Lance Mayer & Gay Myers
Authors & Conservators of Samuel Morse's "Gallery of the Louvre"
Lance Mayer, Taylor Walsh, Gay Myers. 2012.
"The 'Gallery of the Louvre', the last of Samuel Morse's significant works, has just undergone six months of conservation treatment by independent conservators Lance Mayer and Gay Myers, based at the Lyman Allyn Art Museum in New London, Connecticut."
- The Wall Street Journal, April 1, 2011
Why did Samuel Morse choose to paint the 'Gallery of the Louvre'?
Gay Myers: It would be a big picture and because there weren’t movies and TV, people would actually pay money to go look at a big picture, and it was a money maker. And Samuel Morse was just sort of tone-deaf in terms of what people wanted to see. Morse’s first big painting was the House of Representatives, which was “so exciting.” How many people want to see a picture of the House of Representatives? Whereas other artists who were successful painted Niagara Falls or native Americans that people were actually interested in.
How did you get involved in the restoration of Samuel Morse's 'Gallery of the Louvre'?
Lance Mayer: Well getting started on the project to treat “The Gallery of the Louvre” came about because we’d have some dealings with the Terra Foundation for American Art. Gay and I are well-known for treating American paintings and “The Gallery of the Louvre” is an important American painting, it’s also been problematic in the sense that people have known for a long time that there are issues of condition in connection with it.
It looks quite yellow and at various times it had been studied and the question of whether it could be cleaned remained an open one. And since Gay and I had been looking at the literary sources as well, it was thought appropriate that we should study the picture and see whether it could be cleaned.
Lance Mayer & Gay Myers. "A New Look." DVD. 2012.
Gay Myers: And actually the way it got started, is we were contacted by the Terra Foundation. The painting was in New York at the Metropolitan Museum for an exhibition. So, it was very convenient to convene there. So we looked at it with the people from the Terra Foundation and talked about it, looking at its problems such as you can see in the galleries. And then they decided to send it to us. Then we did a very elaborate examination of it, trying to understand it. And that’s where we began to realize the way he had painted it with experimental methods, that it wasn’t safe to clean. It was sort of there and then that we also discovered that part of the problem of the damages perhaps happened because of it not being dry when Morse rolled it up to ship it home. Looking at it in New York, we saw all of these damages, but by looking at it we could see a pattern and understand it that way.
Why were some of the paintings in the 'Gallery of the Louvre' more damaged than others?
Gay Myers: It’s not quite clear why certain paintings were more damaged than others, other than the fact a conservator sometime in the past said ‘oh, I’ll clean that one.” And so they tended to perhaps choose paintings that had a blue sky or thought perhaps should have a blue sky. And so it was this postage stamp of a painting and this one and this one. There wasn’t any sort of systematic thing. It wasn’t they started at the left and cleaned it and went “oops” and stopped, it was selectively cleaning selected paintings.
Lance Mayer: With regard to the different degrees of damage to the different paintings, it some cases it seemed to us with perhaps of a painting of Rembrandt, which is very brown and looked like it was painted with glazes, I think that conservators were wary of the painting and they might have known that it looked like it’d be trouble to clean. Some other paintings that had light colors and were painted more opaquely, there was a painting by Guido Reine, that was particularly badly damaged and this one we think the conservator just thought it looked like it’d be easy to clean, but that was a miscalculation because it was not a simple job. It seems that many of the colors in this picture had had the paints mixed with varnish and that makes them a great challenge to do anything to the painting, because they had turned brown but it was actually within the paint layer itself that the problem was rather than a discolored varnish layer.
Gay Myers: Like the “Earl” we were showing you, is a more conventionally made painting. So, after the paint was dry, there was a varnish coating put on it sort of like the finish on a piece of furniture. And over time the materials used in the varnish would get yellow and so then it would be safe to take them off. And that would be the conventional way a painting would be cleaned. But, because that varnish was mixed in with the paint and the whole thing was coated with the same material, there was no discrimination. Once you started to take off the coating, you were starting to pick up the paint at the same time. And I ought to say the painting is in better condition than when we talk about it, it makes it sound. There were these selected areas that got over cleaned, but the majority of it didn’t have that damage and that’s why I think the treatment was successful in the end.
We identified what the problem was and realized it wasn’t an issue of taking more stuff off, but to put back glazes that shouldn’t have been taken off in the first place and that would unify it.
Why were some of the paintings in the 'Gallery of the Louvre' more damaged than others?
Gay Myers: It’s not quite clear why certain paintings were more damaged than others, other than the fact a conservator sometime in the past said ‘oh, I’ll clean that one.” And so they tended to perhaps choose paintings that had a blue sky or thought perhaps should have a blue sky. And so it was this postage stamp of a painting and this one and this one. There wasn’t any sort of systematic thing. It wasn’t they started at the left and cleaned it and went “oops” and stopped, it was selectively cleaning selected paintings.
Lance Mayer: With regard to the different degrees of damage to the different paintings, it some cases it seemed to us with perhaps of a painting of Rembrandt, which is very brown and looked like it was painted with glazes, I think that conservators were wary of the painting and they might have known that it looked like it’d be trouble to clean. Some other paintings that had light colors and were painted more opaquely, there was a painting by Guido Reine, that was particularly badly damaged and this one we think the conservator just thought it looked like it’d be easy to clean, but that was a miscalculation because it was not a simple job. It seems that many of the colors in this picture had had the paints mixed with varnish and that makes them a great challenge to do anything to the painting, because they had turned brown but it was actually within the paint layer itself that the problem was rather than a discolored varnish layer.
Gay Myers: Like the “Earl” we were showing you, is a more conventionally made painting. So, after the paint was dry, there was a varnish coating put on it sort of like the finish on a piece of furniture. And over time the materials used in the varnish would get yellow and so then it would be safe to take them off. And that would be the conventional way a painting would be cleaned. But, because that varnish was mixed in with the paint and the whole thing was coated with the same material, there was no discrimination. Once you started to take off the coating, you were starting to pick up the paint at the same time. And I ought to say the painting is in better condition than when we talk about it, it makes it sound. There were these selected areas that got over cleaned, but the majority of it didn’t have that damage and that’s why I think the treatment was successful in the end.
We identified what the problem was and realized it wasn’t an issue of taking more stuff off, but to put back glazes that shouldn’t have been taken off in the first place and that would unify it.
Gay Myers. "A New Look." DVD. 2012
Gay Myers: Something that isn’t talked about much is it’s got an enormous tear in it. Were you aware of that? We didn’t fix that. That was damage that occurred in the past and had already been repaired but showed too much. I don’t know if you want to showcase there was a four foot tear in it. See it’s good if you didn’t notice the tear!
Why would an artist like Samuel Morse be able to switch so quickly to becoming an inventor?
Lance Mayer: The painting is such a fascinating example of how the scientific impulse of painters in the second quarter of the nineteenth century is coincidental with the general rise of science in America and there are connections between the two fields all through this period. There are artists thinking a little more like scientists. There are some people like Morse and Robert Fultom, also a young painter, so there are connections between the fields. This fascinates us a lot because it was noted at the time, Americans were on the one hand inventing the telegraph and steamboats and revolving pistols, but also were trying to use the same kind of creativity and experimental process to make more stable paintings or to make better paintings, paintings with innovative use of ingredients that had never been done before.
How long did it take you to complete the restoration and were you always aware of the history behind the painting?
It was over a period of six months that we worked on it, not continuously. But over a period of six months, we were working on the painting and treating it.
Gay Myers: Conservators kind of have to split their brains in a way. That we sometimes work on very famous paintings and also very valuable paintings. So you always know that, but at the same time you have to separate out that part and you concentrate on conserving it and what’s working in this painting, what’s not working in this painting, what can I do to understand what the artist wanted, what can I do to make the artist’s intent more apparent if there’s something that’s gone wrong. And so you’re not always thinking, ‘oh my god, this is an important and valuable painting’. You have to think ‘this is a painting my help and my eye and my thinking as a conservator.’ And then when people walk in the room and go “Wow, look what you’re working on,” it’s like ‘yes, but my concern is it’s an individual painting that doesn’t look as good as it should and what can I do to make it look better.’
Lance Mayer: In terms of the process of how a conservator feels when a conservator treats a painting, we try to be on the one hand objective, almost scientific. We have to analyze is there anything about the particular materials in this painting that have aged so that the aging gets in the way of how we see the picture, but we also have to look at it as a work of art. We have to stand back and see how the space works, see the artist’s intent, so far as we can guess what that is, is being realized. So, at same time it’s very objective and almost scientific and working at close range with small tools and small brushes, but on the other hand stepping back and looking at the big picture, what this picture’s supposed to mean, in terms of its symbolism or what the artist is getting at and how the two are connected. So in a sense, you could say we’re trying to be something like what the artists were being in the second quarter of the nineteenth century: to respect science and use science, but to also use it to our artistic ends. We have to respect this delicate balance between the subjective and the objective.
Why would an artist like Samuel Morse be able to switch so quickly to becoming an inventor?
Lance Mayer: The painting is such a fascinating example of how the scientific impulse of painters in the second quarter of the nineteenth century is coincidental with the general rise of science in America and there are connections between the two fields all through this period. There are artists thinking a little more like scientists. There are some people like Morse and Robert Fultom, also a young painter, so there are connections between the fields. This fascinates us a lot because it was noted at the time, Americans were on the one hand inventing the telegraph and steamboats and revolving pistols, but also were trying to use the same kind of creativity and experimental process to make more stable paintings or to make better paintings, paintings with innovative use of ingredients that had never been done before.
How long did it take you to complete the restoration and were you always aware of the history behind the painting?
It was over a period of six months that we worked on it, not continuously. But over a period of six months, we were working on the painting and treating it.
Gay Myers: Conservators kind of have to split their brains in a way. That we sometimes work on very famous paintings and also very valuable paintings. So you always know that, but at the same time you have to separate out that part and you concentrate on conserving it and what’s working in this painting, what’s not working in this painting, what can I do to understand what the artist wanted, what can I do to make the artist’s intent more apparent if there’s something that’s gone wrong. And so you’re not always thinking, ‘oh my god, this is an important and valuable painting’. You have to think ‘this is a painting my help and my eye and my thinking as a conservator.’ And then when people walk in the room and go “Wow, look what you’re working on,” it’s like ‘yes, but my concern is it’s an individual painting that doesn’t look as good as it should and what can I do to make it look better.’
Lance Mayer: In terms of the process of how a conservator feels when a conservator treats a painting, we try to be on the one hand objective, almost scientific. We have to analyze is there anything about the particular materials in this painting that have aged so that the aging gets in the way of how we see the picture, but we also have to look at it as a work of art. We have to stand back and see how the space works, see the artist’s intent, so far as we can guess what that is, is being realized. So, at same time it’s very objective and almost scientific and working at close range with small tools and small brushes, but on the other hand stepping back and looking at the big picture, what this picture’s supposed to mean, in terms of its symbolism or what the artist is getting at and how the two are connected. So in a sense, you could say we’re trying to be something like what the artists were being in the second quarter of the nineteenth century: to respect science and use science, but to also use it to our artistic ends. We have to respect this delicate balance between the subjective and the objective.
"American Painters on Techniques." Book. 2011.
What kind of research on Samuel Morse did you do to prepare yourself for restoring his painting?
Gay Myers: It helps to know a lot about art history. It’s not like we’re just down here with our brushes and our solvents and our magnifiers and our microscopes. We spend a lot of time in museums looking at paintings and trying to put a painting we’re working on in context with other paintings that were being painted at the same time. And actually, it’s that kind of curiosity that led to our research that eventually led to our books. In trying to understand what might have inspired Morse to do a picture like he did and then to make it using the materials he used.
Gay Myers: Since Morse didn’t write a document, as far as anybody knows, that explains why he chose the paintings he did for “The Gallery of the Louvre,” then that means in the 21st century we all get to guess why he did. People have said it’s “pro Catholic or it’s anti-Catholic” or he likes the Italians, but then there’s some French. There was actually a symposium at Yale, when the picture was shown there, and a lot of people had a lot of opinions and I think the answer was ‘we’re not sure.’ Somebody did a really interesting study saying ‘in 1820, who were the famous painters and the famous paintings in Europe?’ and Morse didn’t necessarily follow that and that’s interesting. Why Morse didn’t follow it is anybody’s guess.
Lance Mayer: One aspect of Morse’s selection of the pictures, is a lot of them are of religious subjects painted by Catholics and used in Catholic churches. And Morse, to his discredit, later in his life became vehemently anti-Catholic - he was one of these nativists.
So, it’s kind of a negative side of this personality. That’s a funny thing to think about. I have no explanation.
Gay Myers: Unfortunately, if you read a lot of his writings and his letters, Morse is not an altogether sympathetic character. I kept wanting to like him better because I was spending so much time with his great picture. But he became kind of a grumpy old guy and was very unhappy with the way things were going in America – very anti-immigration.
Lance Mayer: Morse wasn’t alone in this. There was a strong nativist movement I think after the Irish Potato famine in 1845 and a lot of Irish immigrants. The native Yankees were afraid that the country would be taken over by papists. So, there was this big fear at the time.
Gay Myers: It helps to know a lot about art history. It’s not like we’re just down here with our brushes and our solvents and our magnifiers and our microscopes. We spend a lot of time in museums looking at paintings and trying to put a painting we’re working on in context with other paintings that were being painted at the same time. And actually, it’s that kind of curiosity that led to our research that eventually led to our books. In trying to understand what might have inspired Morse to do a picture like he did and then to make it using the materials he used.
Gay Myers: Since Morse didn’t write a document, as far as anybody knows, that explains why he chose the paintings he did for “The Gallery of the Louvre,” then that means in the 21st century we all get to guess why he did. People have said it’s “pro Catholic or it’s anti-Catholic” or he likes the Italians, but then there’s some French. There was actually a symposium at Yale, when the picture was shown there, and a lot of people had a lot of opinions and I think the answer was ‘we’re not sure.’ Somebody did a really interesting study saying ‘in 1820, who were the famous painters and the famous paintings in Europe?’ and Morse didn’t necessarily follow that and that’s interesting. Why Morse didn’t follow it is anybody’s guess.
Lance Mayer: One aspect of Morse’s selection of the pictures, is a lot of them are of religious subjects painted by Catholics and used in Catholic churches. And Morse, to his discredit, later in his life became vehemently anti-Catholic - he was one of these nativists.
So, it’s kind of a negative side of this personality. That’s a funny thing to think about. I have no explanation.
Gay Myers: Unfortunately, if you read a lot of his writings and his letters, Morse is not an altogether sympathetic character. I kept wanting to like him better because I was spending so much time with his great picture. But he became kind of a grumpy old guy and was very unhappy with the way things were going in America – very anti-immigration.
Lance Mayer: Morse wasn’t alone in this. There was a strong nativist movement I think after the Irish Potato famine in 1845 and a lot of Irish immigrants. The native Yankees were afraid that the country would be taken over by papists. So, there was this big fear at the time.
"A New Look." DVD. Terra Foundation. 2012.
Gay Myers: So it’s really fascinating there are so many religious pictures in Morse’s “Gallery of the Louvre.” But your guess is as good as mine! One obvious thing is: what were the most famous paintings at the time in the Louvre, ‘I’ll just put those down’. Kind of like nowadays, which postcards sell the most, so then he’d be giving us the greatest hits of the Louvre. But, Morse didn’t do that. So he did make other selections. So we’ve looked at whether Morse was trying to think in terms of technique, different ways the paintings were made in different periods; it doesn’t seem to be the case.
Why do you think Samuel Morse chose the paintings he did for his 'Gallery of the Louvre'?
Lance Mayer: Even in terms of the dates of the paintings, it’s all 16th and 17th century paintings, except there’s one or two 18th century paintings. So Morse is favoring certain periods, the 16th and 17th centuries, which might have been seen as the “golden age” of painting, but that in and of itself is interesting.
Gay Myers: There are Italian paintings, French paintings, Spanish paintings. Dutch paintings, so it could be seen as Morse was just trying to give a selection and that selection was just based on his personal appreciation. Maybe he didn’t have a deeper meaning.
Lance Mayer: We’re just back from Europe where we’ve been going through museums and we realized there are different collecting patterns in museums. And one thing that is missing, very obviously, in the “Gallery of the Louvre” that a modern museum-goer would love to see is 15th century paintings. No paintings by Yuri Verni, Roger Venderviden, or Bonnecelli, or any of the great 15th century artists. Those just weren’t loved and respected as much in the 19th century as they are now. The Louvre has those paintings, but we don’t know if they had them when Morse was there. We don’t know why Morse picked those paintings, but in a general way it reflects the tastes of his time – the 16th and 17th centuries would be the great era of the time.
What motivated Samuel Morse to be so ambitious in his painting and then in regard to the telegraph?
Lance Mayer: The second quarter of the 19th century is a great period for America, because the United States is starting to feel its oats, it’s starting to think independently of Europe. In our book, we mention Ralph Waldo Emerson in his Phi Beta Kappa lecture of 1837, which is around this time, which is considered an intellectual declaration of independence from Europe. So Americans, for the first time, were feeling strong enough that maybe they could have opinions about art, make innovations in science independently of what was going on in Britain and France and Germany. So, it’s a fascinating moment in terms of arts and sciences.
Gay Myers: There was a book published in the 1830s by William Dunlap, the history of the rise of the arts in America, which seems a little bit funny from this perspective because there hadn’t been that much art or that much rise in art. But, it’s a book that’s full of optimism saying America will eventually challenge Europe in arts and even challenge the great ancient world master paintings. And that was a really ambitious and actually fairly outrageous thing to say in 1834. But it showed the mood of the time. So, one way to look at the “Gallery of the Louvre” is Morse is saying ‘I’m bringing this to America, this is how we’re going to have the arts flourish.” And as we said before, he might have misjudged the timing.
Lance Mayer: America wanted the telegraph more than they wanted pictures hanging on the wall of a museum in France.
How did Washington Allston influence Samuel Morse and his decision to try historical paintings?
I think he actually gave Morse the idea that art should be elevating and that’s why he came back from his time with Allston not wanting to do portraits, wanting to do grander things. So conceptually, he influenced Morse.
“I” (Allston) experimented with painting a painting where the pigments are bound with milk. Morse did it too.
Lance Mayer: For us, the influence of Allston, it’s general but in terms of the art materials, which is what conservators are really interested in, it was definitely there.
That Allston was one of the most bold experimenters of art materials at the time. He learned how to do this in England, but he brought these ideas back to the U.S. and Morse would have learned from Allston that it was a good idea to experiment with various media, it was a good idea to experiment with glazing, with asphalta which is not the best technique and I think it led both Allston and Morse down the paths they could not anticipate.
Gay Myers: It’s an unstable material and sort of a yellow, brown glaze. And so for example if you wanted a new painting to look old, you might put it asphalta into it. So it might be the instant effect of age, but was going to tear the painting apart over time. I think the whole idea that painting could be an intellectual pursuit, because if you were just a painter you were sort of lowly. And you were very much wanting to be respected as intellectuals or thoughtful people or innovators or anything that would turn you into something other than a guy who wanders around the countryside knocking on doors saying ‘can I paint your portrait?’ Allston was clearly very influential in America for that.
Lance Mayer: Allston was a great model for that. Allston was a poet himself. Allston wrote poetry and mixed with some of the great English poets, so I think that again that’s maybe the most important thing this very lofty conception of what art can be came from Allston.
Gay Myers: I think Morse also had a lofty conception of himself. And I think he was looking for where to make his mark. I think he tried painting and that discouraged him. And he looked around and he did make his mark. He made a huge difference and he made a lot more money with the telegraph than he ever did with painting.
Why do you think Samuel Morse chose the paintings he did for his 'Gallery of the Louvre'?
Lance Mayer: Even in terms of the dates of the paintings, it’s all 16th and 17th century paintings, except there’s one or two 18th century paintings. So Morse is favoring certain periods, the 16th and 17th centuries, which might have been seen as the “golden age” of painting, but that in and of itself is interesting.
Gay Myers: There are Italian paintings, French paintings, Spanish paintings. Dutch paintings, so it could be seen as Morse was just trying to give a selection and that selection was just based on his personal appreciation. Maybe he didn’t have a deeper meaning.
Lance Mayer: We’re just back from Europe where we’ve been going through museums and we realized there are different collecting patterns in museums. And one thing that is missing, very obviously, in the “Gallery of the Louvre” that a modern museum-goer would love to see is 15th century paintings. No paintings by Yuri Verni, Roger Venderviden, or Bonnecelli, or any of the great 15th century artists. Those just weren’t loved and respected as much in the 19th century as they are now. The Louvre has those paintings, but we don’t know if they had them when Morse was there. We don’t know why Morse picked those paintings, but in a general way it reflects the tastes of his time – the 16th and 17th centuries would be the great era of the time.
What motivated Samuel Morse to be so ambitious in his painting and then in regard to the telegraph?
Lance Mayer: The second quarter of the 19th century is a great period for America, because the United States is starting to feel its oats, it’s starting to think independently of Europe. In our book, we mention Ralph Waldo Emerson in his Phi Beta Kappa lecture of 1837, which is around this time, which is considered an intellectual declaration of independence from Europe. So Americans, for the first time, were feeling strong enough that maybe they could have opinions about art, make innovations in science independently of what was going on in Britain and France and Germany. So, it’s a fascinating moment in terms of arts and sciences.
Gay Myers: There was a book published in the 1830s by William Dunlap, the history of the rise of the arts in America, which seems a little bit funny from this perspective because there hadn’t been that much art or that much rise in art. But, it’s a book that’s full of optimism saying America will eventually challenge Europe in arts and even challenge the great ancient world master paintings. And that was a really ambitious and actually fairly outrageous thing to say in 1834. But it showed the mood of the time. So, one way to look at the “Gallery of the Louvre” is Morse is saying ‘I’m bringing this to America, this is how we’re going to have the arts flourish.” And as we said before, he might have misjudged the timing.
Lance Mayer: America wanted the telegraph more than they wanted pictures hanging on the wall of a museum in France.
How did Washington Allston influence Samuel Morse and his decision to try historical paintings?
I think he actually gave Morse the idea that art should be elevating and that’s why he came back from his time with Allston not wanting to do portraits, wanting to do grander things. So conceptually, he influenced Morse.
“I” (Allston) experimented with painting a painting where the pigments are bound with milk. Morse did it too.
Lance Mayer: For us, the influence of Allston, it’s general but in terms of the art materials, which is what conservators are really interested in, it was definitely there.
That Allston was one of the most bold experimenters of art materials at the time. He learned how to do this in England, but he brought these ideas back to the U.S. and Morse would have learned from Allston that it was a good idea to experiment with various media, it was a good idea to experiment with glazing, with asphalta which is not the best technique and I think it led both Allston and Morse down the paths they could not anticipate.
Gay Myers: It’s an unstable material and sort of a yellow, brown glaze. And so for example if you wanted a new painting to look old, you might put it asphalta into it. So it might be the instant effect of age, but was going to tear the painting apart over time. I think the whole idea that painting could be an intellectual pursuit, because if you were just a painter you were sort of lowly. And you were very much wanting to be respected as intellectuals or thoughtful people or innovators or anything that would turn you into something other than a guy who wanders around the countryside knocking on doors saying ‘can I paint your portrait?’ Allston was clearly very influential in America for that.
Lance Mayer: Allston was a great model for that. Allston was a poet himself. Allston wrote poetry and mixed with some of the great English poets, so I think that again that’s maybe the most important thing this very lofty conception of what art can be came from Allston.
Gay Myers: I think Morse also had a lofty conception of himself. And I think he was looking for where to make his mark. I think he tried painting and that discouraged him. And he looked around and he did make his mark. He made a huge difference and he made a lot more money with the telegraph than he ever did with painting.