. at note 5 above, p. 26.8. Janson, op. cit. at note 4 above, p. 41.9. Baur, op. cit. at note 5 above, p. 63.10. I am grateful to Katharina and Gerhard Bott for pointing outthe precise location of Whittredge's scene. Perhaps it had spe-cial significance to Whittredge, recalling the confluence of theLittle Miami and the Ohio Rivers just east of Cincinnati. Evenin the 1850s the Little Miami River had long been noted as apicturesque spot for artists.11. Janson, op. cit. at note 4 above, p. 47.12. Janson [op. cit. at note 4 above) erroneously dates theLandscape in Westphalia (which he calls Landscape with Boyand Cows) to 1852. It is clear from Whittredge's account booksthat this painting, formerly known as simply Landscape, is

Winter 1999 Cincinnati Artists and the Lure of Germany

Self Portrait by FrankDuveneck, ca. 1877.Cincinnati Art Museum, Giftof Frank Duveneck.(Figure 10)

18 Queen City Heritage

The Silent Guest by HenryFarny, 1878. Cincinnati ArtMuseum, Gift of General M.F. Force. (Figure 11)

Winter 1999 Cincinnati Artists and the Lure of Germany

indeed the painting made for George Ward Nichols. It was lentto the Cincinnati Art Museum at its opening in 1886, and final-ly given by Nichols's daughter, the Comtesse de Chambrun,shortly before her death in 1949, when its significance was for-gotten.13. Baur, op. cit. at note 5 above, p. 30.14. Janson, op. cit. at note 4 above, p. 47. Whittredge's trip toDessau is erroneously cited by Janson as on page 56 of Baur'sedition of the artist's autobiography. For a good generalizationof the significance of oak trees to German culture, see SimonSchama, Landscape and Memory. (New York, 1995), pp. 100-120.

15. Esther T. Thyssen, entry on Crossing the Ford: PlatteRiver, Colorado, in American Paradise: The World of theHudson River School, exh. cat., (New York, 1987), p. 186.16. Catalogue of Paintings and Sculpture exhibiting at theFiremen's Fair. Given by the Ladies, for the Benefit of FireEngine and Hose Co., No. 5, at Washington Hall, from 16 June1845. McConkey exhibited The Fisherman (No. 12), Landscape(No. 13), Lake Scene (No. 21), and Rockland Lake. New York(No. 67). All still belonged to McConkey. McConkey's birth-date is unknown but the 1850 Census lists him as age 29.17. Baur, op. cit. at note 5 above, p. 21.18. Cole's account book, Albany Institute of History and Art.19. Vitz, op. cit. at note 1 above, p. 29, suggested thatMcConkey was a strong influence on the work of JohnFrankenstein and William Louis Sonntag. Not enough ofMcConkey's work is known to make any sort of connection.20. McConkey's Roman stay can be deduced from his exhibi-tion of a painting called Roman Ruins with Figures at theAmerican Art Union in 1849 (No. 28; 40 x 30 in.). The quota-tions about Paris are from Baur, op. cit. at note 5 above, p. 21.21. Gerdts, op. cit. at note 1 above, volume 2, p. 191.22. Gerdts, op. cit. at note 1 above, volume 2, p. 185.23. The best and most up-to-date account of Mosler is BarbaraC. Gilbert, Henry Mosler Rediscovered: A Nineteenth-CenturyAmerican-Jewish Artist, exh. cat., (Los Angeles, 1995), fromwhich most of this account is borrowed.24. Gilbert, op. cit. at note 23 above, n. 66, lists an entry for theMcMicken School in Mosler's account books. Gerdts, op. cit.at note 1 above, volume 2, p. 197, has suggested that artistsgave their services freely in the early years of the School.25. Gilbert, op. cit. at note 23 above p. 32.26. La Retour, 1879, received an honorable mention at the 1879Paris Salon (No. 2196). It is now in the Musee DepartementalBreton-Quimper.27. The best introduction to Duveneck's early years and hiscareer in Europe is Michael Quick, An American PainterAbroad: Frank Duveneck's European Years, exh. cat.,(Cincinnati, 1987).28. Quick, op. cit. at note 27 above, p. 16.29. Quick, op. cit. at note 27 above, illustrates Duveneck's andtwo other versions of Head of an Old Man in a Fur Hat, (pp. 18-19, Figs. 6, 7, and 8); and Duveneck's and another version ofboth The Caucasian Soldier (p. 20, Figs. 9 and 10) and Head of aGirl (p. 21, Figs, n and 12).

30. For the Caucasian Soldier dated later than 1870, see Quick,op. cit. at note 27 above, p. 21. Isidor Krsnjavi, "DerKunstunterricht und der Miinchener Akademie," Zeitschrift furBildende Kunst 15 (1880): 113-114, quoted in Quick, op. cit. atnote 27 above, p. 22.31. Josephine W. Duveneck, Frank Duveneck Painter-Teacher,(San Francisco, 1970), p. 38.32. While Quick, op. cit. at note 27 above, p. 25, believes thispainting is unfinished, the similarity to Leibl's work,Duveneck's signature, the date, and the inscription "Munich"suggest that whatever state it was in when Duveneck stopped,he was ready to show it off.33. Quick, op. cit. at note 27 above, p. 24; and NorbertHeermann, Frank Duveneck, (Boston and New York, 1918), p.74. While Duveneck undoubtedly painted with a rapid spon-taneity, one must also take into consideration his comment,recorded by Heermann, 12, regarding the painting of theWoman with a Fan now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art."Asked once in reference to the superb painting of her eyes, thedepth of them, Duveneck said: 'Yes, in those days I had eyeslike a hawk and yet I painted two days on that one eye in thelight.'"34. All letters are in the estate of Frank B. Duveneck and arequoted by Quick, op. cit. at note 27 above, pp. 25-26.35. Henry James, "On Some Pictures Lately Exhibited," TheGalaxy, xx (July 1875): 89-97; quoted by John W. McCoubrey,ed., American Art, ijoo-1960. Sources and Documents,(Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1965), pp. 166-167. Sargent:Heermann, op. cit. at note 33 above, p. 1.36. Denny Carter, Henry Farny (New York, 1978), p. 17, Fig. 6;monogrammed lower right, inscribed and dated lower left"Dusseldorf [sic] Jan 9th / 1870".37. Gerdts, op. cit. at note 1 above, volume 2, p. 200.