Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The role of the brothel monotypes in Degas’s development of the imagery of the nude Young, Margaret Jane 1981

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1981_A8 Y69.pdf [ 22.77MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0095120.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0095120-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0095120-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0095120-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0095120-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0095120-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0095120-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0095120-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0095120.ris

Full Text

THE ROLE OF THE BROTHEL MONOTYPES IN DEGAS'S DEVELOPMENT OF THE IMAGERY OF THE NUDE by MARGARET JANE YOUNG B.A., Mount A l l i s o n U n i v e r s i t y , 1975 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Fine Arts) We accept t h i s t hesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May 1981. @ Margaret Jane Young, 1981 In presenting th i s thes is in pa r t i a l fu l f i lment of the r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an advanced degree at the Un ivers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree t h a t the L ibrary sha l l make it f ree ly ava i lab le for r e f e r e n c e and study . I further agree that permission for extensive copying o f t h i s t h e s i s for scho lar ly purposes may be granted by the Head o f my Department or by his representat ives. It is understood that c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f th is thes is for f inanc ia l gain sha l l not be allowed without my written permission. n c Fine A r t s Department of The Univers i ty of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 A p r i l 23, 1981. i i i ABSTRACT Within the context of the revolution of subject matter i n p a i n t i n g and sculpture that occurred during the nineteenth century, e s p e c i a l l y i n the work of French painters, the imagery of the nude has been explored of l a t e mostly with a view to i l l u s t r a t i n g the underlying sexism of these images and the degrading treatment of women as objects i n these works. In t h i s discussion, the work of Edgar Degas, an a r t i s t whose subject matter i n h i s mature work i s dominated by the nude, has been treated very l i t t l e . Yet with Degas, the development of t h i s imagery i s p a r t i c u l a r l y c l e a r l y demarcated throughout his career. The nudes of h i s early period, the h i s t o r y painting nudes, are very d i f f e r e n t than those of h i s mature work, those executed a f t e r c.1885. As w e l l , the fact that Degas abandoned the subject for a period of almost twelve years would tend to i n d i c a t e an abrupt change i n h i s conception of the imagery from h i s early to his mature paintings. With the p u b l i c a t i o n by Theodore Reff of Degas's notebooks, i t i s now possible to trace h i s development of the subject with firmer dates than was possible heretofore. As his f i r s t explorations of the subject i n o i l and p a s t e l occur i n 1879, i t i s then obvious that Degas's monotypes of bathers and brothels, executed c.1876-78, are his f i r s t r e a l treatment of the nude of modern l i f e , a discovery that makes the monotypes a l l important to t h i s discussion. Further, i t can be r e a d i l y demonstrated upon close examination of these p r i n t s i n r e l a t i o n to s i z e , handling, motifs and poses that Degas did not consider the bathers and the p r o s t i t u t e s as two separate subjects and that the d i s t i n c t i o n i s one imposed by l a t e r cataloguers of the monotypes. Degas's i n t e r e s t i n the subject of p r o s t i t u t i o n i s by no means an i s o l a t e d case i n the l a t e r nineteenth century i n France. Other writers and a r t i s t s chose i t as one which conformed to the p r e v a i l i n g theories of naturalism as a t r u l y modern theme. Nor did Degas ignore a long t r a d i t i o n of nineteenth century lithographs with naughty sub-j e c t s i n h i s depiction of the nudes. The i n t e r e s t i n p r o s t i t u t i o n i n this context and Degas's awareness of the l i t h o g r a p h i c t r a d i t i o n shed some l i g h t on the reaction of the press and audiences towards Degas's mature nudes that he exhibited i n 1886. His p u b l i c found the pastels and o i l s o f f e n s i v e , probably because the images did resemble the p r i n t s of the lithographers of the Romantic era and the paintings of s i m i l a r subjects by other a r t i s t s i n the seventies and eighties whose subjects could be c l e a r l y i d e n t i f i e d with the subject of p r o s t i t u t i o n and were rejected by the o f f i c i a l body, the annual Salon. Degas's l a t e r , mature nudes were regarded as s l i g h t l y salacious subjects for many years and t h e i r i n i t i a l reception by the p u b l i c i n the eighteen-ei g h t i e s forms yet another chapter i n the study of the changes i n sub-j e c t matter that were hotly debated i n a r t i s t i c c i r c l e s during the nine-teenth century and beyond. TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT i i i LIST OF FIGURES v i INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER I 13 CHAPTER II 30 CHAPTER III 52 CHAPTER IV 67 BIBLIOGRAPHY 77 FIGURES 82 LIST OF FIGURES Edgar Degas, Copy a f t e r Two Nude Men by Marcantonio, p e n c i l on pink paper, The Detroit I n s t i t u t e of Art Edgar Degas, Reclining Male Nude, 1857, p e n c i l on pink paper, David Daniels C o l l e c t i o n , New York. Edgar Degas, The Daughter of Jephthah , o i l on canvas, Smith College Museum of Art, Northampton, Mass. Edgar Degas, Study f o r 'The Daughter of Jephthah. ' p e n c i l on paper, Notebbok 12, p.93, Cabinet des Estampes. Edgar Degas, Study f o r 'The Daughter of Jephthah. I p e n c i l on paper, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Edgar Degas, Scenes from the I l i a d , p e n c i l on paper, Notebook 12, p. 95. Edgar Degas, Scenes from the I l i a d , p e n c i l on paper, Notebook 13, p. 7. Edgar Degas, Scenes from the I l i a d , p e n c i l on paper, Notebook 13, p. 9. Edgar Degas, Scenes from the I l i a d , p e n c i l on paper, Notebook 13, p.111. Edgar Degas, The Young Spartans Ex e r c i s i n g , o i l on canvas, The National Gallery London. Edgar Degas, Study for'The Young Spartans', p e n c i l on paper, Bibliotheque Nationale, P a r i s . Edgar Degas, Study f o r 'The Young Spartans Exercising', p e n c i l on paper, c o l l e c t i o n unknown; reproduced In Devin Burn e l l , "Degas and h i s 'Young Spartans Exercising", Art I n s t i t u t e of Chicago: Museum Studies 4 (1969), p.153, fig u r e 5. Edgar Degas, Study f o r 'The Young Spartans Exercising', o i l on paper, Fogg Art Museum, Cambridge, Mass. Edgar Degas, Study f or 'The Young Spartans Exercising', p e n c i l on paper, The Toledo Art Museum, Toledo, Ohio. Edgar Degas, Study f or 'The Young Spartans Exercising', o i l on canvas, The Louvre, P a r i s . Edgar Degas, Study f or 'The Young Spartans Exercising', o i l on canvas, Fogg Art Museum, Cambridge, Mass. V1X 17 Edgar Degas, The Misfortunes of the C i t y of Orleans, o i l -on canvas, The Louvre, P a r i s . 91 18 Edgar Degas, Study f o r 'The Misfortunes', p e n c i l on paper, The Louvre, P a r i s . 92 19 Edgar Degas, Stndv f o r 'The Misfortunes', black chalk and pe n c i l on paper, Cabinet des Dessins, The Louvre, P a r i s . 9.2 20 Edgar Degas, Study f o r 'The Misfortunes', black chalk and pe n c i l on paper, Cabinet des Dessins, The Louvre, P a r i s . 93 21 Edgar Degas, Une Femme au Tub, p a s t e l on paper, The Art Museum and Gallery , Glasgow, Scotland. 93 22 Edgar Degas, Le Tub, p a s t e l on paper, The Louvre, P a r i s . 94 23 Edgar Degas, La T o i l e t t e , p a s t e l on paper, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. 94 24 Edgar Degas, Aft e r the Bath, charcoal on traci n g paper, Staatsgalerie, Stuttgart, West Germany. 95 25 Edgar Degas, Une Femme se Coi f f a n t , o i l on canvas, C o l l e c -t i o n Thannhauser. qc; 26 Edgar Degas, P e t i t e s Paysannes se lavant a l a mer, l e s o i r , o i l on canvas, C o l l e c t i o n . Charles Vignier, P a r i s . 96 27 Edgar Degas, Une Femme Sortant du Bain, p a s t e l over monotype on paper, Cabinet des Dessins, The Louvre, P a r i s . 28 Edgar Degas, La T o i l e t t e (Une Femme Nue Accroupie de Dos), past e l over monotype on paper, Cabinet des Dessins, The Louvre, P a r i s . qj 29 Edgar Degas, Study f o r 'Apres Le Bain', Notebook 32, p.11. 9 8 30 Edgar Degas, Une Femme Sortant du Bain, p a s t e l over monotype, c o l l e c t i o n unknown; reproduced i n Janis, Degas  Monotypes, #174. 99 31 Edgar Degas, La Sortie du Bain, monotype on paper, Cabinet des Estampes, The Louvre, P a r i s . 99 32 Edgar Degas, Le Bain, monotype on paper, Department of P r i n t s and Drawings, Royal Museum of Fine Arts , Copenhagen. 100 33 Edgar Degas, Une Femme Nue a l a Porte- de sa Chambre, monotype on paper, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Mass. 101 34 Edgar Degas, Une Femme Nue Accroupie de Dos, monotype on paper c o l l e c t i o n unknown; reproduced i n Janis, Degas Monotypes, #192. 102 v i i i 35 Edgar Degas, Le lever, monotype on paper, c o l l e c t i o n unknown; reproduced i n Janis, Degas Monotypes, #170. 102 36 Edgar Degas, La Sortie du Bain, monotype on paper, Private C o l l e c t i o n , France. 103 37 Edgar Degas, Une Femme Etendue Sur Son L i t , monotype on paper The Art I n s t i t u t e of Chicago, Chicago, 111. 104 38 Edgar Degas, Maison Close, David Tunick, David Tunick, Inc., New York. 105 39 Edgar Degas, Le Bidet, monotype on paper, c o l l e c t i o n unknown; reproduced i n Janis, Degas Monotypes, #110. 106 40 Edgar Degas, Le Foyer, monotype on paper, Private C o l l e c t i o n , France. 106 41 Edgar Degas, Le Repos, monotype on paper, c o l l e c t i o n unknown; reproduced i n Janis, Degas Monotypes, #73. 107 42 Edgar Degas, La Sieste au Salon, monotype on paper, c o l l e c t i o n unknown; reproduced i n Janis, Degas Monotypes, #72. 107 43 Edgar Degas, A G i r l Putting on her Stockings, monotype on paper, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. 108 44 Edgar Degas, Le Boucle d ' O r e i l l e , monotype on paper, Lefevre Gallery, London. 1 0 9 45 Edgar Degas, Admiration, p a s t e l over monotype on paper, I t t l e -son C o l l e c t i o n , New York. 1 1 0 46 Edgar Degas, Une Femme Nue se Co i f f a n t , monotype on paper, c o l l e c t i o n unknown; reproduced i n Janis, Degas Monotypes, #185. 1 1 1 47 Edgar Degas, Le Tub, pastel.over monotype on paper, c o l l e c t i o n unknown; reproduced i n Janis, Degas Monotypes, #189. 112 48 Edgar Degas, Les Femmes, monotype on paper, c o l l e c t i o n unknown; reproduced i n Janis, Degas Monotypes, #118. 112 49 Edouard Manet, Nana, o i l on canvas, Kuntshalle, Hamburg, West Germany. 113 50 Henri Gervex, R o l l a , o i l on canvas, Musee des Beaux-Arts, Bordaux. 11A 51 Edouard Manet, Une Femme dans un Tub, p a s t e l on paper, Schoclen C o l l e c t i o n , Scarsdale, New York. 52 Edouard Manet, A Woman Fastening Her Garter, p a s t e l on paper, Wilhelm Hansen Museum, Ordrupsgaard, Sweden. 115 i x 53 Edgar Degas, Le Bain, p a s t e l over monotype on paper, c o l l -e ction unknown; reproduced i n Janis, Degas Monotypes, #126. 116 54 Edgar Degas, La T o i l e t t e F i l l e t t e , p a s t e l over monotype on paper, c o l l e c t i o n unknown; reproduced i n Jan i s , Degas Mono- types, #150. 117 1 INTRODUCTION Degas has always been c a l l e d the painter of dancers and bathers as these two f i g u r a l motifs dominate h i s oeuvre. However, despite the f a c t that Degas painted the nude more than any other single motif i n h i s career, studies of t h i s imagery i n h i s work have been fev;. Ronald Pickvance's recent a r t i c l e has somewhat redressed the paucity of w r i t i n g on the subject, but i n general, the imagery has been taken as a given i n the monographs on t h i s a r t i s t . Kenneth Clark has offered the view that a l l of Degas's nudes constitute a co-2 herent group concerned with the depiction of movement. While t h i s i s to some extent true, i t reveals only one aspect of t h i s large body of work. The nudes of his post-history painting period are very d i f f e r -ent from those of the 1880's and l a t e r . As w e l l , for a period of more than ten years, Degas did not execute more than two or three nude subjects. This gap of a decade or so i n h i s use of t h i s imagery i s a puzzle. I t could be that when Manet posed the problem of the nude of modern l i f e with h i s e x h i b i t i o n of Olympia i n 1865, Degas, with the a r t i s t i c and l i t e r a r y background to appreciate the wit of Manet's s o l u -3 t i o n , r e a l i z e d the d i f f i c u l t y of painting a t r u l y modern nude. I t was during the mid to l a t e seventies that Degas executed h i s monotypes of bathers and brothels and i t i s obvious upon close examination that when he did return to the large scale nude i n o i l and p a s t e l i n the e i g h t i e s , that i t was with the gestures, poses and motifs that he established i n the monotype p r i n t s . Yet these nudes of the e i g h t i e s i n o i l and p a s t e l were greeted with charges of obscenity when exhibited i n 1886. I t w i l l be shown that h i s r e l i a n c e upon the monotype configurations of nudes 2 informed his l a t e r work and that the echoes of v i o l a t e d privacy and salacious connotations found i n the l a t e r large scale nudes were the basis of t h e i r poor reception by the general p u b l i c . The monotypes have been treated l a r g e l y as an i n t e r e s t i n g but 3A rather unimportant adjunct to h i s main oeuvre, probably because of the odd medium. Degas i s now considered one of the masters of nine-teenth century graphic art for h i s work i n lithography and etching, yet h i s works i n monotype outnumber his work i n the other two media by 4 more than three to one. I t would seem that Degas himself found mono-type the more s a t i s f y i n g of the three. As w e l l , t h i s 1 subject of the nude i n h i s work and the large gap of a decade can now be explored since the p u b l i c a t i o n by Theodore Reff of the notebooks^ makes i t poss-i b l e to redate a large number of works. With a chronology established, the monotypes become important i n the study of Degas's nude imagery. When the monotype nudes of the broth-els and bathers are studied i n terms of chronology, s i z e , handling and motif, the d i s t i n c t i o n between these two subjects breaks down. It may be r e a d i l y demonstrated that when he f i r s t treated the nude a f t e r a hiatus of more than ten years, Degas did not produce two separate cate-gories of nudes, but treated the scenes of women at t h e i r t o i l e t t e as part of the brothel scenes. The f i r s t chapter of t h i s thesis w i l l determine the differences between the nudes of h i s h i s t o r y painting period and those of the eighties and l a t e r . The nudes of the early to mid seventies w i l l be explored and the chronology of the monotype nudes w i l l be established with the a i d of the subjects depicted i n the notebooks. The chronology, 3 s i z e , technique and motifs of the monotype nudes w i l l be examined i n order to e s t a b l i s h the d i f f i c S n c i e s of t r e a t i n g the early bathers and brothel scenes as d i s t i n c t subjects. A discussion of the s o c i a l and l i t e r a r y topic of p r o s t i t u t i o n during the l a t e r eighteen seventies w i l l e s t a b l i s h the context i n which Degas produced these images i n Chapter I I I . F i n a l l y , h i s nudes w i l l be compared to s i m i l a r subjects by his contemporary a r t i s t s i n order to illuminate the charges of obscenity which greeted the nu'des exhibited i n 1886. Although Eugenia Janis has explored the o r i g i n and importance of the monotypes i n Degas's working method i n d e t a i l i n her essay preced-ing the catalogue of the 1968 e x h i b i t i o n of monotypes at the Fogg Art Museum, a b r i e f survey of the l i t e r a t u r e on the monotypes and a general discussion on t h e i r subject matter and technique i s i n order. Franchise Cachin's statement that the monotypes remained "a closed book to the p u b l i c f or many y e a r s " 6 must be q u a l i f i e d . The cata-logue of the Third Impressionist e x h i b i t i o n of 1877 l i s t s three "dessins f a i t a l'encre grasse et imprimes" among Degas's e n t r i e s , as w e l l as s i x pastels which we now know to have monotypes bases. 7 The monotypes were not mentioned i n any of the reviews of the show, and i t i s not c e r t a i n that they were indeed submitted. Degas, always ready at the l a s t minute 8 for these events, o f t e n f f a i l e d to produce the promised number of works. Two of the famous s e r i e s of nudes shown i n 1886, at the l a s t Impression-9 i s t show, were also monotype-based. These p r i n t s were c e r t a i n l y known to other a r t i s t s of Degas's c i r c l e , i ncluding Lepic, P i s s a r r o , Gauguin and Forain who a l l executed works i n t h i s medium. Several of the pure monotypes, including a number of the brothel scenes, were i n pr i v a t e c o l l e c t i o n s , such as those of F.oger Marx, A l f r e d Beurdeley, and Jacques Doucet, before Degas's death. The e x h i b i t i o n of 1892 at Durand-Ruel's was composed e n t i r e l y of landscape monotypes. 1^ Degas even allowed V o l l a r d to reproduce one i n the f a c s i m i l e e d i t i o n o f Degas's works published i n 1914. 1 1 Hence, i t can be seen that while the monotypes were not exhibited as extensively^as h i s pa s t e l s , they were known to the people whose opinion r e a l l y counted with Degas, h i s fellow a r t i s t s and men whose p r i n t c o l l e c t i o n s were widely admired. I t i s true, however, that i t was not u n t i l the a t e l i e r sales 12 of 1918 that the monotypes were accessible to the general p u b l i c . Henceforth, these p r i n t s came to be associated with the brothel scenes as these constituted the largest s i n g l e group of subjects. From t h i s time on most major Degas exhibitions included at least a few monotypes and usually many pastel-covered monotypes. This i s true of the large 13 show at the Galeries Georges P e t i t i n 1924 and the Orangerie shows 14 of 1931 and 1937. . Thirty-three monotypes were shown i n Copenhagen i n 1 9 4 8 . T h e largest group were shown i n London a f t e r the sale of the c o l l e c t i o n of Maurice Exteens, who, with h i s father-in-law, Gustave P e l l e t , bought most of the monotypes offered at the a t e l i e r s a l e s . ^ I t was not u n t i l the 1968 show at the Fogg that the monotypes c o n s t i t -uted an e n t i r e e x h i b i t i o n . The accompanying essay, c h e c k l i s t and cata-logue written by Eugenia Janis were the f i r s t major research of these • - 1 7 p r i n t s . During Degas's l i f e t i m e , the monotypes were mentioned only by 18 Be r a l d i i n h i s Les Graveurs du XIXe S i l c l e . The author described the process but made no mention of the subject matter. A f t e r the a t e l i e r s a l e s , two a r t i c l e s appeared which dealt with the p r i n t s . Arsene Alexandre wrote that t h i s part of Degas's oeuvre was where the a r t i s t showed himself to be " l e plus l i b r e , l e plus entraine, l e plus , 19 endiable". Marcel Guerin wrote i n more d e t a i l on the process of 20 the monotypes but made l i t t l e comment on the subject matter. A wealth of confusion existed i n regard to technique and subject matter i n the monographs on Degas published during the early part of th i s 21 22 23 century. Lafond, Meier-Graefe, and Fosca spoke of the f r i g h t f u l coarseness of the women of the brothel scenes, t h e i r lamentable appear-ance due to t h e i r d i s s i p a t e d l i f e . R i v e r i e r e , c a l l i n g the p r i n t s ''araquelles et dessins" f e l t that they displayed nothing ignominous 24 and described them instead as " r a b e l a i s i e n s " . Coquoit mentioned the 25 maisons closes but not i n connection with the monotypes. Manson 26 27 barely mentioned them and Jamot ignored them completely. The i n -28 troduction to the London catalogue of 1958 dwelt on the technique of the monotypes as did Rouart's short essay preceding the plates of the 29 monotypes i n h i s publications of 1948. I t was not u n t i l the catalogues and accompanying essays of Janis and Cachin that any attempt was made to research the importance of these p r i n t s or the motifs t h e r e i n . As t h e i r work i s so fundamental to any understanding of the p r i n t s , t h e i r research w i l l be discussed at length i n Chapter I I I . When Degas f i r s t s t a r t s executing monotypes about 1874, he uses them as a base f o r p a s t e l . Indeed, one quarter of a l l of Degas's pastels 30 have a monotypes base. Later he uses i t as an independent medium, 31 free of p a s t e l , as book i l l u s t r a t i o n s and for h i s scenes of brothels, a subject exclusive to the monotype medium. Degas treats a l l of h i s subjects of the seventies and e i g h t i e s , the n i g h t l i f e of P a r i s , the 6 racing scenes and the b a l l e t , i n these p r i n t s which number over three hundred and twenty. We now b e l i e v e , not withstanding the opinions of Lemoisne and 32 Rouart, that Count Ludovic Lepic, painter, etcher, author and member of the Societef des Aquafortistes, taught Degas the monotype technique. Deagas's f i r s t monotype, a p r i n t depicting a b a l l e t master and dancer on stage, executed i n the dark f i e l d manner, i s signed by Lepic and Degas on the p l a t e . Of these signatures, o r i g i n a l l y w r itten backwards, the l a t t e r ' s i s assured while Degas's i s tentative and crude. I t would seem that Lepic provided the expertise for Degas's f i r s t e x p eri-ment with the medium. Lepic devoted a chapter i n h i s book, Comment je deviens graveur, to h i s technique of encrage or eauforte mobile, a process i n which much ink i s l e f t on the plate to achieve, i n separate proofs, the e f f e c t s of d i f f e r e n t times of the day and year. About 1875, Degas p u l l e d from a plate which he had f i r s t etched i n 1857, a proof using the encrage 35 technique. The etching of Joseph Tourney, based on Rembrandt's Young Man i n a Velvet Cap, i s , i n the l a t e r proof, heavily inked. Janis sees i n t h i s example of Degas's use of encrage h i s discovery of "the means to portray the form-constructing power of l i g h t i n opposition to dark; i n other words, the p r i n c i p l e of chiaroscuro of which Rembrandt 36 was considered to be the master." Degas's early monotypes, a l l of which depict b a l l e t scenes under 37 a r t i f i c i a l l i g h t , are, l i k e C a s t i g l i o n e ' s , experiments i n the composi-t i o n a l uses of chiaroscuro. Like the seventeenth century master's, they are a l l done i n the dark f i e l d or subtractive method i n which the 7 plate i s inked a l l over and h i g h l i g h t s are wiped away. According to Blunt " t h i s method gave Castiglione the freedom that he wanted, and 38 allowed him to further produce r i c h e f f e c t s of chiaroscuro". From the beginning, Degas covered a second, l i g h t e r proof with p a s t e l , and used the monotypes as a means of s e t t i n g out the tonal pattern of a work. We can only agree with Janis's analysis that monotype helped Degas to integrate h i s composition and tonal harmony 39 at an e a r l y stage of the work. The f i r s t monotypes, as noted above, are b a l l e t scenes. Later, i n the mid-seventies, Degas used monotype for cafe-concert scenes, again executed i n the dark f i e l d method and often covered i^ i t h p a s t e l . The s t r e e t scenes, jockeys and p o r t r a i t heads of this period are small and executed i n the l i g h t f i e l d method, i n which the image i s painted on a cleatf p l a t e . With the brothel scenes of the l a t e r seventies, a new technique emerges. The l i n e s are drawn on the plate with a small brush loaded with p r i n t e r ' s ink d i l u t e d with essence or s p i r i t . Other areas are brushed with undiluted ink and modeled i n the subtractive method. The l i g h t f i e l d technique predominates i n the i l l u s t r a t i o n s for Ludovic HaleVy's La Famille Cardinal executed, according to the 40 evidence of the notebooks, around 1878. The group of monotypes of nudes and women bathing belong to the l a t e seventies and early e i g h t i e s . Done f o r the most part i n the dark f i e l d manner, the f i r s t impression i s often l e f t bare and dedicated to 41 a f r i e n d or admirer, such as the c r i t i c P h i l l i p p e Burty. The l a s t monotypes of Degas ?s career are the landscape p r i n t s executed i n 1890 and exhibited at Durand-Ruel's i n 1892, These are p r i n t e d with coloured 8 inks and r a r e l y retouched with p a s t e l . 'From studies i n chiaroscuro to l i g h t - f i l l e d colour landscapes, Degas uses monotypes inc r e a s i n g l y as an independent medium. I n i t i a l l y depending on monotype as a s o l -ution to compositional problems, he l a t e r allows i t , with the i n t r o -duction of colour, to stand as a f i n i s h e d and self-contained medium. 9 FOOTNOTES ^Ronald Pickvance, "Some Aspects of Degas's Nudes", Apolloj $3(January 1966), pp. 17-23. 2 KennethClark, The Nude: A study i n Ideal A r t , (London: Penguin Books, 1956), p.211 3 For a discussion of t h i s painting and i t s s i g n i f i c a n c e , see Theodore Reff, Manet and Olympia (New York: Viking Press, 1977). 3A See Eugenia Janis, "The Role of the Monotype i n the Working Method of Degas", Burlington Magazine CIX, Part I (January 1967), pp.20-27; Part II (February 1967), pp.71-81; Janis, Degas Monotypes: Essay,Catalogue and Checklist (Cambridge, Mass., Fogg Art Museum, 1968); Ja n i s , "Degas and 'The Master of Chiaroscuro'", Art I n s t i - tute of Chicago: Museum Studies' 7/?(J972) , pp.52-71; Janis- "The Mono-types of Edgar Degas"(Unpublished 'Phd. Thesis, Harvard U n i v e r s i t y , 1974); and Francoise Cachin and Jean Adhemar, Degas: The Complete Etchings, Lithographs and Monotypes, translated by Jane Breton, foreward by John Rewald, (New York: Viking Press, 1974). 4 320 unique monotype images as opposed to 107 lithographs and etchings, Jean Adhemar and Franchise Cachin, Degas: The Complete  Etchings, Lithographs and Monotypes, translated by Jane Bretoni (New York: Vi k i n g Press, 1974). ^Theodore Reff, CaJ^aJLpgue__ofJthe Notebooks of Edgar Degas, 2 v.61s. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, iy76). Cachin, Degas, p.75. ^ L i o n e l l Venturi, Les Archives de L'Impressionisme, 2 Vols. (Paris: Durand-Ruel, 1939), pp.259-60. g John Rewald, The History of Impressionism, 4th e d i t i o n (New York: Metropolitan Museum of A r t , 1974), p.336. 9 / s Paul Andre Lemoisne, Degas, Un Catalogue Raisonne de son Oeuvre 4 Vols. 2: L. 1086, .1154.-(Paris: Paul Brame et.Caesar de Hauke,.1946-49) 1 0 H a r o l d Lay, "Degas at Durand-Ruel, 1892", P r i n t C o l l e c t o r ' s  Quarterly 9, #5 (November-December 1978), pp.138-42. 10 Ambrolse V o l l a r d , Degas* Album: Ninety-Eight Reproductions (Paris: V o l l a r d , 1914), p.23. The monotype i s J.178. (Hereafter, i n the text and notes, " J " refers to the number i n the c h e c k l i s t i n Janis, Degas Monotypes. "L" r e f e r s to the number i n Lemoisne's catalogue raisonne, Lemoisne, Degas.) 12 • Catalogue des eauxfortes, vernis-mous, a q u a t i n t e s , l i t h o - graphies , et monotypes, par Edgar Degas, et provenant de son  a t e l i e r (Paris: Galerie Manzi Jbyant, 1918). 13 Galerie George P e t i t , P a r i s , Exposition Degas, peintres,  pastels, et dessins, sculpture, eauxfortes, li t h o g r a p h i e s , monotypes, 1924. "'"^ Muse'e de L'Orangerie, P a r i s , Degas p o r t r a i t i s t e et sculpteur, preface de Paul Jamot, catalogue par Jacqueline Bouchet-Saupique et Marie Delaroche-Vernet, 1931; Musee de L'Orangerie, P a r i s , Degas, preface de Paul Jamot, 1937. 15 Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen, Edgar Degas, 1834-1917, skulpturer og monotypier og tegniger og malerier, 4-26 September,1948. 16 Lefevre G a l l e r y , London, Degas, Monotypes, Drawings, Pastels  and Bronzes,foreward by Douglas Cooper, A p r i l - May, 1958, (p.3). ^ J a n i s , Degas Monotypes. "^Henri B e r a l d i , Les Graveurs du XIX S i e c l e , 8 Vols. (Paris: Conquet, 1885-92), 2: 153-54. 19 x Arsene Alexandre, "Degas, graveur et lithographe", Les Arts #171 (1919), p.19. 20 Marcel Guerin, "Notes sur les monotypes de Degas", L'Amour  de L'Art V (March 1924), pp.75-80. 2 1 P a u l Lafond, Degas (Paris: Floury, 1918), 2: 63-71. 22 ^ J u l i u s Meier-Graefe, Degas, translated by J . Holroyd-Reece (London: Ernst Benn, 1923), p.71. 23 / Francois Fosca, Degas (Paris; Societe des Trentes, 1921), pp.56-57. ' 24 \ v GeorgesRiveriere, M. Degas: Bourgeois de Paris (Paris: Floury, 1935), p.163. : 11 25 Gustave Coquolt, Degas (Paris: L i b r a r i e Ollendorf, 1924), p. 86. J.B. Manson, The L i f e and Work of Edgar Degas (London: The Studio, Ltd., 1939), p.36. 27 Paul Jamot, Degas (Paris: Editors Gazette des Beaux Arts, 1924), p.45. ? 8 Lefevre G a l l e r y , Degas Monotypes, (p.3). 29 Dennis Rouart, Degas Monotypes (Paris: Floury, 1948), p.5. 30 T . n Jams, Degas, p.xix. " ^ I l l u s t r a t i o n s f o r Ludovic Halevy's La Famille Cardinal (Paris, 1880). The i l l u s t r a t i o n s were rejected by the author. 32 Lemoisne and Rouart believed that Degas f i r s t thought of the process while watching h i s p r i n t e r p u l l proofs of hi s etchings. Paul Andre Lemoisne, Degas,4 V o l s . ( P a r i s : .Braume et de Hauke,1945-49),1:46; Rouart, Degas a l a Recherche de sa Technique, (Paris: Floury, 1945), p.62. 33 Jani s , Degas Monotypes, c h e c k l i s t #1 3 A Ludovic Hal£vy, Comment Je deviens Graveur (Paris: Cadard, 1876). 35 The discussion of th i s paragraph i s indebted to Janis's a r t i c l e "Degas and 'The Master of Chiaroscuro'", Art I n s t i t u t e of  Chicago: Museum Studies 7 (1972), pp.52-71. 3 6 I b i d , p.53. 37 Giovanni Benedetto C a s t i g l i o n e : Master Draughtsman of.the  I t a l i a n Baroque, foreward by Anthony Blunt, introduction and catalogue by Ann Perry (Philadelphia: P h i l a d e l p h i a Museum of A r t , 1971), p.150. 38 Anthony Blunt, The Drawings of G.B. Castiglione and Stefano D e l i a B e l l a . . (London: Phaidon Press, 1954), p.8. 12 39 Janis, "The Role of Monotype i n the Working Method of Degas -I", Burlington Magazine CT:X (January 1967), p.27. See also J a n i s , Degas Monotypes, p . x x v i i i i . 40 Reff, Notebooks, I: 126. 4 1 J . 137. See also J . 119, 121, and 141. 13 Chapter I With the exception of about t h i r t y landscapes, Degas's subject matter throughout hi s long career i s the human f i g u r e . 1 At either end of h i s work-ing years h i s copying and c o l l e c t i n g a c t i v i t i e s underline t h i s over-riding concern. His copies are almost always of one f i g u r e , a group of f i g u r e s , or an a r r e s t i n g pose or gesture. His art c o l l e c t i o n becomes a near obsession towards the turn of the century when his eyesight deteriorates to the point where any a c t i v i t y beside the t a c t i l e work of sculpture i s an exercise i n f r u s t r a t i o n . The c o l l e c t i o n consists of three s t i l l - l i f e s , some landscapes, a few drawings of horses, and hundreds upon hundreds of paintings and draw-ings of f i g u r a l motifs. Indeed, Degas often buys drawings rel a t e d to paint-ings which he had copied as a student. Kenneth Clark, i n h i s discussion of the nude i n a r t , places Degas's figures i n the context of the nude of energy which communicates the idea of 2 movement. Upon closer inspection, however, of a l l of Degas's nudes, i t i s evident that the majority of the l a t e r bathers could j u s t as convincingly 3 be discussed under Clark's category of Venus Callipygus. Further, the nudes of Degas's early career, that i s the nudes of h i s h i s t o r y paintings, are of two types, sometimes expressing energy and at other times, often i n 4 the same painting as i n The Daughter of Jephthath, pathos. These two types are evident even i n h i s early copies a f t e r B o t t i c e l l i and Michelangelo. His l a s t two h i s t o r y paintings, The Young Spartans Exercising^ and The Misfor- tunes of the C i t y of Orleans, are almost excl u s i v e l y concerned with the depiction of active poses d e s c r i p t i v e of motion. Another misconception regarding t h i s early phase of Degas's art i s that he i s , from the beginning, a devotee of Ingres's s t y l e of drawing. 7 Although Degas does make some copies of t h i s master's works at the e x h i b i t i o n of 1855, 14 i t i s not u n t i l about 1860 or l a t e r that Degas's s t y l e resembles that of g Ingres. This growing s i m i l a r i t y i s e s p e c i a l l y evident i n h i s various studies f o r the second version of The Young Spartans Exercising. In these drawings, the ou t l i n e takes precedence over i n t e r i o r modelling. Degas begins to give o u t l i n e the dominant role i n h i s drawing only with the studies f o r the second Spartans s e r i e s . Here, he even uses the f i n e l y pointed p e n c i l on smooth paper which Ingres used to achieve a strongly accented l i n e to define form. Always a conservative, Degas's i n t e r e s t i n f i g u r a l art and e s p e c i a l l y i n the nude may be p a r t l y explained by h i s t r a i n i n g . He studied f o r a year i n the studio of Louis Lamothe, himself a student of Inges's desciple F l a n d r i n . The following year, 1855, Degas studied at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts"*"^ and h i s course undoubtably followed the usual method of copying various models i n a set pattern; engravings of the masters, p l a s t e r casts and f i n a l l y , the nude model. He was a devoted copyist and was registered i n the Cabinet des Estampes from 1855 to 1868.''""'" At t h i s time, the nude was considered to be the perfect pedagogical device as i t s forms yielded the greatest v a r i e t y of shapes f o r the mastery of the p h y s i c a l world. I t was also considered to be i d e a l f o r the study of anatomy and i t s associations with antiquity and Greek 12 art i n p a r t i c u l a r pointed to i t s p o s i t i o n as the i d e a l form. Among Degas's f i r s t drawings i s a p e n c i l copy of an engraving by the 13 sixteenth century Florentine, Marcantonio Raimondi (Figure 1). The copy depicts a nude man climbing onto a r i v e r bank from Michelangelo's l o s t B a t t l e of Casina. Beside i t on the paper i s a f a i n t e r copy of a helmeted male nude bending a bow from Raimondi's Man with a Banner. The drawing of the f i r s t f i g u r e c a r e f u l l y copies the exaggerated musculature of the engraving. The passages of modelling are c l o s e l y hatched and the drawing retains the 15 sharp o u t l i n e of the p r i n t , e s p e c i a l l y that of the figure's r i g h t l e g . The other fi g u r e i s as c a r e f u l l y modeled as the f i r s t but i t s outline i s stressed even more. These poses of strenuous a c t i v i t y are not as t y p i c a l as some writers have supposed during Degas's early work. His other copies, again fragments or figures from other works, are usually of more s t a t i c poses. This l a t t e r 14 group includes copies a f t e r Michelangelo's The Slave i n the Louvre, the c r u c i f i e d t h i e f from Mantegna's C r u e i f i x i o n , ^ of the same c o l l e c t i o n and the c e n t r a l f i g u r e of B o t t i c e l l i ' s B i r t h of V e n u s . T h e f i r s t two f i g u r e s , while di s p l a y i n g an obvious anatomical i n t e r e s t f or copyists, are as well s t r i k i n g i n t h e i r emotionally evocative gestures. In the V i l l a Medici i n Florence where he studies informally for a time, Degas frequently draws the nude model i n conventional studio poses. Even when the model assumes a f a i r l y a ctive pose, the a r t i s t concentrates more on the pattern of i n t e r i o r modelling and less on the movement of the f i g u r e . The f i n e s t example from t h i s period i s a p e n c i l study (Figure 2) depicting a male model who rests on his r i g h t hand, reaches up with the l e f t , and t i l t s h i s head upwards. 1 7 In t h i s study, Degas follows the curving l i n e of the pattern of modelling from the upraised arm, across the neck, down the l e f t side of the torso and l e f t leg to the c a l f of the righ t l e g . The more s t a t i c poses i n Degas's copying begin, towards the end of 1858, to give way to more vigorous and expressive models drawn from H e l l e n i s t i c figures rather than the calmer Parthenon r e l i e f s and the l a t e r Raphael and 18 Michelangelo rather than the I t a l i a n p r i m i t i v e s . Degas makes small o i l copies of the e n t i r e compositions of works by Poussin and Delacroix and the l a t t e r ' s Entry of the Crusaders into Constantinople greatly influences one of 16 19 Degas's f i r s t major history paintings, The Daughter of Jephthah (Figure 3). 20 Beginning i n 1859, Degas works on t h i s painting for about two years. The story i s from the Book of Judges and depicts the moment when Jephthah, having promised to s a c r i f i c e the f i r s t person to greet him i n return for victory i n b a t t l e , realizes that he must s a c r i f i c e his own daughter who has come to meet him outside the c i t y walls after his victory. In contrast to e a r l i e r depictions of the subject, Jephthah s i t s on his horse, head bowed and eyes closed i n an attitude of dread and resignation. Degas highlights t h i s moment of pathos by placing the daughter with her outstretched arms pointed at Jephthah's head i n the foreground. The emphasis on resignation i s the same i n Vigny's poem on the subject and, as Vigny was reportedly one of Degas's favourite authors, i t i s highly l i k e l y that Degas's interpretation arises from this poem. Degas's interest i n attitudes of action and pathos i s evident throughout the project. The painting proceeds from a series of compositional sketches and studies of i n d i v i d u a l figures. The compositional sketches i n the notebooks (Figure 21 4) emphasize the dramatic swirling l i n e of movement formed by the figures. In the f i n a l painting the movement flows from the upper l e f t corner with the column of troops with horns and banners, to the central group of Jephthah and two soldiers i n the foreground, to a group of men i n the right foreground and f i n a l l y to the women i n the center right background. Following t r a d i t i o n a l procedures, Degas's individual figure studies are nudes while those of the f i n a l painting are draped. Degas's concern for expressing both pathos and movement i s especially evident i n a group of four 22 of these studies. The f i r s t drawing (Figure 5) depicts two p o s s i b i l i t i e s for the figure of the daughter. The motif on the l e f t of the sheet i s 17 f i n a l l y chosen and shows the woman swooning as she i s caught under the bosum by an attendant. The study shows her crumbling legs, arms reaching to the r i g h t and her head f a l l i n g forward and to the l e f t . A study for the figure 23 of Jephthah stresses even more so than i n the painting, the attitude of pathos. He s i t s , eyes closed, head bowed behind h i s upraised arm with h i s sword s t i l l r a i s e d i n the other hand as i f to underline the p r i c e of h i s v i c t o r y . From these studies i t would seem that Degas wishes to juxtapose physic-a l l y active figures with those smitten by the emotion of the event. In h i s f i n a l version, however, he r e l i e s more on the p o s i t i o n of the figures i n r e l a t i o n to each other and on the s w i r l i n g banners to create the impression of a c t i v i t y and motion. This emphasis on the a b i l i t y of the stance of figures to convey emotion i s c l e a r l y seen i n a project chronicled i n the notebooks but never completed. Degas sketches the scene from the I l i a d which depicts Hecuba and Andromache running to the wall to view the death of Hector below. The f i r s t rapid pen 24 sketch (Figure g) shows Hecuba at the w a l l tearing her h a i r while being restrained by an attendant. Both are nude studies i n which the springing 25 motion of Hecuba's body i s e s p e c i a l l y s t r i k i n g . A second sketch (Figure ?) i n Notebook 13 depicts the e n t i r e scene with Hecuba at the w a l l and Andro-mache racing up a s t a i r w e l l to j o i n her mother-in-law. In another sketch 2 6 (Figure g) the figures are again nude but here Andromache, supported by an 27 attendant, i s i n a far more s t a t i c pose. The f i n a l sketch (Figure g) depicts a draped Andromache with arms raised above her head i n an a t t i t u d e of lamentation. I t seems as i f Degas can not decide which action on which to concentrate, the f r a n t i c Hecuba or the more restrained and pathetic Andromache. At any rate, he c a r r i e d the project no further. 18 In h i s Young Spartans Exercising (Figure 10) Degas concentrates on figures i n motion. Devin Burnell has seen three separate projects connected 28 with t h i s painting dating from 1859 to 1864. The f i r s t project r e s u l t s i n the unfinished Detroit canvas, the second i n an o i l sketch now i n the Fogg Art Museum c o l l e c t i o n , and the t h i r d i n the canvas now i n London. The sketches and studies which constitute the three phases allow us to trace Degas's changing ideas on the r o l e of h i s nude figures i n t h i s large tableaux. The subject, drawn from Plutarch, i s the perfect motif for the display 29 of active young bodies. Delacroix's treatment of the subject f o r a penda-t i v e of the l i b r a r y of the P a l a i s Bourbon i s quite d i f f e r e n t from Degas's. The former a r t i s t depicts two p a i r s of wrestling g i r l s and one g i r l i n the foreground tying her sandals. He conceives of the figures as nubile young things, c a r e f u l l y modelling t h e i r adolescent breasts, hips and stomachs. Degas's nudes are androgenous i n comparison. 30 An early sketch i n a notebook (Figure 11) emphasizes a l i n e motion from l e f t to r i g h t through the f r e i z e of running f i g u r e s . A s l i g h t l y l a t e r 31 sketch (Figure 12) shows that Degas, at t h i s early stage of the project, wishes the faces of the g i r l s to convey much of the challenge which they issue to the boys. In cahiers from t h i s period Degas makes notes to himself on various seventeenth and eighteenth century theories on the science of 32 human f a c i a l expression. The foremost figure who issues the challenge has expressive, angry eyes. But t h i s early sketch i s exceptional as l a t e r drawings for t h i s same phase show the g i r l s ' p r o f i l e s to be interchangeable and expressionless. As Burnell notes, the emphasis changes from the face to the figure and "dramatic action i s registered i n the c l a s s i c a l manner, not i n these generalized faces, but i n the more s p e c i f i c a l l y d e s c r i p t i v e positions of the body." 3 3 19 The second phase, dating from 1861-62, i s documented by nine drawings 34 and an o i l sketch i n the Fogg Museum (Figure 13). In t h i s phase the figures are c a r e f u l l y studied and s l i g h t changes occur i n which the figures assume more p h y s i c a l l y strenuous poses. Degas changes the figure of the crouching 35 boy (Figure 14) on the l e f t so that h i s arms are further apart and h i s head displays the a l e r t challenge evident i n the f i n a l painting. The boy standing to the l e f t with his arms above h i s head and his legs apart i s studied with . 3 6 more attention to h i s s t r a i n i n g muscles. At t h i s point Degas i s concerned with the landscape s e t t i n g of the 37 fig u r e s . In the Fogg o i l sketch (Figure 13) he places more space between his figures i n each group and reduces the s i z e of the figures o v e r a l l i n r e l a t i o n to the whole composition. He retains the Phygian caps on the g i r l s ' heads but eliminates the temple i n the background. For the f i n a l version there are three o i l sketches, one i n Oslo of the 38 39 four male figures (Figure 15), one of the crouching boy (Figure 16) and 40 41 one of the two g i r l s to the center r i g h t . Three drawings r e l a t e d to these sketches r e l y even more on a firm o u t l i n e than the drawings of the e a r l i e r Fogg version. The changes i n t h i s group of studies from the second version to the f i n a l version of the London canvas are s l i g h t . These changes tend to emphasize the p h y s i c a l a c t i v i t y more than the poses of the second phase, The puzzling p a i n t i n g of The Misfortunes of the C i t y of Orleans (Figure 42 1') i s Degas's l a s t attempt at h i s t o r y p a i n t i n g . This t i t l e appears at the time of the a t e l i e r sales but when he f i r s t exhibited the painting at the Salon of 1865 i t was t i t l e d Scenes de Guerre de Moyen Age. Many scholars 43 have t r i e d to decipher i t s meaning without success. The only known source i s a painting by Joseph Lies (1821-65) t i t l e d Les Maux de l a Guerre exhibited 44 at the Salon of 1859. I t depicts horsemen leading a group of s p r i g h t l y . 20 chained f i g u r e s . None of the figures are nudes and Lies seems far. more con-cerned with the r i c h medieval costumes than with the p l i g h t of the war vic t i m s . 4 5 Degas's o r i g i n a l compositional sketch (Figure 18) shows two horsemen to the ri g h t of the sheet, a pleading woman i n the centre foreground, a corpse on the l e f t and a group of four women huddled under a blasted tree i n the l e f t middleground. One of t h i s group stands i n the p o s i t i o n of the Venus Pudica, another s i t s comfortably with a hand under her chin i n a pos-i t i o n more evocative of contemplation than of s u f f e r i n g . The f i n a l version i f quite d i f f e r e n t . Here there are three nude corpses, three nude women and three horsemen, one of which f l i n g s a f i n a l arrow at the departing group of females. The changes i n the three women are most s i g n i f -i c a n t . One f l e e s , hunched over her garments; another i s t i e d by one wrist to a tree and a t h i r d bends down, hands on knees, as i f to avoid the l a s t arrow. The Cabinet des Estampes has about twenty p e n c i l and black chalk studies for the figures of t h i s painting, but unfortunately few have been reproduced. 46 The most s t r i k i n g i s the study f o r the fi g u r e of the bound woman. The model i s rather short and round and Degas elongates her body i n the f i n a l p a i n t i n g . He redraws the bound arm and the back leg i n order to emphasize the curve of her body. The same model appears i n the two studies 47 (Figure 1 9 and 2 0 ) f o r the mounted archer, the f i r s t of the two i s nude and the second draped. The figu r e i n both of the studies and the pain t i n g i s poised and ju s t about to release the arrow. He i s however, exceptional i n the work i n that he i s act i v e . Degas poses the women, e s p e c i a l l y the bound woman, i n positions that are more evocative of s u f f e r i n g than of phys i c a l a c t i v i t y . Degas here returns to the nude of pathos reminiscent of The 21 Daughter of Jephthath and the Hecuba and Andromache project. The Misfortunes stands as a f i t t i n g end to Degas's early nudes f o r here, i n the words of Ronald Pickvance, are "a whole v a r i e t y of poses pendantically l a i d out f o r 48 us." The Spartans and The Misfortunes with t h e i r lack of s p e c i f i c thematic content seem to be pieces executed s o l e l y f o r t h e i r virtuoso display of nude figure p a i n t i n g . A f t e r 1865, Degas ceases to paint h i s t o r i c a l subjects and turns to p o r t r a i t u r e to explore human expression i n a modern s e t t i n g . By t h i s date he i s i n close contact with Duranty and Manet and t h e i r ideas on the depic-t i o n of modern l i f e . Given h i s obsession with the nude throughout h i s career, the absense of the nude i n h i s work i s puzzling. This absence may be par-t i a l l y explained by h i s preoccupations of the years of the l a t e eighteen s i x t i e s and seventies, his "worldly phase" as Reff c a l l s i t . With the por-t r a i t s , racing scenes, the b a l l e t pictures, the pastels and o i l s of the cafe- concert and the bars and laundries, Degas explores, perhaps i n response to the p r e v a i l i n g theories of naturalism expounded by Duranty and Manet, h i s own dear c i t y of P a r i s . About 1885 however, he returns to h i s e a r l i e r concern for the formal aspects of painting and drawing and s e t t l e s on two subjects, the dancer and the bathing woman, as h i s format. With the exception of the t h i r t y or so colour landscape monotypes, these two themes dominate his oeuvre. The t r a n s i t i o n to these two subjects as dominant i n h i s work i s by no means sudden., Degas's pastels and charcoal drawings of the late eighties and nineties are the r e s u l t of a long process i n which Degas becomes i n -creasingly concerned both with the role of colour i n the depiction of volume, 49 the a b i l i t y of drawing to depict r e l i e f and with the depiction of motion. 22 This i n t e r e s t i n the movement of the human figu r e occupies Degas i n -creasingly from about 1880 onwards, not throughout h i s whole career as Clark maintains. Degas seems to be p a r t i c u l a r l y interested i n Muybridge's researches i n t h i s area. He even notes the issue of La Nature of 1878 where the photographs f i r s t appear i n F r a n c e . H o w e v e r , the greatest exposure of Muybridge's work occurs during h i s v i s i t to Paris i n 1881 and again i n 1882. As usual, Degas requires time to absorb new information and h i s sculptures of horses show a development from less to more movemented poses from 1884 onwards. The studies of b a l l e t dancers display t h i s same development to a greater emphasis on movement but the changes occur e a r l i e r than i n the sculptures of the horses. About 1870, Degas's focus s h i f t s from the p i t of the orchestra, 53 as i n Le B a l l e t de Robert Le Diable, of 1868, to the spectacle on stage, as i n Repetition d'un B a l l e t sur l a scene of 1 8 7 4 . I n h i s work i n por-t r a i t u r e as w e l l as i n the b a l l e t scenes, the picture space becomes shallower and the point of view c l o s e r to the f i g u r e s . In the b a l l e t scenes, he re-duces the number of figures i n a composition u n t i l by about 1878, a p a i r of 55 figures or a sin g l e figure i s the norm. These studies of a sin g l e figure are i n essence studies of movement. From about 1885, Degas narrows h i s focus even more to concentrate on i n d i v i d u a l gestures such as dancer adjust-ing her shoulder strap or earring. Given h i s i n t e r e s t i n movement, i t i s s u r p r i s i n g that he does not use nude models to pose f o r the dancers u n t i l a f t e r 1882 as the nude i s better suited to the d e f i n i t i o n of positions of the dance which Degas i s so c a r e f u l to reproduce accurately. Indeed, the nude studies of dancers are found only 56 57 i n the notebooks and not on separate sheets u n t i l much l a t e r . In both the dancers and the bathers, Degas gradually increases the 23 siz e of the figure i n r e l a t i o n to the s i z e of the canvas or paper and places 58 the figure closer to the pi c t u r e plane. One excellent example of t h i s i s 59 the famous Une Femme au Tub (Figure 21) which depicts a woman seated i n a shallow tub washing her lower back. She i s seen from behind and above so that her gesture i s e f f e c t i v e l y silhouetted. The more f a m i l i a r Le Tub 60 (Figure 2 2) of the Louvre c o l l e c t i o n shows a woman i n a pose of the Crouching Venus. She squats, balanced on one hand and washes the back of 61 her neck. In La T o i l e t t e (Figure 2 3), a plump woman s i t s on a divan, hands on hips and her head back as a maid attends to her h a i r . These poses, while not overtly strenuous, with the exception of that of Le Tub, are attitudes taken from a se r i e s of movements. Degas has extracted the t e l l i n g and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c pose from a p a r t i c u l a r a c t i v i t y . As with the dancers, Degas concentrates more and more on the movement of the figu r e i n h i s pastels of bathers, bringing them closer to the pic t u r e plane and decreasing the space between the figure and the edge of the paper. A motif he draws often around 1900 i s the bather beside the tub drying her ankles. In one v a r i a t i o n of t h i s motif i n the Staatsgalerie i n Stuttgart 62 (Figure 2 4), the smudged shadows of the modelling c a r r i e s the eye from the shoulder of the figu r e to the buttock and down the l e f t l e g . In other v a r i a t i o n s the model bends further forward but the movement remains e s s e n t i a l l y the same. As h i s eyesight deteriorates, Degas turns to sculpt u r e . His l a s t two-dimensional works are charcoal drawings of sections of the bodies of h i s models, the poses ones which he had been using since the mid-eighties. These were never intended for e x h i b i t i o n and caused a scandal at the a t e l i e r s a l e s . They aptly display Degas's near obsession with movement. 24 But movement i s not the only area of experimentation for Degas i n the bathers. They are as w e l l researches i n t o the role of r e l i e f i n two-dimensional a r t . Degas constantly reduces the p i c t o r i a l space to the minimum 63 required to accommodate his f i g u r e s . In the seventies he uses diagonal arrangements and sharp upward or downward views which function to both create space and to f l a t t e n i t . Later he uses l i g h t e r and more intense colours and a more broken fracture i n the p a s t e l hatchings to draw h i s figures c l o s e r to the plane. His use of p a s t e l during the e i g h t i e s i s e s p e c i a l l y important i n t h i s regard. The unblended strokes of the chalks at once define three-dimensional volume and to hold that volume to the sur-face. He manages, by the early n i n e t i e s , to compress space to almost t o t a l f l a t ness while maintaining the p a l p a b i l i t y of the f i g u r e . As we have seen, Degas's early nudes of the h i s t o r y painting period alternate between figures evocative of pathos and those that display energy and movement. His nudes of the e i g h t i e s and l a t e r are concerned as much with the use of colour i n depicting volume, and the a b i l i t y of drawing to depict r e l i e f as with the depiction of movement. Clark's view that the nudes of h i s oeuvre are a coherent whole cannot be maintained upon examination of the works themselves. As w e l l , h i s view ignores the gap of a decade or more i n Degas's use of the nude i n h i s work. With the p u b l i c a t i o n of the notebooks by Reff, one can trace the development of h i s use of the nude a f t e r the h i s t o r y paintings and e s t a b l i s h a chronology for the monotype nudes and those i n o i l and p a s t e l , such as they are, of the seventies. In the next chapter, t h i s chronology w i l l be established and the paucity of a d i v i s i o n of the monotype bathers and brothel scenes w i l l be shown. Degas's nudes of the eighties and l a t e r are infused with the ambiance of the b r o t h e l as he experimented with a few settings f o r nudity i n the mid-seventies and 2 5 abandoned them. It was only the bather in an interior which arose from his brothel series which satisfied his service to the prevailing theories of naturalism. 26 Anne M. Wagner, "Degas' C o l l e c t i o n of Art: An Introduction Essay and Catalogue, (Unpublished M.A. th e s i s , Brown Un i v e r s i t y , 1974), p. 3. This paragraph i s indebted to the research and opinions of Wagner's t h e s i s . 2 C l a r k , The Nude, p. 211. 3 I b i d , p. 186. 4 Lemoisne, Degas et Son Oeuvre, I I , #94, o i l on canvas, Smith College Museum of Art, Northampton, Mass. ^L. 70, o i l on canvas; The Tate Gallery London. ^L. 124, essence on paper applied to canvas; The Louvre, P a r i s . 7 R e f f , The Notebooks, I: 13. The opinion i s expressed by Jacob Rosenberg i n Great Draughtsmen From P i s a n e l l o to Picasso, (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Uni v e r s i t y Press, 1959), p. 104. 8 R e f f , The Notebooks, I: 13. 9 Devin B u r n e l l , "Degas and His 'Young Spartans E x e r c i s i n g , ' " Art  I n s t i t u t e of Chicago: Museum Studies 4 (1969), p. 62 and Reff, The Notebooks, I: 15. 1 (^Jean Sutherland Boggs, Degas Drawings, (Saint Louis: City Art Museum, 1966), p. 20. 1 : LTheodore Reff, "Copyists i n the Louvre," The Art B u l l e t i n 20 (December 1964), p. 555. 12 Albert Boig>e, S t r i c t l y Academic: L i f e Drawing i n the Nineteenth Century (Binghampton, New York: Uni v e r s i t y Art Museum, SUNY Binghampton, 1974), p. 5. 13 P e n c i l on paper, The Detroit Institute, of,Art; reproduced i n Boggs, Degas Drawings, #14. 14 P e n c i l on pink paper, Private C o l l e c t i o n ; Ibid, #15. ''"^Pencil on white paper, Private C o l l e c t i o n ; Ibid, #17. 16 P e n c i l on white paper, Private C o l l e c t i o n ; I b i d , #16. 1 7Boime, L i f e Drawing, #8. P e n c i l on white paper, dated 1858, David Daniels C o l l e c t i o n , New York. 18 Reff, "Degas's Copies of Older A r t , " Burlington Magazine CV (January 1963), p. 245. 19 Reff, Degas: The A r t i s t ' s Mind (New York: Harper and Row, 1976), pp. 58-59. 20 Ibid . Information i n t h i s paragraph i s from t h i s source. 2 1 R e f f , The Notebooks, N.B. 14A, p. 27; N.B. 15, p. 17, 42; I: 19. 22 P e n c i l on paper, Wildenstein and Co., New York; Boggs, Degas  Drawings, #29. 23 P e n c i l on paper, present whereabouts unknown; Reff, Degas, p. 153, figure 110. 24 Reff, The Notebooks, N.B. 12, p. 95. 2 5 I b i d , N.B. 13, p. 7. 2 6 I b i d , N.B. 13, p. 9. 2 7 I b i d , N.B. 13, p. 111. 28 B u r n e l l , "Degas and His 'Young Spartans Ex e r c i s i n g , ' " p. 50. 29 s Sara L i c h t e n s t e i n , "Cezanne: A Sheet of Copies a f t e r Delacroix," Master Drawings V #2 (1967), p. 185, p l a t e 106. 30 B u r n e l l , "Degas," p. 53, fig u r e 4. 31 Ib i d , figure 5. 32 Ib i d , p. 54. See also Reff, Degas, pp. 214-220. 3 3 B u r n e l l , "Degas," p. 54. 34 Ibid, p. 5, fig u r e 3. 35 P e n c i l on paper, The Toledo Museum of Art; Boggs, Degas Drawings, #35; B u r n e l l , "Degas," f i g u r e 8. 36 P e n c i l on white paper, Detroit I n s t i t u t e of Art; Boggs, Degas  Drawings, #34. 28 3 7 B u m e l l , "Degas," p. 60. 3 8 L . 73. O i l on canvas, The Fogg Art Museum, Harvard; Boggs, Degas Drawings, #36. ^ P r e s e n t whereabouts unknown; 3rd Degas a t e l i e r sale, #31. 41 B u r n e l l , "Degas," figure 17. The other two are discussed on p. 62. 42 x L. 124, Scene de Guerre Au Moyen-Age, essence on paper l a i d down on canvas; Louvre . 43 They are l i s t e d i n P i e r r e Cabanne, "Degas et 'Les Malheurs de La V i l l e d'Or leans , ' " Gazette des Beaux-Arts LIX (May 1962), pp. 363-4. 4 4Phoebe Pool, "The History Paintings of Degas," Apollo 80 (Oct. 1964), p. 311. 45 Cabanne, "Degas," p. 365, figure 2. 4 6 P e n c i l and black chalk, Cabinet des Estampes, The Louvre; M. Seru l l a z , Great Drawings of the Louvre Museum: The French Drawings (New York: Georges B r a z i l l e r , 1968), #91. 47 P e n c i l on grey paper, Cabinet des Estampes, The Louvre; Boggs, Degas  Drawings, #40. P e n c i l , sanguine and white crayon on grey paper, Cabinet des Estampes, The Louvre; Boggs, Degas Drawings, #41. 48 Pickvance, "Degas's Nudes," p. 17. 49 Charles M i l l a r d , The Sculptures of Edgar Degas (Princeton- New Jersey: Princeton U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1976), p. 42. "^ I b i d , p. 21. Ibxd. 52 I b i d , p. 23. 53 L. 294, Le B a l l e t de Robert Le Diable, o i l on canvas; Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. ~*4L. 400, Repetition D'un B a l l e t Surla Scene, essence on paper l a i d down on canvas; Metropolitan Museum of A r t , New York. 29 "^Phoebe Pool, Degas (London: Spring Books, 1963), p. 20. 5 6 R e f f , The Notebooks, N.B. 36, pp. 2-3, dated 1882-85. ~^7The f i r s t i s Three Nude Dancers, charcoal on trac i n g paper, c o l l e c -t i o n unknown; Boggs, Degas Drawings, #88, dated to 1895-1980. 58 Ronald Pickvance, Degas: 1879, p. 5; Pool, Degas, p. 20; M i l l a r d , Degas Sculptures, p. 43. 59 Past e l on paper, L. 940; Art Gallery and Museum, Glasgow, Scotland. 60 Past e l on paper, P. 1286; The Louvre. 61 Pa s t e l on paper, L. 1295; The Hayemeyer C o l l e c t i o n , The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. 62 A f t e r the Bath, C. 1900, charcoal on trac i n g paper mounted on card-board; Staatsgalerie, Stuttgart; Boggs, Degas Drawings, #140. 63 M i l l a r d , Degas Sculptures, p. 42. 30 Chapter II According to Reff's reading of the notebooks, Degas does not begin to explore the nude bather i n an i n t e r i o r s e t t i n g u n t i l 1879 at the e a r l i e s t and only i n the notebooks at that. Reff bases hi s opinion on the fact that the f i r s t studies of bathers appear only i n Notebook 32 which Degas uses between the years 1879 and 1883. Neither are there any known studies on sin g l e sheets of the subject which can be dated before t h i s p e r i o d . 1 2 Lemoisne's dating has long been c a l l e d into question. Working as he was from photographs, hi s cataloguing of the works i n pas t e l and o i l was an enormously ambitious undertaking given the sheer volume of Degas's oeuvre. It i s not then s u r p r i s i n g that Reff's research has lead to the r e v i s i o n of the dates of many works of the years 1856 to 1885, the years when Degas used these cahiers. Lemoisne dated the f i r s t pure p a s t e l i n t e r i o r bather to 3 c. 1879. This should now be changed, according to Reff, to 1881-83. Degas did execute a few nudes during the mid-seventies but these are at y p i c a l due to the fact that the settings are not those of a bather i n an i n t e r i o r . The f i r s t of these i s an o i l on canvas of a b e a u t i f u l young 4 woman. She turns her head to one side l e t t i n g her h a i r f a l l over one shoulder. Lemoisne has dated t h i s work to 1874 on s t y l i s t i c grounds. This f r o n t a l l y posed p o r t r a i t bust i s unique i n Degas's oeuvre and may have been i n s p i r e d by an exceptionally l o v e l y model as a l l h i s other works with the exception of one discussed below ignore the f a c i a l features of the s i t t e r . Another o i l of an intimate scene (Figure 25)^ i s dated by Lemoisne to 1877, yet because the c o i f f u r e i s one seen i n the pictures of dancers of a few years e a r l i e r and the brushwork and subject are closer to Le Pedicure securely dated to 1873, a date of 1874-75 i s more s a t i s f a c t o r y . I t depicts a seated woman i n chemise and corset f i x i n g her h a i r before a mirror. The 31 point of view i s from above and to one side so that the curve of her waist and her face are c l e a r l y defined. In 1 8 7 4 , Degas exhibits a drawing which he t i t l e s "Apres l e Bain. Etude. Dessin." i n the catalogue of the f i r s t Impressionist e x h i b i t i o n . 7 No scholar has found a work which corresponds to t h i s t i t l e and which i s s t y l i s t i c a l l y e a rly enough for t h i s date. I t could have been e i t h e r an i n -door or an outdoor scene as h i s next two exhibited nudes are set i n a land-scape. At the second Impressionist show Degas exhibits two bather scenes. The f i r s t (Figure 26) i s t i t l e d P e t l t e s Paysannes se layant a l a mcr, l e s o i r . It depicts four young women, three of whom stand knee-deep i n the water while a fourth s i t s behind them on the shore combing her h a i r . The three bathers form a f r i e z e - l i k e arrangement p a r a l l e l to the pi c t u r e plane. Lemoisne believed h i s Femmes se Peignant of h i s catalogue raisonne 9 to be the pi c t u r e corresponding to the t i t l e i n the 1876 catalogue. The l a t t e r depicts three women i n chemises on a r i v e r bank f i x i n g t h e i r h a i r . In the absence of a more l i k e l y candidate, t h i s canvas best f i t s the descrip-t i o n of the o r i g i n a l catalogue entry. In the catalogue of the e x h i b i t i o n of 1877, Degas submits two i n t e r i o r bathing scenes which are monotype-based pa s t e l s . The f i r s t , Une Femme  Sortant du Bain (Figure 27),"^ shows a plump woman stepping out of a tub while her maid holds a towel i n readiness. The i n t e r i o r includes a large tub, an armchair and a screen which p a r t i a l l y obscures the tub. The tex-tures of the carpet and wallpaper are r i c h and an atmosphere of warm so f t ease pervades as the chair and screen serve to enclose the f i g u r a l group. 12 The second work (Figure 28) depicts a woman seated on a pouffe, clad only i n stockings and s l i p p e r s . Beside her are a shallow tub, an armchair and a dressing table with a mirrow above. In the background a screen and a 32 curtained window can be seen. The woman i s seated with her back to the viewer and appears to be drying h e r s e l f . She occupies only a small part of the pi c t u r e at the lower left-hand side. These two nudes of 1877, are very d i f f e r e n t i n conception from those of the se r i e s exhibited i n 1886. They are small i n scale, the figures are only one element i n the composition and they wear b i t s of clothing, a brace-l e t i n the f i r s t and stockings and s l i p p e r s i n the second. The l a t e r bathers are completely nude, tend to f i l l the space, and the rooms which they occupy are only summarily indicated. 13 Another s e t t i n g f o r nudity occurs i n a notebook of about 1877. Here two nude women are attended by a maid i n a Turkish bath. Degas's drawing i s a mere sketch i n a notebook that he keeps at his fr i e n d ' s , Ludovic Halevy's, as an afterdinner entertainment for the other guests and Degas never repeats the subject. One other dated work has come to l i g h t . Degas draws a sketch f o r Apres 14 Le Bain (Figure 29) i n a notebook that he uses between 1879 and 1882. On t h i s evidence Reff dates the work to t h i s period although Lemoisne had placed i t to 1882-85. In a l l , the i n t e r i o r i s well-defined, the nude fig u r e i s not cropped by the edge of the paper, and i n s i z e the figure occupies more space than i n the pas t e l covered monotypes of 1877 and less than do those of the 1886 s e r i e s . Degas's f i r s t nudes of the seventies then are few and far between. He finds the outdoor s e t t i n g unsatisfactory and abandons i t a f t e r two canvases. F i n a l l y s e t t l i n g on a woman performing her t o i l e t t e i n a bedroom as the best motif, he executes more and more of these scenes. The i n t e r e s t i n the depic-t i o n of movement, Clark's opinion notwithstanding, i s evident only i n the 33 works executed a f t e r 1882.^ In the e a r l i e s t bathers, Degas concentrates f a r more on the p i c t o r a l aspects of the rooms and fa r less on the figures themselves. I t i s p r e c i s e l y during t h i s period of 1877 to 1879 that Degas executes his monotypes of p r o s t i t u t e s . When examined c l o s e l y , i t i s evident that the br o t h e l and the bather scenes are s i m i l a r i n concep-t i o n and handling, giving r i s e to the notion that the women performing t h e i r 15A t o i l e t t e were o r i g i n a l l y part of the maisons closes s e r i e s . Both Janis and Cachin i n t h e i r catalogues of the monotypes have used two categories to divide the images of nude women; the bathers or women performing t h e i r t o i l e t t e , and the scenes of the maisons closes or p r o s t i t -utes. Yet the e a r l i e s t of the bathers and the brothel scenes are so s i m i l a r i n handling, s i z e and motifs that the d i v i s i o n seems somewhat a r b i t r a r y . They are both executed during the same eighteen month to two year period of 1876-78. This common chronological o r i g i n must be established c a r e f u l l y before the s i m i l a r i t i e s may be discussed at length. Lemoisne's date of 1879 for the brothel scenes r e l i e s on the three p r i n t s which he includes i n his catalogue but which are not i n the least t y p i c a l of the group as whole. Deux F i l l e s Assises de Face (J.77, L.550) and Trois F i l l e s Assises de Face (J.62, L.549) depict the p r o s t i t u t e s from a close point of view. These are the only images among the brothel scenes which display an i n t e r e s t i n the physionomy of a woman and Degas indicates a s i m i l a r i n t e r e s t i n the physionomy of a type only i n a work t i t l e d 16 Physionomie de Criminale which i s securely dated to 1879. Lemoisne also includes La F^te de l a Patronne (J.89, L.548) which i s unique among these scenes because i t depicts a s p e c i f i c incident. It i s much larger i n size and i s f a r more complex i n i t s composition. Hence the established date of 34 the b r o t h e l scenes rests on the evidence of three p r i n t s which are a t y p i c a l of the group as a whole. Cooper i n h i s 1958 catalogue and Janis i n her c h e c k l i s t of the mono-types published i n 1968 r e i t e r a t e this dating of 1879. Janis expands t h i s date to include the year 1880 i n her introduction but does not explain why she has dated some of the p r i n t s to 1878 and others to 1877 i n the i n d i v i d u a l c h e c k l i s t e n t r i e s . She suggests that the f i r s t evidence of i n t e r e s t i n brothel imagery on Degas's part i s the group of sketches i l l u s t r a t i n g Edmond de Goncourt's La F i l l e E l i z a i n a notebook which she dates to 1876-77. This notebook i s one of two which Degas keeps at the house of h i s <• 18 f r i e n d , the l i b r e t t i s t Ludovic Halevy. The a r t i s t drew rough sketches i n them for the amusement of the other guests a f t e r dinner. La F i l l e E l i z a , which w i l l be discussed at length i n the next chapter, i s the story of the f a l l and degradation of a working class woman, i n which her short career as an inmate of a b r o t h e l near the Ecole M i l i t a i r e i s only one incident. Degas chooses only these scenes from the book to i l l u s t r a t e and depicts the s o l d i e r s and chemise-clad p r o s t i t u t e s amiably chatting and playing cards i n the salon. Given t h i s date of p u b l i c a t i o n , Reff dates the two notebooks to 1877. In her catalogue of the monotypes, Franchise Cachin dates the brothel 19 scenes to 1876-85. She notes the evidence of the Halevy notebook and the contemporaneous appearance of n a t u r a l i s t novels on the subject of p r o s t i t u t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y Huysmans' Marthe, H i s t o i r e d'une F i l l e (1876), De Goncourt's La F i l l e E l i z a (1877) and Zola's Nana (1879). Cachin con-cludes that "there i s nothing to ind i c a t e that Degas executed a l l the mono-types i n the course of the same year; i n the end i t i s impossible to date 20 them more p r e c i s e l y than between 1876 and 1885." Her opinion has been 35 challenged by others than the present w r i t e r . 21 In an a r t i c l e published i n 1970, Reff dated the brothel scenes to 1879-80 but, i n h i s p u b l i c a t i o n of the notebooks i n 1976, he revises t h i s 22 to c.1877. Other reasons for antedating the brothel monotypes besides the evidence of the notebooks, i s t h e i r s i z e and technique which are the 23 same as the two pastel-covered monotypes which were exhibited i n 1877. It i s here held that Degas executed the brothel p r i n t s over a period of one or two years for the majority of these p r i n t s are cohesive i n terms of both s t y l e and s i z e . Degas's treatment of p i c t o r a l space and the s i z e of the figure i n r e l a t i o n to that space remain the surest method of e s t a b l i s h -2 A 25 26 ing the chronology of the p r i n t s . M i l l a r d , Pool, and Pickvance a l l trace a development i n Degas's work i n which figures become larger i n r e l a t i o n to the picture space. In h i s catalogue on Degas's work i n 1879, Pickvance also sees a tendancy for Degas at t h i s period to use diagonal 27 l i n e s to create space i n h i s compositions, a feature which i s not evident i n the b r o t h e l scenes or i n the two bather p r i n t s of 1877. In these p r i n t s , Une Femme Sortant du Bain (J.175) (Figure 27) and La T o i l e t t e (Une Femme  Nue Accroupie de Dos (J.191) (Figure 28), the figure occupies only a small part of the composition and does not dominate the space. The monotypes depict almost the whole of the room, and the recession to the fa r w a l l i s c l e a r l y punctuated by various pieces of f u r n i t u r e . The brothel scenes have compositions i n which the figures are small i n r e l a t i o n to the picture space and are placed well back from the picture plane. The i n t e r i o r s are de t a i l e d and we l l defined, and include chandeliers, armchairs, heavy carpets, tables, beds and mirrors i n the bedrooms and chandeliers, mirrors, carpets, and plush settees i n the salon. Degas works 36 with e s s e n t i a l l y the same compositional arrangements and degree of d e t a i l i n the two pa s t e l bather p r i n t s and i n the brothel monotypes. Both are done on small plates of s i x by eight inches, and i n a method which combines the l i g h t and dark f i e l d techniques. Hence a date of 1877 for the majority of the brot h e l scenes i s here held to be more l o g i c a l than the l a t e r date used by Lemoisne and followed by Janis and Cooper. Degas executes seven other pure monotypes and pas t e l cognates of bather scenes that are very s i m i l a r to those exhibited i n 1877 (J.175, J.191). A l l depict the whole figure as opposed to part of i t , a l l place the figure a f a i r distance from the forward plane i n well-defined and det a i l e d i n t e r i o r s , a l l use a combination of the l i g h t and dark f i e l d methods, and a small siz e d p l a t e , and so are here dated to c.1877. However, these now require to be discussed i n some d e t a i l . Thus Une  Femme Sortant de Bain (J.175, 6 1/2 x 8 1/2 ins.) of 1877 depicts a maid holding a towel as a woman steps out of a tub. Degas uses the same two figures, i n the same size and p o s i t i o n i n J.174 (6 3/4 x 10 ins.) (Figure 30..) i n -"!a p r i n t of the same t i t l e . There, however, the figures are seen from behind instead of from the front. The i n t e r i o r includes a tub, two arm-chair s , a wardrobe with a mirrow, a window to the r i g h t and patterned wallpaper. The pure monotype La Sortie de Bain (J.176, 6 1/2 x 4 3/4 ins.) (Figure 3 l) depicts the same two fig u r e s , a tiny b i t larger and i n the same p o s i t i o n as i n J.175, only reversed to face the l e f t side of the composition. A tub, mirror and a low table with a basin and ewer set, and wainscotting and wallpaper constitute the d e t a i l s of the room. Le Bain (J.172, 8 1/2 x 6 1/4 ins.) (Figure 32), another pure monotype depicts a woman seen from behind, standing i n a tub. The i n t e r i o r includes 37 the tub, an armchair with a gown thrown over i t , a mirror, and s t r i p e d w a l l -paper. Une Femme Nue a l a Porte de sa Chambre (J.180, 9 1/4 x 5 1/2 ins.) (Figure 3 3) i s a pure monotype which Degas transferred to a li t h o g r a p h i c stone which accounts f o r the s l i g h t l y grainy texture of the ink which remains 2 8 on the sheet. The figure here i s very small and stands at the back of the room. The i n t e r i o r includes a bed, a rug, an armchair and a p a i r of s l i p p e r s and a gown on the f l o o r . Curiously, Cachin dates t h i s p r i n t to c.1880 a l -though, i n the same catalogue, dates the lithograph which r e s u l t s from i t 29 to 1876-79. Une Femme Nue Accroupie de Dos (J.192) (Figure 34), i s so s i m i l a r i n composition to J.191, the pastel-covered monotype of the same t i t l e exhibited i n 1877, that i t must be given a s i m i l a r date. I t s dimensions are unknown but Cachin believes that i t was drawn on the same plate as J.191. In both p r i n t s , the woman i s seated on a pouffe f i x i n g her h a i r ; she i s placed i n front of the bed, towards the foreground and s l i g h t l y to the l e f t , clad only i n stockings. In both p r i n t s a tub with a sponge i n i t l i e s on the f l o o r to the r i g h t . In p r i n t i n g Le Lever (J.170, 6 1/4 x 8 1/2) (Figure 35), Degas must have moved the plate or paper as the p r i n t ' s r e g i s t r a t i o n has produced double l i n e s . Despite the unsatisfactory r e g i s t r a t i o n , i t i s clear that t h i s p r i n t should be included i n the group of 1877. Degas here uses the dark and l i g h t f i e l d methods. The woman s i t s on a bed putting on her stockings and the room includes a bed, a dresser and patterned wallpaper. La Sortie de Bain ( J . 178, 8 1/4 x 6 1/4 ins.) (Figure 3 6), i s the only one of t h i s group which crops the f i g u r e . The nude stands f i x i n g her h a i r with her back to the viewer and although she i s s l i g h t l y c l o s e r to the forward plane than i n the other p r i n t s , she does not by any means dominate 38 the space. The room includes a table with a basin and ewer, two armchairs, a window and wallpaper. In J.170, the woman wears only stockings and a necklace; i n J.178 she wears only stockings. These states of semi-undress appear i n the two p r i n t s of 1877, J.191 and J.175, as we l l . A l l of these pure monotype and pastel-covered monotypes, the two of 1877 and the seven discussed above, use the same technique and the same conception of picture space. They are a l l small and they use s i m i l a r figures and d e t a i l s i n the rooms. Therefore I am suggesting that a date of about 1877 seems appropriate for a l l these works. The chronology of the remaining bather monotypes i s more problematic. Here, Degas uses the dark f i e l d method, and he usually uses the second, paler cognate as a base for a p a s t e l . The scenes depict women i n gowns and nightcaps getting up from or going to bed, women bending over basins washing themselves, and recumbant nudes reading a f t e r the bath. Degas often dedicates the l a t t e r to friends or admirers such as Lepic or the c r i t i c P h i l l i p p e Burty. Janis o r i g i n a l l y dated these scenes between 1880 and 1885. Cachin, for the most part, concurs with Janis's dates, although she does place a few 30 s l i g h t l y l a t e r . Janis revises the dates of the dark f i e l d nudes i n an 32 a r t i c l e of 1972 and i n her 1974 th e s i s . She now f e e l s that monotypes numbering 119-164 of her che c k l i s t are e a r l i e r , and dates them to about 32 1877. Her reasoning i s as follows: It i s now almost c e r t a i n that the monotypes stage of these pastels dates from the mid to l a t e seventies since one of them probably appeared i n the Third Impressionist E x h i b i t i o n of 1877.... I assigned dates i n the ei g h t i e s to most of the nudes l i s t e d between 119-164 because I loosely associated them with the larger pastels of nudes some of which have an eighties date. I now think that each work's monotype date i s probably mid to l a t e seventies.33 The p a s t e l cognates, J.174 and J.191, discussed above are the only two 39 monotypes which have been c l e a r l y i d e n t i f i e d as appearing i n the 1877 show. The other three "dessins a l'encre grasse et imprimes" of the catalogue are not mentioned i n the reviews, hence i t i s impossible to confirm that Degas did indeed exhibit them. I f they were indeed included, they could have depicted b a l l e t or cafe-concert scenes, p o r t r a i t s or i l l u s t r a t i o n s f o r La  Famille Cardinal. J a n i s ' r e v i s i o n , while sound as to the antedating, rests on an assumption and, i n terms of the s i z e , technique and handling, the mid-seventies date seems too ea r l y as we s h a l l see. These nudes are characterized by the use of large plates and the dark f i e l d method, by summarily indicated i n t e r i o r s , and by a figure which domin-ates the image by v i r t u e of i t s proximity to the picture plane or by i t s 34 s i z e . In the dark f i e l d nudes, the figure often becomes the composition. The highlighted limbs create l i n e s which Degas arranges i n d i s t i n c t i v e patterns. The figures are huge, and, are much closer to the Glasgow bather of 1884 discussed i n Chapter 1. In Une Femme Etendue sur son L i t (J.137, 7 7/8 x 16 ins.) (Figure 37)» the figure f i l l s the picture space. Another feature of these nudes i s Degas's extensive use of diagonal 36 l i n e s i n the composition. Often a vector from one corner divides the rectangular format, vectors formed by the corner of a table or couch or by the limbs of the fi g u r e . This use of diagonal l i n e s i s the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c which Pickvance sees as t y p i c a l of the works of 1879. Given Degas's development from small to la r g e r figures i n r e l a t i o n to the p i c t u r e space and the compositional device of diagonal l i n e s which he begins about 1879, i t i s reasonable to assume a l a t e r date for the dark f i e l d nudes than f o r the bathers of the 1877 group, Janis's opinion notwith-standing, I believe that Degas executes the scenes of women a r i s i n g or 40 going to bed and washing themselves i n basins about 1878-79, because the figu r e s , while large, are not as dominating as those of recumbant nudes of readers. As we l l , the diagonal l i n e s i n the compositions are not as prominent as i n the reader group. The readers probably date from about 1880-83 as they approximate the figure s i z e and compositions of the nudes of the eighties i n pas t e l more than the e a r l i e r bather and bedroom scenes. Degas executed the brothel scenes and the nine bather scenes i n the combination method i n about 1877. Having established the common chrono-l o g i c a l o r i g i n of the brot h e l and bather p r i n t s , the question of the d i f f e r -ences i n the conception between the two groups l o g i c a l l y follows. It w i l l be demonstrated that t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n i s at best a r b i t r a r y and that Degas uses the same technique and indeed the same poses and motif i n the p r i n t s of both groups. One feature of the brothel scenes which i s used by Janis to d i s t i n g u i s h them from the bathers i s that the women of the maisons closes are only par-t i a l l y nude. In some of the scenes they wear st r i p e d stockings, black ribbon necklaces, bracelets and s l i p p e r s , and occasionally the chemise costume. Accordingly to Cachin, p r o s t i t u t e s at t h i s time wore chemises i n the salon and did not appear i n that room of the maisons dressed only i n stockings as 35 Degas often depicts them. He must have chosen t h i s costume of semi-undress to underline the v u l g a r i t y of these women. The women i n f i v e of the ea r l y bather p r i n t s wear s i m i l a r a r t i c l e s of cl o t h i n g . In J.175, the woman wears a br a c e l e t , and i n J . 178, 191, 192 and 170 they wear stockings, while i n the nudes of the eighties i n pure pastel the women are completely nude. Janis and Cachin have both stated that the brothel scenes are done i n 36 the l i g h t f i e l d method. In actual f a c t , Degas uses the combination of the 41 l i g h t and dark f i e l d methods, as Cooper c o r r e c t l y pointed out i n his 1958 catalogue. Degas establishes the main elements of the composition with broad areas of thick ink which he then wipes to produce c e r t a i n d e t a i l s of the furnishings, the patterns of the wallpaper and the texture of the carpets. He then adds smaller d e t a i l s of the l i g h t i n g f i x t u r e s and the figure with a small pointed brush loaded with the thick ink. Besides the majority of the brothel scenes which employ the combination technique, there are eight brothel p r i n t s which are executed i n the dark f i e l d method. Janis and Cachin support t h e i r segregation of the two groups by pointing to the differences of technique. With t h i s rather large number of exceptions, the d i s t i n c t i o n tends to break down. Un Coin de Salon de Maison Close (J.171) i s done almost e n t i r e l y with the dark f i e l d technique as are Le Repos (J.73) , L'Attende (J.103) and a monotype which recently 37 appeared on the New York art market (Figure 38)• As w e l l , Repos sur l e l i t (J.93), Sur l e L i t (J.109) and Le Bidet (J.110) (Figure 39) are a l l c l a s s -i f i e d as brothel scenes but are done i n the dark f i e l d method. Le Foyer (J.159) (Figure 40) i s a most puzzling p r i n t . It depicts a room illuminated by a f i r e p l a c e i n which two nude women, one seated i n an armchair and one standing, are placed. This large p r i n t i s done e n t i r e l y i n the dark f i e l d or subtractive method. Both Janis and Cachin place i t among the bather p r i n t s , yet as Janis notes " t h i s i s the only instance where the mood of the maison closes penetrates the monotypes i n the dark f i e l d 38 manner." I t can be argued that the lone bather i n a room depicts a young women and not nec e s s a r i l y a p r o s t i t u t e . But a s i t u a t i o n i n which two nude women appear together i n a room could only occur i n the s o r o r i t y s i t u a t i o n of a brot h e l . Le Foyer i s merely another example of the confusion which r e s u l t s from an a r b i t r a r y d i s t i n c t i o n between the two groups. 4 2 Aside from the fact that Degas uses s i m i l a r techniques i n both groups, 39 he uses the same poses i n a number as w e l l . Three poses i n p a r t i c u l a r can be distinguished. A woman perched over a bidet i s used i n Le Bidet (J.110) (Figure 39) and i n Une Femme a sa T o i l e t t e ( J . 153), while Janis c l a s s i f i e s the former as a bather scene, the l a t t e r i s supposedly a brothel scene. The second pose i s one of a women r e c l i n i n g with her legs wide apart. The pose appears i n the so- c a l l e d bather p r i n t s Le Sommeil ( J . 135), Une  Femme Etendue sur son L i t (J.137) and i n Le Lecture Apres l e Bain (J.139), as w e l l as i n eight of the supposed brothel scenes, Le Repos ( J . 73) (Figure 4 i) , Deux Jeunes F i l l e s (J.81), Au Salon (J. 82)', Waiting f o r the C l i e n t (J.84) and four p r i n t s e n t i t l e d by Janis Le Repos sur l e L i t (J.91, 93, 95 and 96). The pose i n which a woman l i e s on her back with her legs i n the a i r , or the " b i c y c l e r " as Janis terms i t , i s a common motif i n the brot h e l ser i e s and appears i n La S i e s t e a u Salon (J.72) (Figure 42), Le Repos (J.73), The Courtesans (J.74), La Sieste (Scene de Maison Close) (J.75) and i n L'Ebat Matinale (J.94). The same pose occurs i n two p r i n t s of the bather s e r i e s , Une Femme Nue se Chauffant (J.160) and i n Una Scene de T o i l e t t e (J.161). It should be remembered i n discussing the appearance of s i m i l a r poses i n the p r i n t s of the two groups that Degas i s , throughout h i s career, con-40 cerned with the t e l l i n g gesture of the seasoned p r a c t i t i o n e r . When he depicts dancers, laundresses, and milners, i t i s with a l i m i t e d number of poses or gestures appropriate to each occupation. Even with the charcoal studies of nude dancers of the n i n e t i e s , there i s no p o s s i b i l i t y of confusion with the bathers as the poses are so c l e a r l y those of the b a l l e t . The fact that Degas uses the same poses i n each group underlines the a r b i t r a r y nature of the segregation imposed by cataloguers of the p r i n t s . 43 To further the confusion, Janis and Cachin f a i l to agree on the c l a s s -i f i c a t i o n of four of the p r i n t s . A G i r l Putting on her Stockings (J.169) (Figure 43) depicts a s l i m young g i r l s i t t i n g on a bed donning her stockings. It i s executed i n the combination method and the g i r l wears the black ribbon necklace so common i n the brothel p r i n t s . Janis places i t among the brothel scenes while Cachin c l a s s i f i e s i t as a bather p r i n t . I t s small s i z e , technique, necklace motif and l i g h t t o n a l i t y a l l y i t with both the early bather p r i n t s and with the maisons closes monotypes. Le Boucle d ' O r e i l l e (J.99) (Figure 44) i s i n c o r r e c t l y t i t l e d as the woman, who appears to be adjusting an earring i s ac t u a l l y wiping the side of her neck with a fringed handtowel. She i s t o t a l l y nude and i s seated on a bed or divan. Janis f e e l s that i t i s a brothel scene while Cachin c l a s s i f i e s i t as a bather. Again, i t s small s i z e , and de t a i l e d i n t e r i o r are s i m i l a r to the bather p r i n t s of 1877 and the other brothel scenes. An u n t i t l e d p r i n t (J.113) again depicts a woman wiping her neck with a towel. Janis c l a s s i f i e s i t as a brothel scene while Cachin places i t among the bathers. The room contains the usual bed, a table with a basin and ewer set on i t and a curt a i n that divides the room. Le Bidet (J.110) (Figure 39), discussed above i s the fourth p r i n t f o r which the two cataloguers disagree on the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . A further point indicates that the two groups of pr i n t s are of a common conception for the a r t i s t . Apart from the fact that these p r i n t s were executed during the same period of the a r t i s t ' s career, that he used a s i m i l a r technique, the same sized p l a t e s , the same poses and motifs, there 41 are no preparatory drawings f o r any of the monotypes of these two groups, an unusual s i t u a t i o n f o r an a r t i s t such as Degas who admonished the young «. 42 Daniel Halevy to draw and draw again. Boggs dates the f i r s t study of a 43 nude bather to c.1883. The e a r l i e s t sketch of t h i s subject i n the note-44 44 books according to Reff i s 1879 at the e a r l i e s t . We know from the accounts of friends and models that i n the l a t e r e i g h t i e s , Degas did use models ex-tens i v e l y i n h i s studio for the pa s t e l bathers, and even kept a metal tub 45 there for these scenes. I f Degas did use a model for the early bather and brothel scenes at l e a s t a few of the drawings would have survived. As there are no extant drawings or evidence of them i n the l i t e r a t u r e or i n any of the memoirs, we can only conclude that these monotypes were the product 46 of Degas's prodigious v i s u a l memory. As the ink remains tacky and mall-able for some time on the plate, the image can be changed, but as we do have evidence that Degas did use preparatory studies f o r cafe-concert and street 47 scenes, i t may be concluded that Degas did not use any studies f or the nudes. There are three monotypes whose motifs t i e the two groups even more fi r m l y . In these images, the male c l i e n t of the brothel observes with obvious enjoyment a nude woman performing her t o i l e t t e . This short, balding, mustached gentleman appears clothed i n the salon surveying the p r o s t i t u t e s who l o l l about on settees i n various states of undress i n a number of the brothel scenes. In the three mentioned above, he i s i n the bedroom with the woman. In Admiration (J.184) (Figure 45) the man crouches, clutching the rim of the tub as the nude woman arises from her bath i n a pose reminiscent of the fig u r e i n Ingres's La Source. Because the man i s facing the viewer, his enjoyment of the spectacle i s obvious. In Une Femme Nue Se Coiffant (J.185) (Figure 46), he s i t s on a divan as the woman, clad i n stockings and shoes, combs her h a i r . This monotype was heightened with p a s t e l and the bright Prussian blue and orange stockings serve both to brighten the p r i n t and to draw attention to the state of undress of the woman. The t h i r d p r i n t i n t h i s group of the s c a n t i l y clad woman with a male admirer i n a bedroom i s Le Tub (J.189) (Figure 47). In a l l of these p r i n t s may be found the d e t a i l s 45 such as the tub, a table with a basin and ewer set, a rug and patterned w a l l -paper which appear i n the bather p r i n t of 1877, Une Femme Nue Accroupie de  Dos (J.191). Janis regards these p r i n t s as a separate category from the other brothel scenes while Cachin places Admiration with the bather scenes yet states i n 48 her catalogue d e s c r i p t i o n that i t i s "without doubt a brothel scene." There i s one p r i n t i n which one of three p r o s t i t u t e s i n a bedroom washes h e r s e l f i n a basin while the others r e c l i n e on the bed j^es Femmes (J.118)] (Figure 48). These images, the three with the gentleman as audience and the washing pros-t i t u t e , a l l depict the a c t i v i t y of bathing i n the brothel s e t t i n g . To r e i t e r a t e then, the d i v i s i o n of the early monotypes into two categories, the bathers and the brot h e l scenes, used by Janis and Cachin does not seem l o g i c a l as with the notebooks, i t has been established that Degas executes these works during the same period around 1877. For both he uses small plates, the combination of the dark and l i g h t f i e l d methods or the dark f i e l d method and no preparatory drawings. Often the women i n both so - c a l l e d groups of p r i n t s wear a b i t of clothing and they assume a l i m i t e d number of poses. Further, the confusion regarding the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of several p r i n t s between the catalogues of Janis and Cachin underlines the a r b i t r a r y nature of these d i v i s i o n s . The three p r i n t s of the admirer and the washing p r o s t i t u t e t i e the p r i n t s more. Other writers have noted that Degas explores the nude i n a modern s e t t i n g f i r s t i n the brothel s e r i e s . Some have hinted at a connection between the brot h e l and bather imagery yet t h e i r comments on the subject are tentative and not f u l l y explained. Jean Bouet, for instance, notes that absence of nudes i n Degas's work for a long period and states "that 46 about 1878-80 he took up nude studies i n the form of h i s monotypes of pros-49 t i t u t e s . " Pickvance, i n his recent catalogue of the works of 1879, i n -cludes a bather monotype with the brothel scenes, s t a t i n g that while i t belongs to the series of women at t h e i r t o i l e t t e , he includes i t "to show something of Degas's daring treatment of t h i s r e l a t e d theme...." (emphasis . . 50 mine). Cachin i s the only one to attempt to explain the r e l a t i o n between the two groups. She introduces the section of her catalogue on the bathers with the following remark: "with the exception of a few monotypes linked with the b r o t h e l scenes the Women at t h e i r T o i l e t t e are very close to the pastels and drawings on the same theme produced between approximately 1880 and 1890...."^^ While contending on the one hand that there are a small number of l i n k e d scenes, she states elsewhere i n her essay that "there can be no doubt that the monotypes {of the brothels]] played as important a part as the 52 studies of dancers i n the development of Degas's concept of the nude." Cachin concludes that i t i s a s i m i l a r point of view that connects the two groups. C i t i n g the d i s t i n c t i v e character of a monotype as drawing kept i n a p o r t f o l i o f or the del e c t a t i o n of one person at a time, she believes that with t h i s p r i v a t e q u a l i t y , the monotype medium i s appropriate for "the most personal area of Degas's v i s i o n , h i s voyeurism,if that i s not too strong a word - the brothel scenes, the nudes and the pictures of women washing 53 themselves." As w i l l be discussed i n the next chapter, Degas f i r s t becomes involved with b r o t h e l imagery at a time when low-class p r o s t i t u t i o n i s a very t o p i c a l subject i n Paris and when the n a t u r a l i s t writers deem the brot h e l as one which i s appropriately modern. The bather images of about 1877 are part of the brot h e l imagery and include these small p r i n t s which depict the 47 women i n a state of semi-nudity performing t h e i r t o i l e t t e . A f t e r a hiatus of more than ten years i n his use of the nude and a few unsuccessful out-door nude scenes, he executes the brothel monotypes which include the scenes of women bathing or going to bed. As he gradually loses i n t e r e s t i n the brothel imagery, he becomes more involved with the t o t a l l y nude bather, dropping the salacious connotations which women clad only i n stock-ings evoked i n French nineteenth century a r t . Degas undoubtably sees i n the bather imagery a s o l u t i o n to the problem which Manet had posed i n 1865 with h i s Olympia, that of the nude of modern l i f e . The bather scenes pro-vided a p l a u s i b l e s e t t i n g f o r nudity without the framework of mythical or h i s t o r i c a l a l legory. He signals h i s reawakened i n t e r e s t i n the nude with the e x h i b i t i o n of h i s Young Spartans painted almost twenty years before, at 54 the Impressionist show of 1880. From 1878 onwards, he executes more and more of the bathers u n t i l he f e e l s assured enough about them to exhibit ten large pastels and o i l s of t h i s subject i n 1886. As h i s i n t e r e s t i n the depiction of urban n i g h t l i f e declines and h i s f a s c i n a t i o n with the depiction of movement increases, he turns almost e x c l u s i v e l y to the two subjects which best allow him to render motion, the nude bodies of the bathers and the dancers. From about 1880, these two motifs dominate h i s work. 48 For Reff's discussion of the redating see The Notebooks, I: 5^6, 151. The e a r l i e s t studies of nudes a f t e r 1865 occur i n N.B. 32 (1879-83), pp. 11 and 42 and are studies for Apre*s Le Bain (L.707) and Une Femme Mettant Ses Bas (L.751). 2 lb i d , p . 5 . 3 I b i d , p. 151. 4 Buste d'un Femme (L.304), o i l on canvas. ^Une Femme Se Coiffant (L.436), o i l on canvas. ^See for example Repetition d'un b a l l e t sur l a scene, o i l on canvas, 1874-5, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York and La classe de danse de M.  Perrot, o i l on canvas, 1874-6, Private C o l l e c t i o n . ^Venturi, Les Archives (Paris: Durand-Rerel, 1939), I: 259. Entry #62 of the catalogue of the F i r s t Impressionist e x h i b i t i o n , 1877. g Ibid, p. 265. 9 L.377, o i l on canvas. "^The second canvas of nudes i n a landscape i s Femmes se lavant l e s o i r (L.376), o i l on paper applied to canvas. 1 1L.423, J.175, p a s t e l over monotype, 6 1/2 x 8 1/2 inches, Cabinet des Estampes, Le Louvre ( C a i l l e b o t t e Bequest). 12 La T o i l e t t e , L.547, J.191, p a s t e l over monotype, 6 1/4 x 4 3/4 inches, Cabinet des Estampes, Le Louvre, ( C a i l l e b o t t e Bequest). 1 3 R e f f , The Notebooks, N.B. 29, p. 35. 1 4L.707, N.B. 32, p. 11. " ^ M i l l a r d , Degas Sculptures, p. 42. "'""'Eunice Lipton, i n a recent a r t i c l e , has arriv e d at a s i m i l a r con-clusion. She states that a l l of the bather executed a f t e r c.1875 are , p r o s t i t u t e s . Her evidence i s based on the s i m i l a r poses and motifs used i n the brothel monotypes and the l a t e r large pastels and c e r t a i n observations regarding hygenic pra c t i c e i n the nineteenth century. She does not bother with the dating of works nor with the hiatus of ten years. Although she cre d i t s t h i s author with the main idea, I cannot agree e n t i r e l y with her. 49 I f Degas had depicted p r o s t i t u t e s , with h i s insistence on honesty, the l a t e r nudes would have been so t i t l e d . I tend to the idea of a common con-ception with the brothel scenes for the early bathers. Eunice Lipton, "Degas' Bathers: The Case f o r Realism, Arts Magazine 54 (May 1980), pp. 947. "^L.639. The studies for t h i s work are found i n Reff, The Notebooks, II , N.B. 33 (1879-82), p. 4,5,7. 1 7 J a n i s dates to c.1878 J . 71, 75, 76, 77, 88, 91, 92, 93, 95, 96, 101, 102, 108, 109, 110, 111, and 112. She dates to c. 1877 J . 94 and 98. 1 8 R e f f , The Notebooks, I I , N.B. 28, N.B. 29. 19 Cachin, Degas, p. 274. 20 T,., Ib i d . 21 Reff, "Degas and the L i t e r a t u r e of His Time - I," Burlington Magazine CXII (September 1970), p. 586. Reprinted as Chapter IV i n Reff, Degas: The A r t i s t ' s Mind. 22 Reff, The Notebooks, I: 31. 23 Jean Boggs i n her review of the 1968 e x h i b i t i o n of the monotypes by Janis, concurs that Une Femme Sortant du Bain (J.175) and La T o i l l e t t e (J.191) were exhibited i n 1877. J.S. Boggs, "Degas Monotypes at the Fogg," Burlington  Magazine CX (July 1968), p. 430. 24 M i l l a r d , Degas Sculpture, p. 42. 25 Pool, Degas, p. 20. 26 Pickvance, "Some Aspects of Degas's Nudes," p. 19. 27 Pickvance, Degas: 1879, p. 5. 2 8 J a n i s , Degas, J.42. 29 / Cachin and Adhemar, Degas, #45. 30 For example, Cachin dates J.125 to c.1882-85 while Janis places i t to c.1880-85, J.127 to 1882-85 as w e l l , and J.129 to c.1885 while Janis places both to c.1880-83. 31 Janis, "Degas and 'The Master of Chiaroscuro,'" p. 69, note 12 and Janis,"The Mono_types_ of Edgar Degas"(Unpublished Phd. Thesis, Harvard 50 Univ e r s i t y , 1974), p. 200. 32 Jani s , "Degas and 'The Master of Chiaroscuro,'" p. 69, note 12. 33 I b i d . 3 4 I b i d , pp. 56-59. 35 Cachin, Degas, p. 84. 36 Ibid, p. 82. Janis, Degas, p. XX. 37 David Tunick, David Tunick Inc., New York, New York. 38 Janis, Degas, #37 of the catalogue. 39 F i r s t pointed out by Pickvance, "Some Aspects," p. 19. 40 Ibid, p. XX; Pool, Degas, p. 21. 4 1Pickvance, "Some Aspects of Degas's Nudes," p. 18. 42 Rewald, The History of Impressionism, p. 382, note 50. 43 P e n c i l on grey paper, Oxford, The Ashmolean Museum, study f or L.890, Boggs, Degas Drawings, #131. 44 See note 1 above. 45 Rewald, The History of Impressionism, p. 525. ^Wagner, "Degas' C o l l e c t i o n , " p. 23. Cachin, Degas, p. 80. 47 s Studies f o r the monotype Mme. Becat aux Cafe des Ambassadeurs (Adhemar and Cachin, Degas, #43) occur i n Reff, The Notebooks, I I , N.B. 27, p. 89. 4^Cachin, Degas, p. 276. 49 Jean Bouret, Degas, translated by Daphne Woodward, (London: Thames and Hudson, 1965), p. 186. ~^Pickvance, Degas: 1879, p. 27. 51 "'"'"Cachin, Degas, p. 82. 5 2 T k., Ib i d . 5 3 I b i d , p. 80. 5 4 V e n t u r i , Les Archives, I I : 285. 52 CHAPTER III Because of the monotype medium and seemingly odd subject matter, most writers have tended to regard Degas's brothel scenes as a c u r i o s i t y , as an i n t e r e s t i n g adjunct to h i s main oeuvre. Yet taken i n the context of h i s other subjects of the seventies, the brothel scenes are not s u r p r i s i n g . These wr i t e r s tend to ignore two important conditions which went into the making of these p r i n t s . Degas was very committed to the percepts of n a t u r a l -ism during t h i s decade and the brothel scenes form a part of his scenes of P a r i s i a n n i g h t l i f e which include the tableaux of the cafe-concerts and the backstage of the Opera, both t y p i c a l haunts of the upper or middle class gentleman. More important i s the fact which w i l l be discussed at length below, that the system of reglementation was a hot, t o p i c a l subject i n P a r i s , indeed i n a l l of Europe, during the l a t e r eighteen-seventies. Degas's general p o s i t i o n to the n a t u r a l i s t movement i s well i l l u s t r a t e d i n h i s r e l a t i o n s with the other Impressionists. Despite h i s committment to f i g u r a l as opposed to landscape painting, he was an ardent supporter of the Impressionist group shows from the beginning and he exhibited i n a l l but one of the eight shows. The exhibitors to the f i r s t show i n 1874 agreed to cease submitting any works to the Salon. Throughout the years, only Degas and P i s s a r r o remained l o y a l to the o r i g i n a l agreement."'' Although Degas's record of acceptance at the Salon had been most favourable, he ceased to 2 •send works to the o f f i c i a l body a f t e r the Franco-Prussian war. When the f i r s t show was being planned by the a r t i s t s who frequented the Cafe Nouvelle Orleans, Degas was among the busiest of the organizers. 3 His l e t t e r s include s o l i c i t a t i o n s to other a r t i s t s to support the movement and h i s notebooks reveal that he spent much time tramping about Paris i n 53 4 search of s u i t a b l e e x h i b i t i o n space. In h i s book, The History of Impressionism, John Rewald has portrayed Degas as a dissonant, querulous voice among the f r a t e r n i t y of pure landscape painters.~* He depicts Degas as the harrasser of the misunderstood genius, Cezanne.^ Yet the fact that Degas included nine of Cezanne's works i n the c a r e f u l l y chosen c o l l e c t i o n b e l i e s Rewald's view of t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p . 7 Rewald sees Degas's r e f u s a l to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the show of 1882 as i n d i c -a t i v e of h i s a t t i t u d e and attempts to undermine the s o l i d a r i t y of the group: Never has the Impressionists organized an e x h i b i t i o n so lacking i n a l i e n elements, never had they been so much to themselves. A f t e r eight years of common struggle they managed at l a s t (but with what d i f f i c u l t i e s ) to stage an e x h i b i t i o n which t r u l y represented t h e i r art. (emphasis mine)^ Degas's r e f u s a l to exhibit i n the 1882 show was a r e s u l t of h i s insistence that R a f f a e l l i be allowed to j o i n . The rest of the group refused and Degas withdrew, followed by Mary Cassatt. Rewald's account of the s i t u a t i o n suggests that Degas's support of R a f f a e l l i and others such as Forain and Zandomeneghi, was an attempt to tone down the r a d i c a l nature of the show, a reading which has more to do with Rewald's view that the landscape painters were the true precursors of modernism, than with the r e a l i t y of Degas's intentions. These three a r t i s t s were a l l f i g u r a l draughtmen whose work embodies a view of modernism close to Degas's. A l l depicted lower class types and professions i n a detached, objective manner which was the underlying tenet of the n a t u r a l i s t movement i n l i t e r a t u r e . Huysmans described t h i s point of view s u c c i n c t l y i n an a r t i c l e of 1878: We are a r t i s t s who are a t h i r s t with modernity.... We go into the s t r e e t , the l i v i n g , teeming s t r e e t , into hotel bedrooms as w e l l as i n t o f i n e mansions; into dark corners as w e l l as into w e l l - l i t highways. We do not, l i k e the romantics, want to create puppets 54 more b e a u t i f u l than nature.... We want to l e t creatures of f l e s h and blood stand on t h e i r own f e e t . 9 R a f f a e l l i , Forain and Zandomenghi a l l depicted people i n t h e i r occupational surroundings. Degas does the same i n h i s images of laundresses, cafe-concert singers, b a l l e t - r a t s and p o r t r a i t s . Degas wishes to include these a r t i s t s i n the show because t h e i r art approximated h i s own views on modernism more than did those of the landscape painters such as Monet and P i s s a r r o . What Rewald sees as a reactionary atti t u d e was r e a l l y a divergent opinion on Degas's part as to what constituted modernity. Theodore Reff has devoted two chapters i n h i s book, Degas: The A r t i s t ' s  Mind, to Degas's a f f i n i t i e s with the r e l i a n c e upon the writers Zola, de Goncourt, Huysmans and Duranty."^ These writers ins p i r e d Degas's preoccup-ation with the contemporary scene which dominated h i s art from about 1867 to 1885. To i l l u s t r a t e the truth of Reff's view, one need only look at Degas's Interior,''""'" an i l l u s t r a t i o n of a key scene i n Zola's Therese Raquin (1867). Degas chooses the scene i n which Therese and Laurent, a f t e r murdering Therese's husband, f i n d that they cannot consumate t h e i r marriage due to 12 t h e i r feelings of g u i l t and remorse. In L'Absinthe, Degas exemplifies the i s o l a t i o n of modern c i t y l i f e so evident i n Huysmans's work and more s p e c i f -i c a l l y i n Zola's L'Assomoir (1876). The p a s t e l and o i l versions of Miss 13 La l a au Cirque Fernando foreshadow de Goncourt's i n t e r e s t i n circus performers i n Les Freres Zenganno i n 1879. Reff sees "a broad range of s o c i a l , psychological, and s t y l i s t i c a f f i n i t i e s " between the work of Degas and de Goncourt as the two shared a "mutual i n t e r e s t i n portraying the 14 labours and pleasures of modern P a r i s . " Degas's work of the l a t e s i x t i e s and seventies with i t s depiction of psyc h o l o g i c a l l y tense s i t u a t i o n s (Boudure, L'Absinthe, I n t e r i o r , and P o r t r a i t 55 de Michael Levy), h i s scenes or urban n i g h t l i f e (the audiences of the cafe-concert and the b a l l e t ) and various occupations (laundresses and millners) are types of subjects heralded by Baudelaire, Huysmans and de Goncourt as those which are the essence of modernity. 1"' For Baudelarie, as seen i n h i s Salon de 1846, Salon de 1859, and La Peinture de l a Vie Moderne, only the contemporary urban scene i s a modern subject. 1*' Huysmans, i n h i s reviews i n Le V o l t a i r e , La Reforme and La Revue, r e i t e r a t e the l i s t of Baudelaire's appropriate subjects. Huysmans, i n h i s review of the Salon of 1880, i s o l a t e s Degas as "the i d e a l painter of modern l i f e . " He goes on to describe Degas as "the p i c t o r i a l equivalent of the brothers de Goncourt," 1 7 the early heroes of Huysmans. Given Degas's a f f i n i t i e s with the novels and subject matter of the n a t u r a l i s t writers and h i s own appreciation of the domestic scenes of seven-18 teenth century Dutch a r t , the i n t e r i o r scenes of the brothels are not as s u r p r i s i n g . They do not seem as odd when placed i n the context of the con-temporary urban scene. Like the laundresses, cafe-concert singers and b a l l e t r a t s, the p r o s t i t u t e s are lower class women plying t h e i r trade. They are depicted i n attitudes c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t h e i r profession; they wait i n the salon or bedroom, administer to the c l i e n t s or perform t h e i r t o i l e t . The nineteenth century i n France has seen a gradual increase i n i n t e r e s t i n the s o c i a l implications of p r o s t i t u t i o n . Parent-Duchalet's De l a Pros- t i t u t i o n dans l a v i l l e P a r is f i r s t appeared i n 1825 and was revised and 19 reissued throughout the century. I t consisted of voluminious s t a t i s t i c a l information with few generalizations drawn from the material. The author examined the p r o s t i t u t e population with regard to county, province, and 56 town of o r i g i n ; m a r i t a l , s o c i a l and economic status of the parents; the various factors involved i n the choice of the profession and the numbers of the various types of p r o s t i t u t e s . Other books continued to appear throughout the century, notably Charles Jerome Lecour's La P r o s t i t u t i o n a Paris et a Londres, 1789-1870, augmente des chapites sur l a p r o s t i t u t i o n \ 20 a Paris pendant l e Siege et l a Commune and Paul Lacroix's H i s t o i r e de l a 21 P r o s t i t u t i o n chez tous les peuples du monde. The s t a t i s t i c a l t r a c t s were gradually superceded by books which denounced the system of l e g a l i z e d p r o s t i t u t i o n such as J . Meugy's De / * "2.2. I'Existence de l a Prostitution: P e t i t i o n au Senat, session de 1865 and 23 Yves Guyot's La P r o s t i t u t i o n , Revue et augmentation, an important book which w i l l be discussed at length below. The movements to reform the conditions of poor women who were forced i n t o p r o s t i t u t i o n as a way of l i f e , both i n England and i n France, were part of the wider struggles f o r s o c i a l j u s t i c e . The brothels became a hotly debated subject i n Paris during the seventies. They were the mainstay of the system of reglementation which was increasingly 24 attacked i n the press. France had l e g a l i z e d p r o s t i t u t i o n i n 1635 and sub-sequent laws were enacted to regulate the obvious s o c i a l problems r e l a t e d to 25 p r o s t i t u t i o n : p u b l i c nuisance and venereal disease. The French laws s t i p u l a t e d that p r o s t i t u t e s could not s o l i c i t e i n the streets and public places or display themselves at t h e i r windows, and, by 1802, the system of i n s c r i p t i o n was i n force. A l l p r o s t i t u t e s had to be registered with the Bureau des Moeurs and had to submit to regular medical examinations f o r venereal disease. During the nineteenth century there existed two types of p r o s t i t u t i o n : 57 l e g a l and clandestine. There was also a cl e a r hierarchy of p r o s t i t u t e s . The "courtisans" and the "lorettes" comprised the claudestine type. These women were not in s c r i b e d and led a r e l a t i v e l y charmed existence i n contrast to t h e i r more unfortunate s i s t e r s . The "courtisans" were s o c i a l l y prominent e s p e c i a l l y during the Second Empire and thrived on the r i s e of the new i n d u s t r i a l i s t c l a s s . The " l o r e t t e s " were most often employed i n menial jobs and l i v e d with succession of lovers. Although they r a r e l y charged for t h e i r services, they were classed as p r o s t i t u t e s by v i r t u e of t h e i r promiscuity. The " f i l l e s en carte" and the " f i l l e s a p a r t i e " were inscribed pros-t i t u t e s who p l i e d t h e i r trade freelance or with the help of a "ponce" or pimp. The " f i l l e s en numero" and the " f i l l e s a soldat" were the lowest on the s c a l e . They l i v e d i n licensed brothels under the supervision of a madame. They were fed and clothed i n return f o r t h e i r services and were allowed to keep only small g r a t u i t i e s given to them by c l i e n t s . Often they were shame-f u l l y exploited by the madame who overcharged f o r basic amenities and kept them so deep i n debt that the g i r l s could r a r e l y hope to ameliorate t h e i r s i t u a t i o n . The freelance p r o s t i t u t e s were constantly harrassed by the p o l i c e and 26 the "agents des moeurs." Imprisonment was the punishment for f a i l u r e to in s c r i b e oneself, f o r missing a medical examination and f o r s o l i c i t a t i o n i n a public place. The "agents" had wide powers and could incarcerate any woman who they believed to be a p r o s t i t u t e . In such a system, i t was the poor who suffered as the "agents" tended to imprison poor, unaccompanied women. During the seventies, many cases were reported i n the press of women who were im-prisoned without cause. Most often, they were respectable women who had legitimate reason to be out at night. In one such case, the woman was on an 58 errand to fetch medicine for a sic k c h i l d . She was apprehended by the "agents," imprisoned for three days and the c h i l d died. Many spent days i n confinement before t h e i r f a m i l i e s could f i n d them and arrange f o r t h e i r release. The p l i g h t of these respectable women only served to point out the lack of c i v i l r i g h t s accorded to the p r o s t i t u t e s and the abuses of the agents directed against respectable women. The a b o l i t i o n i s t movement i n France was c l o s e l y a l l i e d to the English movement. The adherents to both countries f e l t that the system was a f a i l u r e and a scandal. Josephine Butler, head of the Ladies National Association, the vanguard of the English a b o l i t i o n i s t movement, v i s i t e d P a r is i n 1874 where she met with the upper echelons of P a r i s i a n society and was greatly encouraged i n her determination to unite the groups concerned 27 with p r o s t i t u t i o n i n a l l of the European countries. These reformers saw that venereal disease had not been brought under control and i n an era before the use of a n t i c e p t i c s , the medical examinations spread the disease more than 2 8 they c o n t r o l l e d i t . The brothel system tended to keep the women i n a state of bondage that made i t d i f f i c u l t f o r them to change t h e i r l i v e s f o r 29 the better. The wide powers of the agents were often abused and the prac-30 t i c e of i n s c r i p t i o n branded a woman for l i f e . In some recorded cases, women were forced into brothels i f they were unlucky enough to be picked up . . 31 by the agents a second time. The n a t i o n a l reform movements of Europe culminated i n a se r i e s of con-ventions which received a great deal of p u b l i c i t y i n the press. The f i r s t I nternational Congress on P r o s t i t u t i o n was held i n Geneva i n 1877, the 32 second i n Liege i n 1879 and the t h i r d i n London i n 1881. France did not 33 abolish the system of "reglementation of brothels u n t i l the Second World War but the public outcry against the system was well along the way by 1880. 59 Two n a t u r a l i s t novels on p r o s t i t u t i o n appeared at t h i s time. Huysmans, fearing censorship from the D i v i s i o n des Beaux-Arts, took his manuscript of 34 Marthe, H i s t o i r e d'une F i l l e to Belgium i n August of 1876. Jean Gay, a s p e c i a l i s t i n e r o t i c a , published the work for Huysmans. In September, Huysmans attempted to import four hundred copies into France. The bulk of these were confiscated at the border, but many copies did reach Paris where they sold for f a n t a s t i c p r i c e s . Marthe i s the story of an a r t i f i c a l pearl maker who, af t e r l i v i n g with a series of lovers, becomes an inmate of a br o t h e l . Huysmans describes the boredom and torpor of the p r o s t i t u t e s i n great d e t a i l and, i n the most v i v i d scene of the book, r e l a t e s Marthe's t e r r o r of the agents des moeurs one night as she escapes from the brothel to wander the streets i n bewilderment and despair, a f e e l i n g described i n the reported cases of innocent women accosted by the agents i n the press of the l a t e seventies. Despite i t s subject matter, the book i s not pornographic. Huysmans, i n describing the brot h e l l i f e , centers on the salon and d i s c r e e t l y leaves the a c t i v i t i e s of the bedroom and the early scenes between Marthe and her various lovers to the reader's imagination. Its impact l i e s i n the fact that Huysmans does not provide the conventional, sentimentalized view of pros-t i t u t i o n embodied i n the " l o r e t t e " or "courtisan" of the l i t e r a t u r e of the Romantic period. Dumas f i l s had treated the subject f i r s t i n his Dame aux Camelias (1848). I t was followed by the opera La Traviata (1853) based on 35 the e a r l i e r novel, and by a host of other books and plays on the subject. These works a l l portrayed the women as "courtisans" or " l o r e t t e s , " and as women more sinned against than sinning. They were the "whores with hearts of gold" i n the t r a d i t i o n of Fanny and Moll Flanders. Marthe was the f i r s t 36 novel to deal with the brothel and the low class p r o s t i t u t e . The heroine 60 i s r e a l l y a cardboard character but t h i s appropriate to Huysmans's theme of a woman shaped by s o c i a l forces into a de s t i t u t e and depraved being. Huysmans hurr i e d the completion and p u b l i c a t i o n of h i s book because i t had been announced that de Goncourt was planning to publish another novel dealing with p r o s t i t u t i o n , La F i l l e E l i z a . Huysmans sent de Goncourt a copy of Marthe, and i n an accompanying l e t t e r , warned de Goncourt of h i s own 37 d i f f i c u l t i e s with the censorship of the border a u t h o r i t i e s . De Goncourt did make c e r t a i n changes i n l i g h t of th i s information and the book was not 38 censored. I t s f i r s t p r i n t i n g of 10,000 copies which appeared i n March of 1877 sold out immediately, a fact which underlines the t o p i c a l i t y and popularity of the subject during the l a t e seventies i n P a r i s . La F i l l e E l i z a chronicles the l i f e of a woman, who again a f t e r a se r i e s of lovers, i s forced into a brothel due to extreme penury. She ends up i n a prison for the criminal and the insane which enforces a s t r i c t rule of s i l e n c e . E l i z a may have escaped censorship because, as de Goncourt so c a r e f u l l y pointed out i n h i s preface, the book was about "prisons and the 39 prisoner" more than about " p r o s t i t u t i o n and the p r o s t i t u t e . " Indeed, E l i z a ' s stay i n the brothel i s only one incident i n her downward s l i d e to the p r i s o n . Zola's Nana, which dealt with a high class "courtisan," was s e r i a l i z e d i n 1879 and published i n book form with a p r i n t i n g of 55,000 copies i n 40 February of 1880. The s e r i a l i z a t i o n i n Le V o l t a i r e was accompanied by the biggest p u b l i c i t y campaign i n French l i t e r a r y h i s t o r y to date. The campaign employed advertisements i n other newspapers, sandwich-board men and posters everywhere i n Paris including the public l a t r i n e s . At one point during the campaign, Paul A l e x i s , Zola's d i s c i p l e , f e l t compelled to write 61 a newspaper a r t i c l e p o i n t i n g out that the author of Nana was not responsible for the publisher's attempt to increase the c i r c u l a t i o n of Le V o l t a i r e . The vulgar p u b l i c i t y was probably the subject of adverse comment i n the a r t i s t i c c i r c l e s of that time. While many writers and painters of the period treated t h i s subject of p r o s t i t u t i o n , only Huysmans received a great deal of c r i t i c i s m . I t would seem then that the subject of p r o s t i t u t i o n i t s e l f was not objectionable but the depiction of low class p r o s t i t u t i o n was. Yves Guyot, himself a doctor who once served with the Bureau des Moeurs, described the reactions of the French public as follows: La F i l l e E l i z a a ete un scandale, parce que M. de Goncourt a quitte l a region du Demi-monde, ou s'agitaient les Dames aux Camelias, l e s l o r e t t e s et autres Lionnes, pour j e t e r un coup d ' o e i l sur l a f i l l e pauvre. "La f i l l e entretenue," " l a cocotte'." on s o u r i t en prononcant son nom, e l l e a des journaux uniquement consacrees a ses moeurs et au re'cit des actions d'e'clat des favorise'es ou des habits. "La f i l l e en carte" est considered avec degout. Un homme qui avoue ses rapports avec l a premiere n 1avoue pas ses rapports avec c e l l i - c i . La " f i l l e en bordel!" c'est l e dernier echelon, et l a f i l l e en carte elle-meme di t avec hauteur: "Je ne suis pas une f i l l e de bordel, moi!"41 Guyot eventually became c l o s e l y a l l i e d with the a b o l i t i o n i s t movement i n France. Here, he cogently pinpointed the unease and d i s t a s t e which h i s con-temporaries f e l t when confronted with the subject of the b r o t h e l v a r i e t y of p r o s t i t u t i o n . We know that Degas did read La F i l l e E l i z a from his i l l u s t r a t i o n s for i t i n the Halevy notebook. But these sketches are d i f f e r e n t from his brothel monotypes. The women i n the i l l u s t r a t i o n s are clad i n chemises and appear only i n the salon of the house. They chat and play cards with the s o l d i e r c l i e n t s . The brothel monotypes, as we have seen, depict the women waiting i n the salon or bedroom, administering to the c l i e n t s or performing t h e i r 62 t o i l e t t e . This a c t i v i t y of waiting i s p r e c i s e l y what dominates Huysman's depiction of the brothel. Huysmans sent h i s novel to both de Goncourt and 42 Zola, hence i t i s e n t i r e l y possible that Degas read Marthe sho r t l y a f t e r i t s p u b l i c a t i o n v i a the writers i n his c i r c l e . Reff had a i l e d Degas's br o t h e l scenes with Marthe, noting that the subject " i s imbued with that melancholy s p i r i t of i s o l a t i o n and d i s i l l u s i o n -4 3 ment which each [Huysmans and Degas] i d e n t i f i e d with a modern s e n s i b i l i t y . " Both expressed a c y n i c a l attitude to the pro s t i t u t e s and depicted them " i n the same positions of t o t a l p h y s i c a l abandon" not seen i n the more conven-t i o n a l treatment of Constantin Guys i n h i s drawings of "l e s f i l l e s " or of 44 de Goncourt i n E l i z a . Indeed, Baudelaire, i n La Peinture de l a Vie Moderne, devoted a paragraph to the subject of p r o s t i t u t e s and noted that t h e i r p h y s i c a l postures were e s p e c i a l l y appropriate for the painter concerned with 45 modernxty. Degas's b r o t h e l scenes are however, much more e x p l i c i t than the novels of Huysmans and de Goncourt. Degas follows the pro s t i t u t e s into the bedroom and shows her administering to the c l i e n t i n scenes which depict the act of f e l l a t i o . The monotypes dwell on the l e e r i n g faces of the women, on t h e i r fat bodies, and on the overwhelming ennui which characterizes the b r o t h e l l i f e . His attitude to them i s objective i n that he does not p r e t t i f y them or d i s c r e e t l y leave t h e i r bedroom a c t i v i t i e s to the imagination. Janis, Cachin and Pickvance have described the monotypes as more comic than obscene with the charactural f a c i a l types as evidence of a l i g h t , f r i v o l o u s approach to the subject matter. Reff's opinion, that the fat bodies and ugly faces 46 are evidence of Degas's d i s t a s t e for women of the lower classes, seems more l i k e l y given the strong connections between Degas's and Huysmans,' work. 63 The b r o t h e l monotypes were undoubtably i n s p i r e d i n part by Huysmans novel. Degas's i n t e r e s t i n the subject was part of the general attention given to the matter of low class p r o s t i t u t i o n i n Paris i n the years 1876 to 1879. But he t i r e d of the subject, possibly as a r e s u l t of the excessive p u b l i c i t y which accompanied the s e r i a l i z a t i o n of Zola's Nana. Degas's 47 attitude had cooled towards the w r i t e r considerably by t h i s time. He probably viewed Zola's novel as an attempt to cash i n on the t o p i c a l i t y of p r o s t i t u t i o n a f t e r the novels of Huysmans and de Goncourt, the l a t t e r having in s p i r e d Degas's i l l u s t r a t i o n s i n the Halevy notebook. Degas, then, i n response to the novels of Huysmans and de Goncourt and to the coverage of the a b o l i t i o n i s t movement i n the press, treats the au courant subject of low class p r o s t i t u t i o n i n h i s brothel monotypes. His i n t e r e s t i s sustained f o r a period of about eighteen months to two years from 1877 to 1879. I t i s l e f t to compare Degas's work with s i m i l a r scenes by other a r t i s t s i n order to demonstrate that the b r o t h e l monotypes had a profound influence on the l a t e r bathers and that t h i s influence was un-consciously f e l t by the audiences who charged that the bathers were obscene. 64 "'"John Rewald, The History of Impressionism, 4th ed. (New York: Museum of Modern Art, 1973), pp. 560-578. 2 I b i d , p. 596, 598, 600, 603, 604. 3 See the l e t t e r ot T i s s o t i n Marcel Guerin, Degas Le t t e r s , by M. Kay (Oxford: Bruno Cassirer, 1947), pp. 38-39. 4 Reff, Notebooks, p. 32. ^Rewald, Impressionism, pp. 311, 313, 445, 521. 6 I b i d , p. 314. 7Anne Middleton Wagner,"Degas' C o l l e c t i o n of Art: An Introductory Essay and Catalogue"(Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Brown University, 1974), pp. 160-161. g Rewald, Impressionism, pp. 470-471. 9 Quoted i n Henry R.T. Brandreth, Huysmans (London: Bowes and Bowes, 1963), p. 23. "^Reff, Degas, Chapters 4 and 5. 1 : LL.348, 1868-69. 1 2L.393, 1876. 1 3L.552, 1879. 14 Reff, Degas, p. 170. "^Anita Brookner, The Genius of the Future (London: Phaidon, 1971), pp. 72, 74. 1 6 I b J d , p. 154. 17 T, ., Ibid . 18 Ian Dunlop, Degas (New York: Harper & Row, 1979), pp. 58-61. 19 Alexandre Parent-Duchalet, De La P r o s t i t u t i o n dans l a V i l l e de P a r i s , 3rd ed. (Paris: J.B. B a i l l i e r e et f i l s , 1857). 65 20 > N Charles Jerome Lacour, La P r o s t i t u t i o n a Paris et a Londres, augmente des chapitres sur l a P r o s t i t u t i o n pendant l e Siege et l a Commune (Paris: A s s e l i n , 1872). 21 Paul Lacroix, H i s t o i r e de l a P r o s t i t u t i o n chez tous les Peuplesdu  Monde (Paris: Charpentier, 1867). 2 2 J . Meugy, De l'Existence de l a P r o s t i t u t i o n : P e t i t i o n au senat, session de 1865 (Paris: Gauthier et f r e r e s , 1865). 23 Yves Guyot, La P r o s t i t u t i o n : Revue et Augmentation (Paris: G. Charpentier, 1883). 24 Vern and Bonnie Bullough, P r o s t i t u t i o n : An I l l u s t r a t e d S o c i a l  History (New York: Crown Publishers, 19 78), p. 244. 25 La Grande Larousse du XIXe S i e c l e , " P r o s t i t u t i o n " (Paris: Larousse, 1875), p. 296. Information i n t h i s and the following two paragraphs i s from t h i s source. 2 6 Guyot, La P r o s t i t u t i o n , pp. 123-127. Information i n t h i s paragraph i s from t h i s source. 27 E. Moberly B e l l , Josephine Butler: Flame of F i r e (London: Constable and Co. L t d . , 1962), p. 118. 28 Bullough, P r o s t i t u t i o n , p. 180. 29 Guyot, La P r o s t i t u t i o n , pp. 477-84. 30T, ., Ibid . 31 Ibid . 3 2 I b i d , p. 405. 33 Bullough, P r o s t i t u t i o n , p. 262. 34 Brandreth, Huysmans, pp. 19-21. Information i n t h i s paragraph i s from t h i s source. 35 Martin Seymour-Smith, F a l l e n Women (London: Nelson, 1969), pp. 160-183. 36 Brandreth, Huysmans, p. 21. 3 7 I b i d , p. 22. 66 O Q Edmond de Concourt, E l i z a , translated by M. Crosland (New York: Howard F e r t i g , 1975), pp. 9-11. Information i n t h i s paragraph i s from t h i s source. 3 9 I b i d , p. 15. 4°F.W.J. Hemmings, The L i f e and Times of Emile Zola (London: Paul Elek, 1977), pp. 94-95. Information i n t h i s paragraph i s from t h i s source. 4^Guyot, La P r o s t i t u t i o n , p. 10. 42 Brandreth, Huysmans, p. 22. 4 3 R e f f , Degas, p. 180. 44 Ibid, p. 181 ^Quoted i n Dunlop, Degas, p. 146. 4 6 R e f f , Degas, p. 165. 4 7 I b i d , p. 181. 67 CHAPTER IV Degas's i n t e r e s t i n pr o s t i t u t e s i s by no means an i s o l a t e d phenomena among writers and a r t i s t s i n nineteenth century France, nor more s p e c i f -i c a l l y i n the decades of the seventies and e i g h t i e s . As we l l , there e x i s t s a long t r a d i t i o n of intimate bathing scenes, mostly lithographs, that has been traced by two writ e r s on French a r t , Beatrice Farwell i n her study of Courbet's nudes 1 and by Carol Duncan i n her work on themes of l a v i e galante 2 i n her thesis on the Rococo r e v i v a l i n nineteenth century French a r t . Both authors point to a large body of p r i n t s , many anonymous, that depict both bathers and g r i s e t t e s , the lower c l a s s , claudestine p r o s t i t u t e s , of P a r i s . According to Farwell, the scenes of ladies at t h e i r bath i n anonymous l a t e eighteenth century p r i n t s , often with a peeping Tom present, included maids who revealed the charms of t h e i r mistresses to the viewer of the p r i n t 3 or to a gentleman i n the composition. Beginning about the turn of the 4 century lesbian themes became common. By the 1830's and 1840's, the gr i s e t t e taking o f f or putting on her stockings i s a motif used by Octave Tassaert, A c h i l l e Deveria and a host of other lithographers.^ This image of stockings on an otherwise naked woman become a symbol of "low-down s i n and l u s t " according to Farwell and connotations continued throughout the century to the works of Lautrec and Bonnard. Degas's monotypes of bathers and p r o s t i t u t e s contain many examples of nudes with maids, notably Une  Femme Sortant du Bain (J.175) exhibited i n 1877. 7 As w e l l , the stocking theme appears i n twenty of the so-called brothel and i n ten df the bather 8 N p r i n t s . Women i n nightcaps were another motif common to the scenes galantes that are seen i n Degas's monotypes J.129-131, 133-135, 146, 153-155, 164-165, and 167^168. One of Degas's monotypes of a nude even includes a small dog 1^ as does the p r i n t by Tassaert La Volumpte. 1 1 Degas devotes 68 12 one monotype to a lesbian theme. Farwell concludes that " i t i s perhaps not too much to suggest that the en t i r e output of intimate bathing scenes by Degas, and those by Manet as w e l l , were inspi r e d by th i s t r a d i t i o n of , i • -.13 bather p r i n t s . Degas was f a m i l i a r with t h i s imagery through p r i n t s or possibly photo-graphs. His own c o l l e c t i o n contained p r i n t s by Gavarni who also depicted 14 a bather a l b e i t a more modestly covered one than most of the genre. Degas knew Deveria, who was curator of p r i n t s at the Cabinet des Estampes during the years that Degas was a student."'""' He almost c e r t a i n l y knew Constantin Guys (1802-92) from, the Cafe de Nouvelles Orleans"'"6 and i t i s possible that he was f a m i l i a r with Guy's drawings of pr o s t i t u t e s that i n -cluded a l l the stock poses of women with t h e i r legs a p a r t , ^ l o l l i n g on settees j u s t as Baudelaire described the subject i n his Salon of 1846 as 18 a f i t t i n g l y modern scene. Guys's women also wore the stockings and short chemises of the e a r l i e r depictions. Degas could have known the cartes de v i s i t e s photographs as he was so interested i n photography from the begin-19 ning. The s i m i l a r i t i e s of these photos and the drawings of Guys has been noted elsewhere. 2^* Other a r t i s t s , contemporaries of Degas, depicted p r o s t i t u t e s . F e l i c i e n Rops (1833-1898), the Belgianetcher and former p o l i t i c a l cartoonist, i s l a r g e l y remembered f o r h i s e r o t i c p r i n t s . His subjects included bathers, 21 streetwalkers and other sordid scenes. Rops himself once wrote to a fr i e n d : One must not draw a c l a s s i c a l nude but the nude of today. One must not draw the breast of the Venus de Milo but the breast of Tata, which i s less b e a u t i f u l but i s the breast of today.22 Jean Francois R a f f a e l l i (1850-1924) and Jean-Louis Forain (1852-1931), 69 both admirers of Degas, did drawings and p r i n t s of bathers and p r o s t i t u t e s , 23 R a f a e l l i i n a series of drawings of s o l d i e r s ' p r o s t i t u t e s of 1883-85 and Forain with h i s bathers and his frontespieces for Marthe, H i s t o i r e d'un 24 F i l l e . The f i r s t p r i n t depicts Marthe nude except for a p a i r of s t r i p e d 25 stockings, a format rejected by the publishers as too provocative while the second version depicts the heroine clothed. 26 Lautrec executed h i s brothel scenes i n the years 1892-95. They include the stock poses and costumes and indeed, when arranging a photo to be taken by h i s f r i e n d , Gauzi, of the inmates of his favourite maison, Lautrec posed some of the women nude except for stockings and others i n the short chemises. 2 7 Two outstanding examples of the high p r o f i l e of p r o s t i t u t e imagery dur-28 ing t h i s period are Manet's Nana (Figure 49) and Henri Gervex's R o l l a 29 (Figure 50). Nana, probably t i t l e d a f t e r the character i n Zola's L'Assomoir, was refused at the Salon of 1877. I t was exhibited i n a ga l l e r y i n the Boulevard des Capucines where i t was the object of great 30 c u r i o s i t y . The woman i n the painting i s not the inmate of a brot h e l . Her luxurious c l o t h i n g and well-dressed admirer ind i c a t e a "courtisan." Unlike the n a t u r a l i s t novels, the painting deals more with her pulchritude than her exploited p o s i t i o n i n l i f e . Gervex's R o l l a suffered a s i m i l a r r e j e c t i o n by the Salon and subsequent pr i v a t e e x h i b i t i o n i n 1878. I t was greeted by charges of obscenity i n the press. In researching the painting, one writer has determined that the outrage was based on the fact that the woman was a streetwalker and t h i s holds with the o r i g i n of the character i n a poem by 31 A l f r e d de Musset. In a l l of these bathers and p r o s t i t u t e s of the seventies and ei g h t i e s , 70 the a r t i s t s tend to portray the faces of the women, a tendency not seen i n Degas's works. Indeed the differences between Lautrec's and Degas's pros-t i t u t e s f or example have been noted as follows: 'QDegas^ also did some brothel scenes, but they lack the deep, knowing sense of f a m i l i a r i t y exuded by Lautrec's more numerous images of t h i s kind. I t must be remembered that both of these a r t i s t s had posed themselves a heroic l i f e t i m e project: that of s c r u t i n i z i n g Paris i t s e l f and of compassing the whole gamut of what might be c a l l e d P a r i s i a n womanhood. Degas's whores, l i k e h i s laundresses, are simply another e s s e n t i a l set of female models....32 Manet's i n t e r e s t i n nudes and bathers i s almost contemporaneous with that of Degas. A f t e r Olympia, painted i n 1863 and exhibited i n 1865, Manet 33 did not execute another nude for nine years, a hiatus that p a r a l l e l s Degas's own i n the use of t h i s imagery. Manet's f i r s t two nudes, Brunette  Nude of 1872 and Blond Nude of mid-decade are hal f - l e n g t h studies of pretty women posed without a s p e c i f i c s e t t i n g or action. They are then very close to Une Femme Nue Assise (L.304) and Une Femme se Coi f f a n t (L.436), the two early busts of women that Degas painted before turning to the bathing woman i n an i n t e r i o r s e t t i n g . From 1876 to 1879 Manet executed a number of o i l and pastels of bathers and women tying t h e i r garters and washing. These women are much p r e t t i e r and more com.ely than those of Degas and have i n d i v i d u a l i z e d faces. One need only compare for example Une Femme dans un 34 35 Tub (Figure 51) and Woman Fastening Her Garter (Figure 5 2) by Manet to Le Bain (Figure 5 3) (J.126) and La T o i l e t t e F i l l e t t e (J.150) (Figure 54), both pastel-covered monotypes by Degas to see that Manet emphasized the pretty bodies and pert faces of h i s models far more than Degas. Manet exhibited ten of his pastels and o i l s of bathers at the o f f i c e s of La Vie Moderne, a popular magazine edited by Georges Charpentier, a f r i e n d 36 of the Impressionists, i n 1880. The reviews of the show were generally favourable. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note with regard to Manet's choice of 71 e x h i b i t i o n space that one researcher has found a development i n the fashion press, a move from plates depicting Opera, b a l l , dinner, concert and racing 37 scenes of the seventies to the boudoir i n the e i g h t i e s . This tends to t i e the bathers by Manet and Degas to contemporary sources even more so than the motifs they used i n common with early 19th century lithographs. When i n 1886, Degas exhibited ten p a s t e l and pastel-covered monotypes 38 of bathers to the l a s t Impressionist show, the press reacted negatively. As Rewald has shown, reviewers saw the works as obscene. Pickvance f e e l s that i t must have been the close point of view, "that oppressive sense of p a r t i c i p a t i o n , the uncanny f e e l i n g of being i n the very presence of the 39 model that upset the v i s i t o r s to the e x h i b i t i o n . " As we have seen, Degas's bathers and pr o s t i t u t e s are faceless and oblivious to the viewer as the women i n such scenes by his contemporaries are not. These c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s emphasize the sense of v i o l a t e d privacy noted by Cachin, the voyejrism inher-ent i n Degas's p r i n t s . I t i s possible to conclude from h i s own statements on the subject that Degas himself was aware of the e f f e c t of h i s bathers on the viewer and was not surprised i f even a t r i f l e b i t t e r , that h i s attempt to treat the modern nude i n a bathing scene on a large scale and i n o i l was greeted with l i t t l e p r a i se and understanding. He described this voyeuristic point of view to George Moore: Hitherto, the nude has always been represented i n poses which pre-suppose an audience. But these women of mine are honest, simple f o l k , unconcerned by any other i n t e r e s t s than those involved i n t h e i r p h y s i c a l condition. Here i s another; she i s washing her feet . I t i s as i f you looked through a key-hole.^0 Degas r e i t e r a t e d t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of his bathers to Walter Sickert at about the same time: Qu'est-ce q u ' i l s f e r a i e n t a l'Academie Royale s i j e leur envoyais ca? 72 I l s vous mettraient surement a l a porte? ^ Je m'en doutais. I l s n'admettant pas l e cynlsme dans l ' a r t . "Cynlsm" i n nineteenth century France did not mean, as i t does i n English, 42 the disillusionment with ideals.once held. Instead i t connoted a v i o l a t i o n of s o c i e t a l and e s p e c i a l l y sexual mores. It was defined as "impudeur, e f f r o n t e r i e , depravation et ehontee;" while i t s antonyms were "bienseance, chasete, decence, deconim, modestie, pudeur, p u d i c i t e , reserve, et retenue." It connoted, i n i t s p h i l o s o p h i c a l usage, the cynics of ancient Qreece who a f f e c t e d to l i v e i n a state of nature without the constraints imposed by c i v i l i z a t i o n i n the form of behaviour d i c t a t e d by decency and p o l i t e n e s s . Given Degas's p r o f i c i e n c y i n Greek and h i s i n t e r e s t i n vocabulary, i t i s safe to assume that he was aware of both the l i t e r a l and the p h i l o s o p h i c a l 43 meanings. I f Sickert has indeed transcribed exactly the painter's thoughts on the subject, i t would seem that Degas was prepared f o r the charges of obscenity that greeted the large pastel bathers i n 1886. Degas's development of nude imagery i n h i s oeuvre can now be traced. He abandoned h i s t o r y painting i n about 1865 and with i t the nude. He l a t e r t r i e d conventional settings f o r nudity, such as the seaside or forest and r i v e r bank but dropped that subject a f t e r only two canvases. He returns to the nude i n the mid-seventies, but only at f i r s t i n the context of h i s scenes of urban n i g h t l i f e of which the brothels are part of the a c t i v i t y of the P a r i s i a n gentleman. The early monotypes of p r o s t i t u t e s and women per-forming t h e i r t o i l e t t e are not, i n any sense, academic. The figures are small, t h e i r anatomy only barely sketched i n contrast to the d e t a i l e d studies of the h i s t o r y painting nudes of a decade e a r l i e r . The figures of the early monotypes are an i n t e g r a l part of the tableau and would be l o s t without the s e t t i n g . Later, towards the early e i g h t i e s , Degas turns h i s 73 attention to the depiction of movement and the dancers and bathers are his choosen vehicles. But even as he eliminates the more overtly salacious elements of the scenes, the stockings, s l i p p e r s , necklaces and bracelets, he could not render the nudes sexually neutral. The settings of cheap hotel or furnished rooms, evoked the settings of naughty lithographs of Deveria and others of the mid nineteenth century which s t i l l , i n the eighties, connoted s i n f u l sexuality. More importantly however, the sense of violated privacy, of the peepshow, not present i n the prostitute scenes of F e l i c i e n Rops, Forain, and i n Manet's Nana, remained i n the l a t e r bather scenes of Degas as a l l are oblivious to the viewer. Degas's history painting nudes had faces and individualized presenses. With the brothel monotypes, the settings and violated privacy are prominent. The large pastel bathers of the 1886 show then retained the i n t e r i o r s and the close point of view f i r s t explored i n the brothel monotypes of the seventies, and these two characteristics made the pastels unacceptable to the audience as an a r t suitable for public display. 74 "^Beatrice Farwell, "Courbet's 'Baigneuses' and the Rhetorical Feminine Image," Art News Annual 38 (1972), pp. 68-75. 2 Carol Duncan, The Pursuit of Pleasure: The Rococo Revival i n French  Romantic Art (New York: Garland Publishing Co., 1976). 3 F a r w e l l , "Courbet," p. 70. 4 Ibid. ^Ibi'd. See for example Louis Dunard, La Femme Vue par des Lithographes Romantiques (Lyon: Musee des Beaux-Arts, 1974) #21, 23, 24, 26. 6 I b i d , p. 70. 70thers are J . 161, 173-176. 8They are J . 64-70, 72-75, 81-86, 89-91, 93, 95-96, 100-101, 104, 109, 118. 9 Duncan, The Pursuit of Pleasure, p. 107-8. 1 0J.164. "^Deveria, lithograph, reproduced i n Dunard, #24. 12 Deux Femmes, J.117. 1 3 F a r w e l l , "Courbet," p. 70. 1 4Anne M. Wagner,"Degas' C o l l e c t i o n of Art: An Introductory Essay and Catalogue"(Unpublished M.A. t h e s i s , Jirown University, 1974), p. 76. "'""'Lemoisne, Degas, 1: 9. "^Rewald, History of Impressionism, p. 197. 1 7 J . - P . Dubray, Constantin Guys (Paris 1930), plates 30./La Cigarette, 34 Les Deux Amies and 48 Chez E l l e s . 18 Quoted i n Dunlop, Degas, p. 146. 19 Aaron Scharf, Art and Photography (Baltimore: Baltimore Press, 1974), p. 356 75 20 A d'Eugnyet et R. Coursayet, Au Temps de Baudelaire, Guys et Nadar. 21 See f o r example U n t i t l e d etching and aquatint, Chicago Art Museum C o l l e c t i o n R1127c; La Deche (Poverty, scene of a streetwalker reproduced i n Maurice Exteens, L'Oeuvre Grave et Lithographie de F e l i c i e n Rops (Paris: E d i t i o n s P e l l e t , 1928), 1: #846; and Woman by a Lamp Exteens #352. 22 V i t o r Arwas, F e l i c i e n Rops (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1972), p. (6). 23 Maurice Joyant, Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec, 1864-1901 (Paris: Henri Floury, 1926), p. 149. 2 4 For a f u l l e r discussion of th i s project see Janis,"The Monotypes of Degas"(Unpublished Phd. t h e s i s ) , p. 189. Ibxd. 26 Joyant, Lautrec, p. 149. 2 7 Reproduced i n P. Huisman and M.G. Dortu, Lautrec by Lautrec (New York: Viking Press, 1964), p. 173. 2 8 Dennis Rouart and Sandra O r e i t t i Tout L'Oeuvre Peint d'Edouard Manet (Paris: Wildenstein, 1970), 1: #256. 29 Holly Clayson, "The Young Henri Gervex and Naturalism," Abstracts of  Papers i n Art History Sessions, 66th Annual Meeting, The College Art Association of America (New York: College Art Association, 1978). 30 Rewald, History of Impressionism, p. 403-4. 31 Clayson, "The Young Henri Gervex and Naturalism." 32 Parker Tyler, Degas/Lautrec (New York: Doubelday & Co., Inc., 1968), p. 99. 33 Anne C o f f i n Hanson, Manet and the Modern T r a d i t i o n (New Haven, Conn.,: Yale U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1977), p. 101. Information on Manet's nudes i n t h i s paragraph i s from Hanson, pp. 90-102. 3 4 Rouart and O r e i t t i , Manet, #24. 3 5 I b i d , #263. 36 Rewald, History of the Impressionists, p. 447. 76 J /David Kunzle, "The Corset as Erotic Aleheny," Art News Annual 38 (1972), p. 120. 38 Rewald, History of Impressionism, p. 526. 39 Pickvance, "Degas's Nudes," p. 19. ^George Moore, Impressions and Opinions (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1891), p. 318. ^Quoted i n Robert Emmons, The L i f e and Opinions of Walter Richard  Sickert (London: Faber and Faber, 1941), p. 63-64. 42 The d e f i n i t i o n , synonyms and antonyms of this paragraph are from Pierre LaousTser^-; editor, Le Grand Dictionaire de XIXe Siecle (Paris: L i b r a r i e Classique Larousse et Boyer, 1869), entry for "cynisme." See also Dictionnaire de L'Acadmie Francaise, 6th ed. (Paris: Imprinerie et Li b r a r i e de Firmin Didot Freres, 1835), p. 467. 43 Reff, Degas, p. 147-148. Also J. Fevre, Mon Oncle Degas, pp. 50-51, 71-73. BIBLIOGRAPHY Adhemar, Jean and Cachin, Franchise. Degas: The complete Etchings, Lithographs  and Monotypes. Translated by Jane Breton. New York: Viking Press, 1974. Alexandre, Andre. "Degas: Graveur et lithographe". Les Arts 171 (1919): 11 - 19. B e l l , E. Moberly. Josephine Butler: Flame of F i r e . London: Constable and Co. Ltd., 1962. e f B e r a l d i , Henri. Les graveurs du XIX s i e c l e : guide de 1'amateur d'estampes modernes. Vol. 5, Cherrier - Dien. P a r i s : Conquet, 1885-92. Blunt, Anthony. The Drawings of G.B. Cas t i g l i o n e and Stefano D e l i a B e l l a London Phaidon Press, 1 9 5 4 . Boggs, Jean Sutherland. Degas Drawings. Saint Louis, Missouri: C i t y Art Museum, 1966. . "Degas Monotypes at the Fogg." Burlington Magazine CX (July 1968): 430. Boime, Albert. S t r i c t l y Academic: L i f e Drawing i n the Nineteenth Century. Binghampton, New York: U n i v e r s i t y Art Museum, SUNY Binghampton, 1974. Bouret, Jean. Degas. Translated by Daphne Woodward. London: Thames and Hudson, 1965. Brandreth, R.T. Huysmans. London: Bowes and Bowes, 1963. Brookner, Anita. The Genius of the Future. London: Phaidon, 1971. Bullough, Vern and Bonnie. P r o s t i t u t i o n : An I l l u s t r a t e d S o c i a l History. New York: Crown Publishers, 1978. Burne l l , Devin. "Degas and His 'Young Spartans Exercising'". Art I n s t i t u t e of  Chicago: Museum Studies 4 (1969): 62 - 73. Cabanne, P i e r r e . "Degas et 'Les Malheurs de La V i l l e d'Orleans'". Gazette des  Beaux-Arts LIX (May 1962):363 - 6. Catalogue des eaux-fortes, vernis-mous, aquatintes, lithographies et monotypes par  Edgar Degas, et provenant de son a t e l i e r . P a r i s : Galerie Manzi Joyant, 1918. Clark, Kenneth. The Nude: A Study i n Ideal Art. London: Penquin Books, 1956. Clayson, Holly. "The Young Henri Gervex and Naturalism". Abstracts of Papers i n Art History Sessions, 66th Annual Meeting, The College Art Association  of America. New York: College Art Association, 1978. Coquoit, Gustave. Degas. P a r i s : L i b r a r i e Ollendorf, 1924. 78 De Goncourt, Edmond. E l i z a . Translated by M. Crosland. New York: Howard F e r t i g , 1975. D'Eugnyet, A., et Cousayet, R. Au Temps de Baudelaire, Guys et Nadar. P a r i s , 1932. Degas L e t t e r s . Edited by Marcel Guerin. Translated from the French by Marguerite Kay. Oxford: B. Cassiere, 1947. D i c t i o n n a i r e de L^Academie Franchise. 6th ed. P a r i s : Imprimerie et L i b r a r i e de Firmin Didot Freres, 1835. Dubray, J.-P. Constantin Guys. P a r i s , 1930. Dunard, Louis. La Femme Vue par l e s Lithographes Romantiques. Lyon: Musee des Beaux-Arts, 1974. Duncan, Carol. The Pursuit of Pleasure: The Rococo Revival i n Nineteenth Century  France. New York: Garland Publishing Co., Ltd., 1976. Dunlop, Ian. Degas. New York: Harper and Row, 1979. Emmons, Robert. The L i f e and Opinions of Walter Richard Sickert. London: Faber and Faber, 1941. Exteens, Maurice. L'Oeuvre Grave et Lithographie de F e l i c i e n Rops. 2 v o l s . P a r i s : Editions P e l l e t , 1928. Farwell, Beatrice. "Courbet's 'Baigneuses' and the Rhetorical Feminine Image". Art News Annual 38 (1972): 68 - 75. Fevre, Jeanne. Mon oncle Degas; souvenirs et documents ined.its r e c u e i l l i s et publies par P i e r r e Borel. Geneve: P. C a i l l e r , 1949. Fosca, Francois. Degas. P a r i s : Societe^ des Trentes, 1921. Galerie Georges P e t i t , P a r i s . Exposition Degas, peintres, pastels et dessins, sculp- tures, eaux-fortes, lithographies et monotypes. P a r i s , 1924. Giovanni Benedetto Cas t i g l i o n e : Master Draughtsman of the I t a l i a n Baroque. Forword by Anthony Blunt. Introduction and catalogue by Ann Perry. Philadelphia: Philadelphia Museum of Art, 1971. Guerin, Marcel. "Notes sur l e s monotypes de Degas". L'Amour de L'Art 5 (1924): 75 -80. Guyot, Yves. La P r o s t i t u t i o n : Revue et Augmentation. P a r i s : G. Charpentier, 1883. Halevy, Ludovic. Comment j e deviens graveur. P a r i s : Cadart, 1876. Hanson, Anne C o f f i n . Manet and the Modern T r a d i t i o n . New Haven, Conn.: Yale Univer-s i t y Press, 1977. Hemmings, F.W.J. The L i f e and Times of Emile Zola. London: Paul Elek, 1977. 79 Huisman, P., and Dortu, M.G. Lautrec by Lautrec. New York: Viking Press, 1964. Huysmans, J o r i s K a r l . Marthe, H i s t o i r e d'une F i l l e . Bruxelles, 1914. Jamot, Paul. Degas. P a r i s : Editions de l a Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 1924. Janis, Eugenia Perry. "Degas and the 'Master of Chiaroscuro'". Art I n s t i t u t e of  Chicago: Museum Studies 7 (1972): 52 - 71. . Degas Monotypes: Essay, Checklist and Catalogue. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1968. . "The Monotypes of Edgar Degas". Unpublished PhD Thesis, Harvard University, 1974. . "The Role of the Monotype i n the Working Method of Degas". Burli n g - ton Magazine CIX (January 1967): 20 - 27; and CIX (February 1967):71 -81. Joyant, Maurice. Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec: 1864 - 1901. P a r i s : Henri Floury, 1926. Kunzle, David. "The Corset as E r o t i c Alchemy". Art News Annual 38 (1972): 96 - 121. Lacour, Charles Jerome. La P r o s t i t u t i o n a Paris et a Londres, augment^ des chapitres sur l a P r o s t i t u t i o n pendant l a Si£ge et l a Commune. P a r i s : A s s e l i n , 1872. Lacroix, Paul. H i s t o i r e de l a P r o s t i t u t i o n chez tous l e s Peuples du Monde. P a r i s : Charpentier, 1867. Lafond, Paul. Degas. 2 v o l s . P a r i s : Floury, 1918. e v La Grande Larousse de XIX S i e c l e . P a r i s : Larousse, 1875. Larousse, P i e r r e , ed. Le Grand Dictionnaire de XIX 6 S i e c l e . P a r i s : L j b r a r i e Classique Larousse et Boyer, 1869. Lay, Howard. "Degas at Durand-Ruel, 1892". P r i n t C o l l e c t o r ' s Quarterly 9 #5 (Novem-ber - December 1978): 138 - 142. Lefevre Gallery, London. Degas, Monotypes, Drawings, Pastels and Bronzes. Foreword by Douglas Cooper. A p r i l - May, 1958. Lemoisne, Paul-Andre'. Degas et son Oeuvre. 4 v o l s . P a r i s : Paul Brame et Cesar de Hauke, 1946 - 49. Li c h t e n s t e i n , Sara. "Cezanne: A Sheet of Copies A f t e r Delacroix". Master Drawings 5 #2 (1967): 181 - 189. Manson, J.B. The L i f e and Works of Edgar Degas. London: The Studio, 1939. Meier-Graefe, J u l i u s . Degas. Translated from the German by J . Holyrod-Reece. London: Ernest Benn, 1923. Meugy, J . De 1'Existence de l a P r o s t i t u t i o n : P e t i t i o n s au senat, session de 1865. P a r i s : Gauthier et f r e r e s , 1 9 8 5 . M i l l a r d , Charles. The Srculptures of EA^ar Degas. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton Uni v e r s i t y Press, 1976. 80 Moore, Georges. Impressions and Opinions. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1891. Musee de L'Orangerie, P a r i s . Degas. Preface de Paul Jamot, 1937. . Degas, p o r t r a i t i s t e et sculpteur. Preface de Paul Jamot. Catalogue par Jacqueline Bouchet-Saupique et Marie Degaroche-Vernet, 1931. Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen. Edgar Degas, 1834 - 1917, skulpturer of monotypier  og tenigner og malerier. Septmeber 4 - 2 6 , 1948. Parent-Duchalet, Alexandre. De l a P r o s t i t u t i o n dans l a v i l l e de P a r i s . 3rd ed. Pari s : J.B. B a i l l i e r e et f i l s , 1857. Pickvance, Ronald. Degas: 1879. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Art Museum, 1979. . "Some Aspects of Degas's Nudes". Apollo 83 (January 1966): 17- 23. Pool, Phoebe. Degas. London: Spring Books, 1963. . "The History Paintings of Edgar Degas". Apollo 80 (June 1964): 306 - 11. Reff, Theodore. Catalogue of the Notebooks of Edgar Degas. 2 v o l s . Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976. . "Copyists i n the Louvre". Art B u l l e t i n 20 (December 1964): 550 - 68. "Degas and the L i t e r a t u r e of h i s Time - I". Burlington Magazine CXII (September 1970): 580 - 95. "Degas's Copies of Older Art". Burlington Magazine CV (January 1963): 243 - 48. , Degas: The A r t i s t ' s Mind. New York: Harper and Row, 1976. , Manet and Olympia. New York: Viking Press, 1977. Rewald, John. The History of Impressionism. 4th ed. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1974. R i v e r i e r e , Georges. M. Degas: Bourgeois de P a r i s . P a r i s : Floury, 1935. Rosenberg, Jacob. Great Draughtsmen From P i s a n e l l o to Picasso. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Un i v e r s i t y Press, 1959. Rouart, Dennis. Degas a l a Recherche de sa technique. P a r i s : Floury, 1945. . Degas Monotypes. P a r i s : Floury, 1948. and O r e i t t i , Sandra. Tout 1'Oeuvre Peint d'Edouard Manet. 2 v o l s . P a r i s : Wildenstein, 1970. Serullaz, M. Great Drawings of the Louvre: The French Drawings. New York: Georges B r a z i l l e r , 1968. 81 Seymour-Smith, Martin. F a l l e n Women. London: Nelson, 1969. Tyler, Parker. Degas/Lautrec. New York: Doubleday and Co., Inc., 1968. Venturi, L i o n e l l . Les Archives de 1'Impressionisme. 2 v o l s . P a r i s : Durand-Ruel, 1939. V o l l a r d , Ambroise. Degas Album: Ninety-Eight Reproductions. P a r i s : V o l l a r d , 1914. Wagner, Anne M. "Degas' C o l l e c t i o n of A r t : An Introductory Essay and Catalogue". Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Brown Uni v e r s i t y , 1974. Figure 2 Figure 4 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure I I Figure 13 Figure 15 Figure 16 Tignre 17 Figure 19 Figure 21 Figure 24 Figure 25 Figure 26 Figure 28 m 97 Figure 2j Figure 29 100 Figure 32 101 Figure 33 103 Figure 36 Figure 37 105 Figure 38 106 Figure 39 Figure 40 107 Figure 41 Figure 42 108 Figure 43 Figure 4 4 110 Figure 45 I l l Figure 46 Figure 48 113 Figure 49 115 Figure 52 Figure 53 Figure 54 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0095120/manifest

Comment

Related Items