The Practice of Her Profession: Florence Carlyle, Canadian Painter in the Age of Impressionism 9780773575257

Citation preview

the practice of her profession



McGill-Queen’s/Beaverbrook Canadian Foundation Studies in Art History Recognizing the need for a better understanding of Canada’s artistic culture both at home and abroad, the Beaverbrook Canadian Foundation, through its generous support, makes possible the publication of innovative books that advance our understanding of Canadian art and Canada’s visual and material culture. This series supports and stimulates such scholarship through the publication of original and rigorous peerreviewed books that make significant contributions to the subject. We welcome submissions from Canadian and international scholars for book-length projects on historical and contemporary Canadian art and visual and material culture, including Native and Inuit art, architecture, photography, craft, design, and museum studies. Studies by Canadian scholars on non-Canadian themes will also be considered. The Practice of Her Profession Florence Carlyle, Canadian Painter in the Age of Impressionism Susan Butlin

TH E P RAC T I C E OF H E R P RO F E S S IO N

F LO R E N C E CAR LY L E C A N A D I A N PA I N T E R I N T H E AG E O F I M P R E S S I O N I S M

SUSAN BUTLIN

McGill-Queen’s University Press k i n g ston & m on t re a l • lond on • ithaca

© McGill-Queen’s University Press 2009 isbn 978-0-7735-3509-1 Legal deposit first quarter 2009 Bibliothéque national du Québec Printed in Canada on acid-free paper This book has been published with the help of a grant from the Canadian Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences, through the Aid to Scholarly Publications Programme, using funds provided by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. McGill-Queen’s University Press acknowledges the support of the Canada Council for the Arts for our publishing program. We also acknowledge the financial support of the Government of Canada through the Book Publishing Industry Development Program (bpidp) for our publishng activities. Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Butlin, Susan, 1957– The practice of her profession : Florence Carlyle, Canadian painter in the age of Impressionism / Susan Butlin. Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn 978-0-7735-3509-1 1. Carlyle, Florence, 1864–1923. 2. Women painters – Canada – Biography. 3. Women artists – Canada – History. 4. Art, Canadian – 19th century. 5. Art, Canadian – 20th century. i. Title. nd249.c2776b88 2009

759.11

c2008-905785-6

This book was designed and typeset by Pamela Woodland in Minion 10.75/14

contents 

illustrations vii acknowledgments introduction xv plates xxi preamble 3

xi

part one formation, 1864–1890 1 First Lessons, 1864–1883 9 2 Contacts, 1883–1890 19

part two emergence, 1890–1899 3 The Bohemia of Paris, 1890–1896 39 4 Brass and Copper: Alternatives and Strategies, 1896–1899

part three a life apart from convention, 1899–1914 5 The Village, 1899–1903 103 6 Acclaim, 1903–1911 130 7 Losses and Gains, 1911–1914 167

part four out of the mainstream, 1915–1923 8 Resolutions, 1915–1923

197

appendix Short Biographies of Women Artists Mentioned in the Text 225 notes 235 bibliography 277 index 305

69

This page intentionally left blank

illustrations 

The title of each painting in this list and the text is, as far as known, that given by Florence Carlyle and under which she originally exhibited the work. An attempt has been made to include other titles under which the paintings have subsequently been known or exhibited. Measurements are given in centimetres, height before width. i Sketch of the Artist, ca. 1904, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 43.5 × 33 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery, gift of Florence Johnson, 1991. xix ii The Tiff, 1902, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 183.8 × 134.6 cm. Art Gallery of Ontario, Toronto. Gift of the Government of the Province of Ontario, 1972. 4 1.1 Portrait of My Mother (also known as Emily Youmans Carlyle), ca. 1911. Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 89.5 × 74 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery. Gift of Florence Carlyle, 1991. 10 1.2 Portrait of My Father, 1911, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 101 × 84 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery, gift of Florence Johnson, 1991. 12 1.3 Hand-tinted studio photograph of Florence Carlyle, ca. 1885–90, 32.5 ×25cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery, bequeathed by Florence Johnson, 1994. 17 1.4 Photograph of Englewood, the Carlyle family home in Woodstock, Ont., ca. 1923. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery. 18 2.1 H.R.H. Princess Louise, Duchess of Argyle, ca. 1878, artist unknown. Lithograph, 58.7 × 47.8 cm. Library and Archives of Canada, Ottawa, c-000065. 21 2.2 The Flowers’ Revenge, ca. 1888, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 106 × 13 cm. Private collection. 31 3.1 Studio Study of Male Model (also known as Study of Brittany Man [Front Pose, ca. 1890–96]), ca. 1893, Florence Carlyle. Coloured chalk on paper, 41.6 × 34.8 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery, bequeathed by Florence Johnson, 1994. 43 3.2 Une dame hollandaise (also known as Une femme hollandaise), 1893, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 61.2 × 44.7 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery, bequeathed by Florence Johnson, 1994. 53

viii illustrations 3.3 La vieille Victorine (also known as Victorine and Mère Adele), 1893, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 82 × 70 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery, bequeathed by Florence Johnson, 1994. 56 3.4 Summer, ca. 1901, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 100 × 57.9 cm. Collection of the Granite Club, Toronto. Photograph by Dave Starrett, Toronto. 65 4.1 An Interesting Chapter (also known as Dreams), 1897, Florence Carlyle. Medium and dimensions unknown. Reproduced from a photograph in the collection of Florence Johnson. Printed from “Painters and the Public,” Toronto Mail and Empire, Christmas 1898. 73 4.2 The Garden (also known as The Garden at Englewood), 1913, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 65.8 × 48.4 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery. 78 4.3 Golden Rod, 1901, Florence Carlyle. Oil on board, 45.7 × 40.6 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery. Purchased with funds from the Ministry of Citizenship and Culture and the Volunteer Committee, 1990. 79 4.4 Before Her First Communion, ca. 1903, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 84 × 58.5 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery. 80 4.5 “Impressions – Woman’s Art Exhibit.” Reprinted from Saturday Night, 6 March 1897. 82 4.6 Portrait of My Brother (also known as Portrait of Russell), 1898, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 118 × 81.3 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery. 94 4.7 Monday Morning, 1898, Florence Carlyle. Drawing of original painting reprinted from a review by James Mavor of the osa exhibition in Toronto, 1898. Location unknown. 96 4.8 Photograph of Florence Carlyle, ca. 1898. Reproduced from “Painters and the Public,” Toronto Mail and Empire, Christmas 1898. 99 5.1 Royal Canadian Academy exhibition, Ottawa, February 1900, showing Carlyle’s painting “We Beseech Thee to Hear Us, O Lord” (also known as “Amen”), 1900. Library and Archives of Canada, Ottawa, pa-200915. Original photograph by Topley Studios. 109 5.2 The Joy of Living (also known as Washerwoman), 1910, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 88 × 61.5 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery. 117 5.3 Badinage, 1903, Florence Carlyle. Reprinted from “Canada Lost Great Colorist in Florence Carlyle,” Katherine Hale, Toronto Star Weekly, 16 June 1923. 120 5.4 The Studio (also known as Reverie), 1898, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 58.6 × 76 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery, gift of Mrs Dasselaar, 1990. 121. 5.5 Royal Canadian Academy Exhibition, April 1903, Ottawa, showing Carlyle’s painting The Studio. Library and Archives of Canada, Ottawa, pa-200916. Original photograph by Topley Studios. 125 5.6 Calendar painting Miss Mischief, 1905, Florence Carlyle. Original lithograph, 25.4 ×14 cm. Reproduced from Osborne Company, Annual Catalogue [of Art

illustrations ix

6.1 6.2

6.3

6.4

6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9

6.10

6.11 6.12 7.1

7.2 7.3 7.4

Calendars], (New York: Osborne Company, 1906). Collection of the University of Delaware Library, Newark, Delaware. 128 Always Room for One More, 1908, Florence Carlyle. Chromolithograph, 73 × 39.7 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery. 133 Postcard, “Art Palace, Official Souvenir World’s Fair, St. Louis 1904,” Samuel Cupples Envelope Co., St Louis, Mo., “Sole World’s Fair Stationers.” Author’s collection. 137 Silver medal, front and back, awarded to Florence Carlyle, Louisiana Purchase Exposition, 1904. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery, bequeathed by Florence Johnston, 1994. 138 A Lily of Florence (also known as Miranda), ca. 1908, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 99 × 79 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery, gift of the Wingate Raiders Chapter of the iode, 1977. 144 Pippa Passes, 1908, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 66.7 ×66.7 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery. 149 Girl with a Bowl (also known as Girl with a Green Bowl), 1909, Florence Carlyle. Reproduced from “Art in Ontario,” Canadian Courier, 23 March 1912. 153 Mother and Child, 1910, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 86.4 × 71.1 cm. Private collection. 156 Grey and Gold, 1910, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 74.6 × 61.9 cm. Collection of the National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa. 158 The Moth, 1910, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 61.9 × 74.6 cm. Collection of the McIntosh Gallery, University of Western Ontario, bequest of Wilhelmina Morris McIntosh, 1940. 159 Canadian Art Exhibition at the Walker Art Gallery, Liverpool, England, July 1910, showing Carlyle’s The Joy of Living (1910). Library and Archives of Canada, Ottawa, c-98559. 161 High Noon (also known as Woman in a Doorway), ca. 1916, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 118 × 100 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery. 163 Photograph of the artist and her family at William Carlyle’s home in Wimbledon, England, in June 1911. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery. 166 Photograph of Emily and Florence Carlyle on verandah at Englewood in Woodstock, summer of 1912. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery, bequeathed by Florence Johnston, 1994. 168 Photograph of Florence Carlyle on the front lawn of Englewood, ca. 1912. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery, bequeathed by Florence Johnston, 1994. 171 Spring Song, 1912, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas. Reproduced from “Spring Song,” Canadian Magazine (March 1915). 173 The Threshold (also known as On the Threshold), 1912, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 100.7 × 80.4 cm. Ontario Collection, Government of Ontario, Toronto. 174

x illustrations 7.5 Photograph of Florence Carlyle and Judith Hastings at the Alpine Club, Vermillion Pass, 1912. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery, bequeathed by Florence Johnston, 1994. 177 7.6 Photograph of Florence Carlyle by M.O. Hammond, ca. 1912. Originally appeared in “Representative Women: Miss Florence Carlyle,” Toronto Globe, 8 June 1912. Library and Archives of Canada, Ottawa. 179 7.7 Afternoon,Venice, 1913, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 43.5 ×55.3 cm. Collection of the National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa. 185 7.8 The Guest, Venice (also known as Les Amies, Venice), 1913, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 73 × 38.1 cm. Collection of the Woodstock Art Gallery, gift of Leonora McCartney in memory of her parents, Ethel and Frank DeRice, 1986. 186 7.9 Photograph of Yew Tree Cottage, Crowborough, Sussex, ca 1919. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery, bequeathed by Florence Johnston, 1994. 187 7.10 Photograph, sitting room, Yew Tree Cottage, ca. 1914. Originally published in “Canadian Women in the Arts” Maclean’s, October 1914. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery, bequeathed by Florence Johnston, 1994. 188 8.1 Photograph of matron, nurses, and staff of Roehampton House Convalescent Auxiliary Hospital, 1915. Reproduced from “Roehampton House as a Hospital,” Country Life, 14 August 1915. 199 8.2 Photograph of Florence Carlyle in her nursing uniform, ca. 1915. Reproduced from “Paintings Typify Artist,” Toronto Telegram, 16 May 1925. 200 8.3 Portrait of Lady Drummond, 1918, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 102.3 × 76.8 cm. Beaverbrook Collection of War Art 19710261-0119, Canadian War Museum. 209 8.4 Photograph of Florence Carlyle, ca. 1922, in the garden of Yew Tree Cottage. Reproduced from “Pictures by Florence Carlyle,” Hector Charlesworth, Saturday Night, 6 June 1925. 218 8.5 Still Life: My Studio Corner, ca. 1921, Florence Carlyle. Oil on canvas, 66.5 × 54.5 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery. 221

acknowledgments 

Like most academic theses that have been transformed into books, this project has been long in the making. It was begun more than ten years ago, during which time I have accrued many debts of gratitude and drawn widely on the support and expertise of friends, colleagues, and teachers. It is a great pleasure to acknowledge all those who have contributed to the writing of this book. The genesis of this project was my master’s thesis on Florence Carlyle. I owe a debt of gratitude to Dr Angela Carr and the late Natalie Luckyj for their willingness to supervise the project as a thesis, and for the comments and advice which they gave me during the course of its progress. When the idea to turn it into a book presented itself, I realized that there were many new avenues and questions I wished to consider. The present volume benefited from this broadening of scope and much additional research in both private and public archives, and from my doctoral research on a related subject. Many helpful people associated with archives, libraries, and art societies deserve to be recognized for their kind assistance. In Ottawa thanks are due the staff at both Library and Archives Canada and the library and archives of the National Gallery of Canada. I am delighted to acknowledge the assistance of Peter Fyvie and Kim Diamond at the Granite Club, and Lynn Cumine of the Lyceum Club and waac. Also in Toronto, many thanks are due Linda Cobon at the cne archives, the staff of the Archives of Ontario, the E.P. Taylor Research Library and Archives at the Art Gallery of Ontario, and the Toronto office of Sotheby’s. Warm thanks are due to Margaret Thompson and Patricia Garrow and the teachers at Havergal College who opened their archives to me. In London, Ontario, I wish to thank W. Glen Curnoe at the London Room, London Public Library, and the staff of the McIntosh Gallery at the University of Western Ontario.

xii acknowledgments

I owe a debt of gratitude to Marjorie Skeoch, Janice Kneale, and the late Florence Carlyle Johnston for their kind assistance in sharing information with me. At the Woodstock Art Gallery my heartfelt thanks go to Maria Ricker, Anna-Marie Larsen, and other staff for their inestimable help. Thanks also to Marian MacCausland. My research extended to the United States and England. I would like to express my thanks to all those involved, in particular Melissa De Medieros at the Knoedler Galleries in New York City, and Debra Randorf of the New York Historical Society. I am also grateful for the assistance of Heather Lemonedes at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Pat Lynagh at the Library of the National Museum of American Art, and Cornelia Moynihan at the National Museum of Women in the Arts, Washington, D.C. Special thanks also to Timothy Murray at the Special Collections, of the University of Delaware Library for his generosity. In England the following institutions provided essential information: Carlyle’s House Museum, London; the archives of the Royal Academy of Arts, London; and the Royal Archives, Windsor Castle. I especially appreciate the support and hard work on my behalf by the editorial staff of McGill-Queen’s University Press, in particular by Jonathan Crago, Joan McGilvray, and my copy-editor, Maureen Garvie. Thanks also to Aurèle Parisien who guided the book in the early stages of publication. I extend my warm thanks to each of my academic readers for their wise criticisms, insightful suggestions, and encouragement. I am grateful to the Aid to Scholarly Publications Committee for awarding the grant to publish this book. I would also like to thank the Beaverbook Canadian Foundation for choosing the book as the first in their new series on Canadian art and culture. In the School of Canadian Studies at Carleton University I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to Mary Casaubon and to our former director, Dr François Rocher, for their encouragement. Special thanks are due my friends Ron Dicks, Jean Murray, Matthew Borden, and my mother-in-law, Ev Smith, for their unflagging enthusiasm. Finally, to all my family and friends, I must say that your personal and unstinting support throughout the many years of writing this book has kept me going during some of the most trying periods. The love and support of both my parents, the late Rose and Earl Cartwright, played a crucial role in my being able to bring this project to fruition. I thank my sisters and brother for their encouragement and interest in my work. I would like to thank my

acknowledgments xiii

husband, Derek Smith, who has given me much support and encouragement (and is always there to help me solve my computer problems). I would also like to acknowledge the contributions of my constant canine companions, Rupert and Louis. I wish to express my gratitude to my late husband, Dr George Butlin, most especially for his good humour and intellectual inspiration. This book is dedicated to my mother, Rose Warnick Cartwright, who instilled her own love of history in all her six children. Susan Butlin, Ph.D. Ottawa, 2008

This page intentionally left blank

introduction 

Florence Carlyle (1864–1923) was both a woman painter and a painter of women. She was an artist who invented herself because there were few examples to emulate or maps to follow on the journey she chose to make. Role models for the kind of strategically organized, self-defined career that Carlyle lived were rare in Canada when she began to establish herself in the 1880s. She found unusual ways of doing so, such as working part of the year at lucrative calendar art commissions for a New York firm. Her life and career as an artist were prototypical examples of the “New Woman’s” approach to professional identity. During the height of her career in the early twentieth century, Carlyle not only attained critical success, winning prizes in Canada and the United States, but her paintings engaged and delighted the viewing public. Prior to 1914 she was considered by critics and peers to be among the leading Canadian women artists of her generation. More Canadian women were setting out to work as professional artists than ever before, the first significant group of professionally trained women artists in Canadian history, yet recent publications remind us how little is known about the history of women artists in Canada before 1920. With the exception of Emily Carr, few of Carlyle’s female colleagues who knew professional success during their lifetimes have their lives, careers, and artistic production thoroughly documented in scholarly studies.1 Painters such as Sarah Holden, Elizabeth McGillivray Knowles, and Sydney Tully and sculpture and craft artists Winnifred Kingsford, Marion Living, and Louise Tully are now largely forgotten. Their achievements and production have been obscured by an incomplete archive and marginalized by the canon of Canadian art history. Recent scholarship on painters Mary Hiester Reid, Helen McNicoll, and Laura Muntz 2 has only begun the process of recovery and re-examination. Carlyle’s paintings evolved from the amateur work characteristic of middle- and upper-class women’s pictorial production of the mid-nine-

xvi introduction

teenth century. Together with her Canadian women colleagues, Carlyle began painting in this feminine pictorial tradition. Women’s social role presented barriers that tended to compromise their aspirations to earning a living as equals alongside male artist colleagues. The era’s definitions of femininity and professionalism did not readily admit women to a career as “artist.” The professions were traditionally defined as a male preserve, with women positioned as amateurs. Nonetheless, Carlyle continued toward her goal, negotiating her way through competing values, which often involved difficult personal choices. During her lifetime many aspects of women’s traditional roles and status in society were being questioned and in some cases changing. As Carlyle developed from amateur to professional artist, she encountered barriers that challenged her to react against them, to seize opportunities and attain freedom in her career and her role as a woman. From 1890 onwards, finding institutional structures in place that limited her education, she stretched her ambitions, venturing into unknown territory by pursuing art instruction in France. Women of Carlyle’s generation developed networks of support for their quests to enter and work within professional art practice. These included friendships, cultural societies, and art exhibiting clubs. Studying in France, Carlyle found that women art students sustained one another in acquiring specialist art training; supportive friendship between women was an important recurring factor in forging a professional career. Canadian women’s cultural societies, a part of the broader women’s club trend of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, were another important factor in advancing women’s professional aspirations. The Women’s Art Association of Canada (waac), the National Council of Women of Canada (ncwc), and the Heliconian Club in Toronto were some exhibition groups with which Carlyle and her women colleagues were associated. Carlyle questioned social traditions that marginalized women and privileged her male colleagues. She brought her own strategies to her career, striking out into the world of commercial art. Women artists intent on supporting themselves by their brush could not afford to be uncompromising, and Carlyle successfully diversified her art production to make sales and win commissions. Yet her artistic compromises carefully balanced the necessity of supporting herself by selling commercial and other art production with her professional goal of continuing her personal production and exhibiting this at “high art” venues.

introduction xvii

If Carlyle is less well known today than she was during her lifetime, this is probably more a reflection of gender politics and the relative place of figural painting in the stylistic hierarchy of Canadian twentieth-century art rather than of the quality of her work. The waning of recognition after her death in 1923, her fall into marginality and ultimately obscurity in Canadian art writing, also occurred with many of her contemporaries who were women artists. Carlyle’s national prominence as an artist is evident in the surveys of Canadian art written during the 1920s and 1930s,3 but by the late 1930s, the style of art she represented was long out of vogue. Collectors lost interest in her, and after 1945 surveys of Canadian art excluded mention of her. Beginning in the 1970s, as a part of the rediscovery of Canadian women artists dating from Natalie Luckyj’s From Women’s Eyes, Carlyle’s career and production began to receive scholarly attention in the form of several short exhibition catalogue entries and articles and two master’s theses.4 In 1995 the first (and until the present volume, the only) full-length scholarly work to focus solely on her appeared in the form of my master’s thesis, “Making a Living: Florence Carlyle and the Negotiation of a Professional Artistic Identity.” 5 The present book has emerged in part from the initial research and ideas first put forth in that thesis, and from my subsequent work on Canadian women artists. Many of Carlyle’s generation of Canadian women artists including her friends and contemporaries Sydney Strickland Tully, Laura Muntz, and Elizabeth McGillivray Knowles, once renowned as professionals on a par with male peers, were also largely written out of the histories of Canadian art. Feminist work has brought attention to this marginalization, resulting in a questioning of the canon that excluded women artists. Feminist art historians are seeking to redress this imbalance with the recovery of these women’s careers and reintroduction of their work. In Canada over the past several decades, a number of articles, exhibition catalogues, books and theses have appeared that correct the assumptions of Canadian art history that there were few, if any, Canadian women artists of any consequence in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century.6 These studies have done more than broaden the base of scholarship on women artists –they have called attention to the need for a revision of the canon of Canadian art history. The work and careers of Canadian women artists form part of a lost cultural heritage. Carole Gerson’s studies of nineteenth-century Canadian women writers observe a similar negation of their professional careers. Such evidence

xviii introduction

points to the fact that a national cultural canon, whether artistic or literary, is a social construct imbued and inscribed with the prejudices and attitudes of social and gender power.7 How can Canadian art history be considered whole and complete when it is missing more than one-third of its history? Once women artists are re-inscribed in the canon and the challenge has been met, as Natalie Luckyj wrote, “to reconstruct the complex and multilayered social and artistic contexts” of the practice of Canadian women artists, Canadian art history will look and read very differently.8 That Carlyle was a woman, a Canadian, and a figure painter were all equally significant in determining her distinctive art and career. At a time when women were encouraged to paint only as lady amateurs, how did she come to leave small-town Ontario to study painting in France for five years? When she began her early art education in the 1870s, there were few professional women painters in Canada. How did she establish her art practice and earn her living in Canada and New York City? The answers to these questions may only be understood by placing her life and work within the broader social and historical context of her time. In her own way, Florence Carlyle exemplified many qualities of the late nineteenth century New Woman, a prominent example of a self-sufficient, independent single woman. Like her contemporaries, a pioneer generation of women professionals and reformers who included poets, journalists, and writers like E. Pauline Johnson, Kathleen Blake Coleman, and Sara Jeannette Duncan, Carlyle was a serious champion of a new ideal for women. That ideal was one in which they could lead self-determined professional lives, effectively creating their own stories. Carlyle painted the world she knew intimately. In seeming contradiction to her own fast-paced, urban professional life, her work offers glimpses into a primarily female world and into the contemporary domestic spaces and experience of women. Her multi-layered images are of that sphere of activity that engaged most women of her time and class, aptly named “spaces of femininity” by Griselda Pollock.9 Carlyle depicted the women with whom she was most familiar, middle-class women at leisure or engaged in light household domestic tasks, and women servants at work in the home. She admired feminine concerns and honoured and cherished women’s domestic role in creating and maintaining these spaces of femininity. Carlyle’s creative work and life in New York City should be seen within her generation of men and women, a number of whom worked for periods in the United States. The Canadian poet Archibald Lampman wrote in 1892

introduction xix

fig. i Sketch of the Artist, Florence Carlyle, ca. 1904. [plate 1]

that American magazines were “attracting to them most of our literary and artistic effort.”10 Canadian journalist Sara Jeanette Duncan (1862–1922) was hired by the Washington Post in 1885 and went on to have an internationally successful career as a writer.11 While some Canadian artists pursued careers in the United States and abroad in the 1890s, it was rare for Canadian women artists to do so and even rarer, as Carlyle did, to succeed. Carlyle had to define an identity for herself as both woman and professional artist. Her self-portrait, Sketch of the Artist (1904), reveals very little. In contrast to her colour-filled portraits of women in bright sunshine, in

xx introduction

her self-portrait she is veiled and in a shadowy, ill-defined space (fig. i); she has depicted herself in a way that is simultaneously dramatic and secretive. The painting hints at her own life experience, one of ambiguities and contradictions in which she struggled to establish a public identity for herself. Yet she also maintained an independent, even mysterious side; perhaps because of the times in which she lived, she was protective of her private life, cautious of interviews, and often preferred to keep her own counsel. In direct contradiction of these conventions, however, the life of a professional artist required her to seek notice and publicity and to enter the world of commerce, effectively working as an entrepreneur. Like the suffragists of her day, Carlyle dreamed of what might be possible, but she also went further, engaging in the new age of the mass-circulation media, carefully managing a wide range of resources. A major concern in this study is to reveal how she shaped a professional identity while negotiating traditional social conventions, how she overcame barriers that discouraged women’s participation in professional life and became a role model for the generation of aspiring Canadian women artists. Her novel solutions to the challenges of women’s entry into the commercial and professional world contributed to a new model of the art professional in Canada, one accessible to women.

plate 1 Sketch of the Artist, ca. 1904. Oil on canvas, 43.5 × 33 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery.

plate 2 The Tiff, 1902. Oil on canvas, 183.8 × 134.6 cm. Art Gallery of Ontario, Toronto.

plate 3 Portrait of My Mother, ca. 1911. Oil on canvas, 89.5 × 74 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery.

plate 4 Portrait of My Father, 1911. Oil on canvas, 101 ×84 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery.

plate 5 Studio Study of Male Model, ca. 1893. Coloured chalk on paper, 41.6 ×34.8 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery.

plate 6 Une dame hollandaise, 1893. Oil on canvas, 61.2 ×44.7 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery.

plate 7 La vieille Victorine, 1893. Oil on canvas, 82 ×70 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery.

plate 8 Summer, Florence Carlyle, ca. 1901. Oil on canvas, 100 ×57.9 cm. Collection of the Granite Club, Toronto.

plate 9 The Garden, 1913. Oil on canvas, 65.8 ×48.4 cm. Also known as The Garden at Englewood. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery.

plate 10 Golden Rod, 1901. Oil on canvas, 45.7 ×40.6 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery.

plate 11 Before Her First Communion, ca. 1903. Oil on canvas, 84 ×58.5 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery.

plate 12 Portrait of My Brother, 1898. Oil on canvas, 118 ×81.3 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery.

plate 13 The Joy of Living, 1910. Oil on canvas, 88 ×61.5 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery.

plate 14 The Studio, 1903. Oil on canvas, 58.6 ×76.7 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery.

plate 15 Calendar painting Miss Mischief, copyrighted by the artist, 1905. Original lithograph, 25.4 × 14 cm.

plate 16 Mother and Child, 1910. Oil on canvas, 86.4 × 71.1 cm. Private collection.

plate 17 Grey and Gold, 1910. Oil on canvas, 74.6 ×61.9 cm. Collection of the National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa.

plate 18 The Moth, 1910. Oil on canvas, 61.9 ×74.6 cm.

plate 19 High Noon, ca. 1916. Oil on canvas, 118 ×100 cm.

plate 20 The Threshold, 1912. Oil on canvas, 100.7 ×80.4 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery.

plate 21 Afternoon,Venice, 1913. Oil on canvas, 43.5 ×55.3 cm. Collection of the National Gallery of Canada.

plate 22 The Guest, Venice, 1913. Oil on canvas, 73 × 38.1 cm. Collection of the Woodstock Art Gallery.

plate 23 Portrait of Lady Drummond, 1918. Oil on canvas, 102.3 ×76.8 cm. Collection of the Canadian War Museum.

plate 24 Still Life: My Studio Corner, ca. 1921. Oil on canvas, 65.5 ×54.5 cm. Collection Woodstock Art Gallery.

the practice of her profession



This page intentionally left blank

preamble 

The evening of 28 February 1902 in Toronto was crisp and clear. Under a starstudded sky, horses and buggies pulled up in swift succession outside 165 King Street West for the opening-night private viewing of the Ontario Society of Artists thirtieth annual exhibition. Within, the voices and laughter of the people thronging the galleries rose above the sounds of the musical ensemble. They were all there, the leaders of Toronto society and the Canadian art world. Florence Carlyle stepped down from the taxi.1 Entering the gallery, she passed her large oil of quarrelling lovers (fig. ii), hung in the place of honour opposite the main entrance.2 Fortune had indeed followed her – followed on the heels of adversity, perseverance, and years of struggle. Now, at last, her years of hard work were starting to pay off. Head high, making the most of her small stature and showing to advantage the elegant violet silk crepe ensemble she’d bought in New York, she moved into the crowd. Heads turned to greet her. George Reid, who would within days announce his retirement from the presidency of the Ontario Society of Artists, shook her hand. He conveyed the regrets of his wife, Mary Hiester Reid, unable to be there as she was laid up with a severe cold. Carlyle’s friends greeted her warmly. Laura Muntz, newly elected to the executive council of the Ontario Society of Artists, moved to her side. “How are you, Florence? Just back from New York? There’s something I must talk with you about.” “I steal off to New York when I can, but I’ve been at my studio at home in Woodstock lately, freezing to death trying to finish some work.” “But you know your way around New York. Where could I find a studioapartment, not too dear?” Muntz asked. “Perhaps we could even share for a few months? I’d like to submit a few things to the Society of American Artists.” Carlyle nodded. “I might know a place on West 23rd Street that would suit us both. I will write to – ”

4 preamble

fig. ii The Tiff, Florence Carlyle, 1902. Awarded the osa Prize of the Year in 1902 and a silver medal in 1904 at the Louisiana Purchase Exhibition in St Louis, Missouri. [plate 2]

Muntz interrupted her. “Oh, look over there, Florence – who is that talking with Edmund Grier in front of your Tiff ?” The women eyed the two smartly dressed men engaged in conversation in front of Carlyle’s prominently hung painting.3 “That’s E.F.B. Johnston, the critic,” said Carlyle. “I try not to concern myself with critics, but Johnston can also afford to buy what he likes. I hear he has quite a collection. Excuse, me, will you, Laura?”

preamble 5

“Of course!” The two men greeted her as she approached. “Miss Carlyle! As you see, we are captivated by your work,” exclaimed Grier, a Toronto portraitist. “And these two tempersome young folks turning their backs on one another – who are they?” asked Johnston, gesturing to her painting. “I posed that around the dinner table at home,” Carlyle replied. “They are my younger brother and sister. My brother could not keep from laughing and talking, so I was forced to paint him with his back turned.” “Very engaging, my dear,” said Johnston. “A lover’s quarrel. You got it right.”4 Throughout the evening, as Carlyle circulated among the critics, artists, and patrons, she smiled to herself. The performance was over, but the game had only just begun.

This page intentionally left blank

part one

Formation

1864–1890

This page intentionally left blank

1 First Lessons 1864–1883 

What must a woman have in order to work as a professional artist? She needs food and shelter, tools, materials, and education. She must have a source of inspiration, something about which she feels it is worth making art. And, not insignificantly, she requires support. That aspiring women artists today have access to these things may be taken for granted; however, the reality was very different in Canada in the 1860s when Florence Carlyle was born. At this time a woman’s family and the broader social context could either facilitate or discourage her pursuit of a career. Without a doubt these factors helped to shape her desires and aspirations. Florence Carlyle was born on 24 September 1864 in the town of Galt in Canada West, now southern Ontario, two years after her brother William. Her place as eldest daughter would play an important role in her life, particularly in her relationships with her two younger sisters and three younger brothers.1 The Carlyles belonged to the conventional, educated middle class of British descent. There was no precedent in the immediate family of a serious, professional commitment to art. In one instance, however – in the early career of Florence Carlyle’s mother – the family had come close to breaking the customary social boundaries for women. Emily Carlyle (1834–1913), born Youmans, was originally from Picton, Ontario (fig. 1.1). The land grant received by a United Empire

10 formation, 1864 – 1890

fig. 1.1 Portrait of My Mother, Florence Carlyle, ca. 1911. Emily Youmans Carlyle (1834–1913), the artist’s mother, was about seventy-eight when Carlyle completed the portrait. [plate 3]

Loyalist ancestor was described as a good one, and the family had prospered. Emily was raised in a comfortable home with servants. Like other women of her generation and class, she was groomed for a life of domestic responsibility, motherhood, piety, and gentle accomplishment in arts such as needlework, watercolour painting, music, and singing – les arts des femmes. She was also given training in a profession. She studied to be a teacher at Fort Edward Collegiate Institute in New York State, receiving an education that would have been regarded as superior for a woman of her time. In the late 1850s she accepted a position as the principal of a ladies’ college in North Carolina. The decision to work so far away from home (unlikely to have

First Lessons, 1864– 1883 11

been encouraged by her family) reveals that Emily Youmans was no “shrinking violet” but possessed an independence of mind and a confident personality. After working for several years, she was compelled by the outbreak of the American Civil War to return to Canada in 1860.2 In 1861 she married William Carlyle, whom she had met at Fort Edward Collegiate. In keeping with fixed notions of appropriate feminine behaviour and school-board regulations, she gave up her teaching career when she married. William Carlyle was born in the English Lake District town of Cockermouth in 1834 (fig. 1.2). His most notable family connection was that his father, John Carlyle, was the half-brother of the eminent essayist Thomas Carlyle (1795–1881).3 Florence Carlyle was thus the grand-niece of one of the most influential thinkers of the nineteenth century, well known throughout Canada and Britain, and commonly referred to as “the Wise Man of Chelsea.” 4 About 1838, when William was a child, John Carlyle immigrated to Canada, settling his family in Upper Canada near the village of Mount Pleasant south of Brantford.5 Canada appealed to the Carlyles, and in 1843 William’s uncle, Alexander Carlyle, half-brother to John, settled on a farm in nearby Burford, west of Brantford.6 Educated first at the local “common school,” William was determined at an early age to leave the farm life behind. He attended the local normal school and graduated at the head of his class at the age of seventeen.7 After continuing his education for two years in New York State at Fort Edward Collegiate,8 he returned to Ontario and studied for several years at the University of Toronto and Toronto’s Congregational Theological Institute. He supported these years of study by teaching part-time. He may also have had aspirations to pursue a career in medicine, which he studied for a time, but these plans were abandoned when Emily returned to Canada.9 Accepting a teaching position in Hamilton, Ontario, William married Emily in the summer of 1861. Their first child, named after his father but always called Will, was born in Hamilton the following year. In 1864, William Carlyle took a new position as principal of the Galt Graded School in Galt, Ontario, and the family moved to that town. Their first daughter, christened Florence Emily, was born in September. In 1871, William Carlyle was appointed county school inspector for Oxford County, an important and prominent position, and the family moved again, this time to Woodstock, the largest town in the county. An English tourist of 1856 described it: “Woodstock stands on undulating ground and is a completely rural, straggling place, like a large village with a number of gentlemen’s homes in it … It contains six churches, a gaol,

12 formation, 1864 – 1890

fig. 1.2 Portrait of My Father, Florence Carlyle, 1911. This portrait of William Carlyle has the original label from the artist’s dealer, O.B. Graves, on verso. [plate 4]

a court-house, a grammar school, a mechanics’ institute, some mills and boasts of a newspaper … Full of promise, as is the whole land, that, after all, is the garden of the province.” 10 By the 1870s Woodstock had become the centre of a prosperous rural community in Canada West, the western portion of the united province of Canada created in the 1840 Act of Union. The town was served by the newly completed Great Western Railway and occupied a strategic location within a rich agricultural area, accessible to the markets and population centres of Toronto and the United States. The home environment into which Florence Carlyle was born was one of contrasting personalities and high ideals. Family anecdotes describe her

First Lessons, 1864– 1883 13

father as austere and stern. These characteristics were attributed to his impoverished background and the rigid self-discipline he was forced to acquire during his student years. His children respected and admired him but feared him as well.11 In his professional life he was said to have possessed “a rugged individuality that manifested itself in his … questioning of both teachers and scholars.” He encouraged “originality in the scholars he addressed” and was to have a significant impact on his two eldest children.12 In contrast, Emily Carlyle worked to create a gentler way of life in the family home. While she encouraged excellence in education, she was especially interested in furthering her children’s interests in music and art. Florence Carlyle and her elder brother received much of their early education from their parents. As they worked at household chores, Emily lectured them on history and geography. In the evenings their father read with them and discussed the works of Shakespeare, Addison, and their great-uncle, Thomas Carlyle. These lessons and later discussions and debates over the dinner table, attesting to a lively intellectual life and strong emphasis on learning and education, were to continue throughout Florence Carlyle’s life.13 Encouraged by her mother to develop her talent for painting, Florence Carlyle’s birthday gifts were frequently “watercolour boxes.” 14 Her attraction to colour had begun early in childhood; she recalled “the first time I saw colour. Nurse brought in a big pink blossom … It seemed so large … and so pink. I have never seen an apple blossom like that since.”15 As a girl, she amused herself by painting flowers in the garden.16 This fascination with paint and visual imagery continued to develop: “In childhood, play for her consisted in making copies of pictures. In this way she taught herself to paint.” 17 She progressed to a preference for drawing and painting figures: “We children all used to draw a great deal … and the others would draw everything else, but when it came to the heads of people and animals, I always had to do it.” 18 In 1874, to accommodate the growing family, the Carlyles moved to Norwich Street. By this time Florence Carlyle had been a student in Woodstock’s public and grammar schools for three years, since the age of seven.19 While her artistic facility seemed to emerge almost effortlessly, her mother’s influence nurtured it. Emily Carlyle likely had no intention of encouraging her daughter to enter a long-term artistic career; she was merely promoting the development of an amateur gift. With this in mind, she organized a class of young art students, including Florence, from among the children of neighbours and friends. Setting up a small studio for the class in a house on Simcoe Street in Woodstock, she engaged a professional artist

14 formation, 1864 – 1890

“from New York” to conduct regular classes. 20 Although little information is available, it appears that the artist was William Lees Judson (1842–1928), who settled in nearby London during the late 1860s and earned a living as an artist by selling landscapes, soliciting portrait commissions, and teaching art.21 In 1872–73 Judson studied painting in New York with John Beaufain Irving (1825–1877). On his return home, he established a studio,22 regularly advertising his art classes and portraiture business in the London newspapers. It was at this time that Emily Carlyle likely approached him to make trips into Woodstock to tutor her daughter and the other aspiring artists.23 Florence Carlyle was between nine and fifteen years old when Judson taught her the rudiments of drawing and painting. Although she had from an early age shown skill and interest in drawing the faces and heads in her own and her friends’ pictures, her instruction from Judson, with his acknowledged skill as a portraitist and figure painter, undoubtedly encouraged her preference for such subjects. Her mother was fortunate in finding such a talented teacher for although it was prosperous, Woodstock remained somewhat of a provincial backwater. In addition to taking an art class at London’s Hellmuth Ladies College, Judson instructed the young Paul Peel (1860–1892) between 1875 and 1877, when Peel entered the Pennsylvania Academy of Art. Peel would go on to become one of Canada’s most celebrated late-nineteenth century artists. Judson eventually moved to California to a position as a professor of painting at the University of Southern California.24 Little else is known about Florence Carlyle’s childhood and adolescence. Mid-nineteenth century ideas on the education and socialization of young women gave priority to inculcating domesticity. Carlyle would have grown up amid commonly held assumptions about femininity that took for granted that a woman’s primary interests would be marriage and family. A young woman was taught to think that she was a success if she fulfilled the roles of wife and mother and to put the activities of “breeding, nurturing and servicing” first in her life.25 Art had long been one component of a middle-class girl’s education, alongside music, familiarity with light literature, and conversation. Well-to-do Canadian families encouraged their daughters’ accomplishments in such areas as embroidery, sketching, and painting, sometimes hiring private instructors as Emily Carlyle had. Working-class families placed more emphasis on practical arts such as weaving, quilting, knitting, and clothing design, skills that were passed on within the home environment. Although Carlyle and her sisters’ experience fell somewhere between these

First Lessons, 1864– 1883 15

two models, their education in the arts was nonetheless designed to prepare them for their domestic roles.26 In 1878, when Carlyle was fourteen, she began studying at the co-educational Canadian Literary Institute, later renamed Woodstock College. This was considered at the time a more than adequate education for women, but William and Emily Carlyle saw it as important to educate not only their eldest daughter but her two younger sisters in such an institution. Although William held a respected position as school inspector, the family was not wealthy and the commitment would have been a financial burden. The Literary Institute, one of several Baptist educational colleges established across Canada during the nineteenth century, was a private school relying upon tuition fees. The Carlyles were not Baptists themselves, regularly attending Woodstock’s St Paul’s Presbyterian Church; however, Baptist schools welcomed all those “who might wish to have their children educated in a Christian setting dedicated to practical educational goals.” 27 Known to be progressive, concerned with providing “the necessary skills and the background for its young men to join the forward march of society,” 28 Baptist schools also tended to place a high value on female education. Within Baptist colleges there was “surprisingly little discussion over whether females should be educated.” The education of women was “closely allied with, even a contributing factor to, all the other aspirations … of the Baptist body.” 29 In entering the vibrant co-educational atmosphere of the Canadian Literary Institute, only a short walk from her home, Carlyle took the first step in a career pattern of cultivating and aspiring to intellectual and artistic excellence. In 1878 when she began her studies, the facility had the status of a “junior college.” The school served not only southern Ontario but all of Canada. It accepted non-Baptists as teachers as well as students, and by 1881 the institute had twelve instructors and over two hundred students.30 It offered an extensive elementary and secondary program of education. Carlyle’s curriculum centred around literature, art and music, each subject apparently holding an equally strong interest for her.31 She never lost her early love of music, and while her talent at the piano remained at the level of accomplished amateur, she drew from her musical experience to enrich her art. Literature too captured her imagination. She was inspired by the romantic poetry of Elizabeth Barrett Browning and could recite it from memory. She also admired the essays of Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882). Artists in Europe and North America by mid-cen-

16 formation, 1864 – 1890

tury were concerning themselves with revealing nature’s “truth” unmodified by humankind. Emerson’s essays such as “Nature,” “Beauty,” and “Art” spoke of art as important in preparing artists for the wider experience of finding their place in the natural universe.32 Yet it was her ability in art that distinguished Carlyle from her peers. At the Institute her art instructor was Professor Jones H. Farmer. Although little is known of his methods, one of Carlyle’s classmates, Amos Jury, attended Farmer’s classes and later attained a professional art career in London, Ontario.33 Another friend and classmate, Joseph Whiteside Boyle (1867–1923) went on to a career in the Yukon as a prospector developing the Klondike goldfields. The Boyles lived in the east end of Woodstock near the Carlyle home.34 In 1881, when Carlyle was seventeen (fig. 1.3), the family moved to Englewood, a property on the edge of town, “a handsome, old-fashioned, English style house with spacious grounds and handsome trees.” 35 Photographs show a compact house with a small upper storey and a large white verandah along the front (fig. 1.4). Behind the house was a red barn, a flower garden, and a utility yard for hanging washing, with groves of trees and open fields beyond. This gracious setting, close to nature, ensured that the house became one of Carlyle’s favourite places, providing the setting for many of her paintings. Although family and teachers had encouraged her artistic ability, Carlyle did not focus on painting to the exclusion of all else. She had wideranging interests outside of the arts, enjoying riding and tennis in particular.36 She had an exuberant, cheerful personality, and for this reason perhaps was always known to her family and friends as “Bird.” So commonly used was this nickname that her cousin Helene Youmans, who maintained a lifetime friendship with her, rarely heard her called anything else.37 As the eldest daughter in a large family, Carlyle had many practical responsibilities including the frequent care of the younger children. A family member later recalled that she loved “the joyous attachment they felt toward each other, and the harmony that prevailed among them in spite of strongly differing opinions, ranging from the personal habits of each other through politics and religious beliefs down to the correct way to eat soup.” 38 Family debates around the dinner table were rescued from acrimony by the “keen sense of humour” with which the whole family was endowed.39 Carlyle recalled of this time, “Just when we seemed to be on the verge of an explosion, someone was sure to make the witty remark that made us all appear ridiculous, and the tension was broken. Our most serious arguments always ended in gales of laughter.” 40

First Lessons, 1864– 1883 17

fig. 1.3 Hand-tinted studio photograph of Florence Carlyle, ca. 1885–90.

The family was intimately connected to the community. William Carlyle held a position of responsibility as school inspector for the county and had many acquaintances. He also served in municipal affairs on the local town council. Emily Carlyle was active in fundraising and charity work. An annual garden party hosted by the family on the grounds at Englewood was considered an important local social event.41 They were regular church-goers, and neighbours recalled the three “Carlyle sisters wending their way to New St. Paul’s Church on Sunday mornings.” 42

18 formation, 1864 – 1890

fig. 1.4 Photograph of Englewood, the Carlyle family home in Woodstock, Ont., ca. 1923. Carlyle’s home studio, on the ground floor of the red barn, was located to the left of the house.

During the 1880s, while Carlyle continued her studies at the Canadian Literary Institute, Will went to McGill University in Montreal.43 Although both parents placed a high value on education for all their children, Carlyle’s brothers were advantaged over their sisters. All three sons were educated at McGill. At a time when women were beginning to enter Canadian universities, none of the Carlyle daughters attended. Money was tight at times; school-teaching was not “conducive to luxurious living … Most of what surplus there was went toward the education of the boys.” 44 Carlyle had to be content with eight years of study at the local Canadian Literary Institute, and she absorbed all she could from this opportunity.45

2 Contacts 1883–1890 

With parents who believed in the value of education, Florence Carlyle and her sisters, Maud and Lillian, were considerably better off in this regard than most girls of their generation. Typical of the era, instruction in the social arts was accorded equal importance with formal education in their early life. Emily Carlyle, coming from a prosperous family background and given the family’s central position in Woodstock, ensured that her daughters acquired the accomplishments considered essential by society. She taught both her sons and daughters the rudiments of music on the family piano; in addition, the girls were instructed in the art of singing to their own accompaniment. A firm grounding in grooming and deportment as well as in the established rules of social conduct was the special focus as a young woman approached marriageable age. Knowing how to enter a room and sit with cumbersome skirts becomingly arranged, knowing when to remove gloves, and demonstrating skill in the art of exchanging pleasantries were all part of this program. Social occasions were, after all, not only a venue in which to display charm and respectability but a prelude to that all-important prize, marriage. Emily Carlyle was described as statuesque in appearance, and portraits of her done in later years show a thoughtful expression. Maud and Lillian, delicately featured like their mother, were considered attractive. Florence was far from the Victorian ideal in appearance, but early photographs show

20 formation, 1864 – 1890

a vivacious young woman with a head of curly golden brown hair, an unruly tendril invariably escaping over her eyes 1 (fig. 1.3). In 1833, when she turned nineteen, painting was regarded as a genteel lady’s accomplishment to be pursued in moderation. A popular book of the time, Mrs Ellis’s Family Monitor and Domestic Guide, warned mothers of young girls against letting them pursue any accomplishment further than social necessity demanded: “It must not be supposed that the writer is one who would advocate, as essential to woman, any extraordinary degree of intellectual attainment, especially if confined to one particular branch of study … To be able to do a great many things tolerably well, is of infinitely more value to a woman than to be able to excel in any one. By the former, she may render herself generally useful; by the latter she may dazzle for an hour.” 2 Carlyle was coming of age at a time when many role models for women were society figures. In the United States this included women such as Consuelo Vanderbilt, who married the Duke of Marlborough, and Irene Langhorne of Virginia, whose husband, Charles Dana Gibson, immortalized her graceful beauty in his artwork. In Canada, prominent women tended to be British: the wife of the governor general of Canada from 1872 to 1878, for example, Lady Harriot Rowan Hamilton Blackwood, countess of Dufferin and Ava. The Irish-born “high-spirited beauty” was the first governor general’s consort to travel with her husband through Western Canada. In 1876 their spectacular fancy-dress ball at Rideau Hall was widely reported, and Lady Dufferin’s championing of entertainments during her years in Ottawa contributed much to Canadian social life.3 Queen Victoria’s daughter Princess Louise (1848–1939) arrived with her husband, the next governor general, the Marquis of Lorne, in Canada in October 1878 (fig. 2.1). In an 1879 article entitled “The New Ideal of Womanhood,” Agnes Machar wrote, “It may well be hoped that [Princess Louise’s] living example among us will stimulate many of her Canadian sisters to cultivate at once mental gifts and physical vigour.” 4 The princess was a distinguished painter and sculptor and, following the example of her mother, Queen Victoria, also a supporter of women artists.5 There were few other role models for aspiring Canadian women artists of the time. Susanna Moodie (1803–1885) sold her flower paintings to supplement her income; in 1868 her daughter Agnes Fitzgibbon (1833–1913) illustrated Moodie’s book, Canadian Wild Flowers. In 1870 Frances Anne Hopkins (1838–1919) exhibited sixteen paintings and sketches at the Art Association of Montreal, the first exhibition of such a large body of work by

Contacts, 1883– 1890 21

fig. 2.1 H.R.H. Princess Louise, Duchess of Argyle, ca. 1878, artist unknown.

a woman artist in Montreal.6 Charlotte M. Schreiber (1834–1922) reached a pinnacle of artistic achievement, and her career presented a vivid role model for aspiring women artists of Carlyle’s generation. Schreiber emigrated to Canada in 1875 and, before her election in 1880 as the first woman academician to the newly formed Royal Canadian Academy of Art, had gained glowing reviews of her painting in national periodicals. In 1876 she was elected to serve on the board of the Ontario School of Art and Design.7 The Canadian Monthly of June 1877 described her as “a very great acquisition to the Ontario Society [of Artists].”

22 formation, 1864 – 1890

Carlyle was intent upon a career as an artist, a goal seen at the time as diverting a woman from her proper pursuits of home, husband, and children. An unpublished manuscript by Carlyle’s cousin Helene Youmans allows us a rare insight into the artist’s attitude toward marriage.8 Carlyle confided to her cousin that she loved her painting career and in her life priorities, placed it first. Her unequivocal statement, although made later in her life, nevertheless leaves no question that she believed she must choose between marriage and career as an artist. Her passionate statement that there was “no other way” helps us to understand her exceptional resolution and commitment to her art from an early age.9 At the age of nineteen, having outgrown local fairs and competitions, she set her sights higher and wider. In September 1883 she showed “fifteen or sixteen paintings” in the Ladies Department of the Toronto Industrial Exhibition (tie), later the Canadian National Exhibition or cne.10 Billed as “the people’s annual holiday” and “Canada’s Great Fair,” 11 the tie offered zoological and horticultural displays, scientific and commercial exhibitions, side shows, and an art gallery. It was a bold move for a young woman from smalltown Ontario to enter artwork in the foremost annual fair of the Dominion. Toronto was a short journey from Woodstock via the Grand Trunk Railway. The fare in August 1883 for a return one-day ticket between nearby London and Toronto, the line that passed through Woodstock, was a modest $1.25. The fairgrounds bordering Lake Ontario could also be accessed by steamer ferries making stops every half-hour at Toronto’s Parliament and Yonge Street wharves. The exhibition of September 1883 was attended by 172,000 people.12 One could tour the fairgrounds in “an electric railway,” ascend in a “captive balloon,” or tour the exhibition departments, enjoying the many band concerts. In the evenings Professor Hand of Hamilton amazed the crowds with his descent from the main tower in his “Chariot of Fire” during his fireworks display. The fair gardens were illuminated with an amazing novelty – electric light! 13 The fair was to be officially opened by the governor general and his wife (fig. 2.1). Princess Louise Caroline Alberta, the fourth daughter of Queen Victoria, had married John Campbell, later Marquis of Lorne (1871–1900) and 9th Duke of Argyle (1900–15) in 1871. At the time of their visit to the Toronto Industrial Exposition, the governor general was nearing the end of his tenure and the couple were making a “farewell visit” before returning to England. They had showed a great interest in the arts and had been instrumental in the founding of the Royal Canadian Academy of Arts in 1880.14 Carlyle’s colleague, the artist and writer Harriet Mary Ford (1859–1939), later wrote, “The

Contacts, 1883– 1890 23

Royal Canadian Academy of Arts was founded by H.R.H. the Princess Louise and the Marquis of Lorne. I put the Princess first, advisedly, believing that she had more to do with the institution than the Marquis.”15 The vice-regals’ formal opening of the exposition took place on Wednesday, September 12th, at 2 p.m. Given that Woodstock was only a short train journey away, it is likely that Carlyle attended the ceremony. Emily Carlyle’s United Empire Loyalist heritage suggests that the family would not have passed up the chance to see one of the queen’s daughters in person. The Marquis of Lorne, Princess Louise, and George, Prince of Wales, arrived by train in the governor general’s specially outfitted coach. The Countess and Earl of Carnarvon, the ex-secretary of state for the Colonies, were also present, as were Canadian dignitaries such as Lieutenant Governor John Beverley Robinson and the Honourable Oliver Mowat.16 After the opening address, Princess Louise, attired in gold-coloured satin costume and bonnet and carrying a green silk parasol, moved through the displays with her husband.17 The party first toured the Fine Art Gallery, with works by John Colin Forbes (1846–1925), Thomas Mower Martin (1838– 1934), Paul Peel (1860–1891), and Charlotte Schreiber.18 They then continued to the Ladies Work Department, where Carlyle and one of her younger sisters, presumably Lillian, were exhibiting their paintings. The princess paid close attention to the offerings, as one journalist recorded: “The visitors lingered some time … in this area, the Princess was particularly admiring of crewel work and china painting.” 19 Carlyle had entered paintings in several different media and was described in the Woodstock paper as “one of the principal exhibitors of painting on china.” 20 Her painting of white water-lilies and one of roses by her sister “attracted the attention of Princess Louise,” who commented on the artists’ skill. Both works were on a black background of ebonized wood, a popular technique of the time. Later that day the Princess had several paintings, among them Florence Carlyle’s, sent for “close inspection’ to Toronto’s Queen’s Hotel where she was staying. The royal desire to purchase the painting of white water-lilies was “communicated” to Carlyle, who offered it as a gift. However, the princess “insisted on buying [it], at the same time writing a kind note to the young artist.” 21 Clearly, she understood the significance of paying for the work of artists, in particular work by young women artists, in this public and commercial context. The news made headlines in the Toronto papers, including the Globe and the Daily Mail:

24 formation, 1864 – 1890

h.r.h. princess louise and canadian artists Miss Florence Carlisle [sic], of Woodstock, Ont., has had a special honour bestowed on her handiwork …Her Royal Highness Princess Louise expressed admiration at the artist’s ability … [and] selected one of the collection [of paintings by Carlyle], the subject being “Water-lilies.” 22 The Woodstock paper reported the triumph on page one with the headline “Honor to Woodstock” and reprinted the Globe’s report verbatim.23 There is no evidence that the Lornes purchased work from any other Canadian artist at the exhibition. The quality of Carlyle’s work must have stood out strongly. Although the art displayed in both the Ladies’ Department and in the Art Gallery was listed in the program under the general heading of Fine Art Department, the Ladies’ Department in fact was in a separate location on the upper level, far removed from the art gallery in its large space on the main floor.24 In addition to displaying professional and amateur work by women, the area in which the Ladies’ Department was located was also devoted to work by children “under 14 years of age” and work from public and charitable institutions, “reformatories and asylums.” 25 In the early 1880s few women exhibited work in the tie’s fine art gallery. Those who did, such as Charlotte Schreiber, still the only woman charter member of the Royal Canadian Academy, had solid academic art training, often under foreign masters.26 Given Carlyle’s lack of professional training and contacts at this time, she likely had no option but to enter her work in an alternative department. Moreover, her painting, whatever its quality, would not have been considered appropriate to the tie gallery since she worked in media such as china and ebonized wood panels. Had she wished to enter a picture in the traditionally more elevated media of watercolour or oil, she could have done so in the “Amateur” class 103 of the Fine Arts Department. That she did not enter a painting even in this secondary “High Art” class indicates her firm grounding at this time in the ladylike accomplishments for useful and ornamental decoration in the home. Although Carlyle had already shown a precocious talent for drawing figures from life, she and her sister had chosen to exhibit still-life compositions. By the mid-nineteenth century, in both Europe and Canada, this genre, regarded as a decorative art that tested manual dexterity without requiring intellectual content, was one in which women had gained considerable critical acclaim: “Fruits and flowers seem by divine appointment the property

Contacts, 1883– 1890 25

of ladies.” 27 Floral paintings were considered “expressions of innate femininity” for women artists, and mastery of this genre was a “natural” activity for a woman.28 After Carlyle’s celebrity status, albeit fleeting, conferred by Princess Louise’s patronage of her artwork, it might be thought that her parents would have sent her to an art school in Toronto or further afield to Pennsylvania for more advanced training. Surely she would have relished such an opportunity. However, she returned to her art classes at the Canadian Literary Institute, attending regularly for the next three years. Her father’s attitude toward higher education for his daughters is summed up in an article published during the artist’s lifetime which attested that “Dr. Carlyle considered that girls could acquire what [higher education] was necessary in the practical performance of domestic duties.” 29 As a man who held a position of respectability in a conservative town in rural Ontario, it wouldn’t do for his nineteen-year-old daughter to make a spectacle of herself travelling unchaperoned to study art in urban centres full of worldly temptations. Her reputation might well have been irreparably ruined. With her artistic ambitions for the time being confined within the boundaries of the acceptably feminine, Carlyle made the most of what Woodstock could offer. In about 1885 a group of the town’s young women with high intellectual aspirations banded together to form the Saturday Reading Club, a women’s reading and discussion group. Carlyle was a founding member. Her friends included women who would go on to have important professional careers in the history of Canadian writing and journalism: Blanche B. Hume, who gained a national profile as an editor, Byrne Sanders, who also later worked as an editor, Margaret Clarke Russell, who became a writer, Mrs Ruttan, who wrote a column as “Dorothy Dale,” and Carlyle’s close friend, Isabel Ecclestone Mackay, who would become a celebrated poet and author.30 For many participants, including Carlyle, the Saturday Reading Club provided the sustenance necessary for the forging of a feminine professional identity. It should be recognized as a manifestation of “matronage,” a term revived by the art historian Deborah Cherry to mean the support system that coexisted between women and assisted them in the advancement of their cultural aspirations.31 That such a circle of friendships and culture among women flourished in 1880s Woodstock argues for an ambitious and independent self-image emerging among women of Carlyle’s generation, “defying masculine jeers that women never stick together” and other less subtle patriarchal barriers designed to restrict women’s independence.32

26 formation, 1864 – 1890

In 1886, the twenty-two-year-old Carlyle graduated from the Canadian Literary Institute, and the question of art studies further afield again arose. Her brother Will was studying mining engineering at McGill University in Montreal; 33 she, however, could not look to her father to fund advanced studies for her. During the summer months of the next five years, she travelled to Grimsby Park near St Catharines to conduct a summer school for budding artists,34 saving her wages with the thought of furthering her professional art knowledge. However, possibly even that autumn, with the backing of her mother, she left Woodstock to study in Toronto. It is likely she stayed with her father’s elder brother, Dr James Carlyle, and his family at their home in Toronto on Gerrard Street.35 By the 1880s women’s education in Toronto had made great strides. A university education had been a possibility for women at Toronto’s University College since 1880, and Trinity College had been granting women degrees since 1883.36 However, Carlyle was not interested in pursuing academic studies; her ambitions were focused on furthering her artistic training. In the mid-1880s professional art training for women in Canada was offered at only a small number of facilities. The Art Association of Montreal School opened in 1879. William Brymner (1855–1925) assumed the directorship in 1886, modifying the school on the lines of the Parisian academies. Opportunities in Toronto were more limited. To Carlyle, Toronto must have seemed a place of boundless opportunities, but Jimmie Rembrandt, an art critic for the Toronto publication Saturday Night, summed up the state of the visual arts in the city in the mid-1880s: “For a city of its size and population Toronto is an artistic sloth … art is not understood here as it should be, all things considered.” 37 Efforts to establish a school of art and an art gallery in Toronto had been going on since 1857 when Dr Egerton Ryerson was instrumental in establishing the Educational Museum of Upper Canada, housed in the teacher’s training college, the Normal School, located in St James Square.38 The museum’s collection was overwhelmingly made up of plaster casts of statuary and painted copies of European masters, although in 1875 it expanded its mandate to include works by living Canadian artists.39 In 1872 the Toronto-based Ontario Society of Artists had been founded and held its first annual exhibition in the city the following year.40 In 1876 the forerunner of the Toronto Art School opened its doors.41 In 1884 Esther K. Westmacott opened Toronto’s Associated Artists’ School of Art and Design in rooms on the second floor of the Yonge Street Arcade.42

Contacts, 1883– 1890 27

Founded with the intent of offering women an education in design, the school offered classes in the applied arts such as carpet and textile design, ceramics, and carving. In 1887 the curriculum changed to focus on drawing, painting, and modelling. London painter Mary Ella Dignam (1857–1938) began teaching there in 1886, and headed the school in 1889. Dignam, a graduate of the Woman’s Institute of Technical Design in New York City who had briefly studied at the New York Art Students’ League and in Paris, planned the course of study to prepare pupils “for the New York and Paris schools.”43 In Toronto in 1887 she founded the Woman’s Art Club, incorporated in 1892 as the Woman’s Art Association of Canada (waac). The most prestigious option in art education open to Carlyle in 1886 was the Toronto Art School, located since 1882 in the Education Department Buildings of the Toronto Normal School.44 From 1882 until 1886, it had been closely associated with the Ontario Society of Artists (osa) and known as the Ontario Society of Artists School of Art.45 However, by 1884 disagreements over government control of the school had led to a gradual disassociation from the artists’ society.46 In 1886 the school was renamed the Toronto Art School, retaining this title until 1890. The school offered nineteen areas of art training, with the greatest variety of classes of the four Ontario art schools. These included foundation courses in “practical geometry and linear perspective,” architectural drawing, “shading from antique,” “sculpture in marble,” “repousse work,” “electro-metallurgy,” and carving in wood. Carlyle would have excelled in her drawing and painting classes, classes in “freehand drawing,” “Drawing from Models,” “Charcoal from Life,” and classes in watercolours and oil painting.47 A classmate in the drawing class later recalled that Carlyle was admired for the “quality of her art,” even though she freely admitted to classmates and instructors that “she had not studied much.” 48 Besides the challenges of advanced training in the studio classes, Carlyle was exposed to a wider variety of art than at any time in her life so far. In drawing class, students would have been expected to draw from plaster casts of notable “modern” European and classical statuary.49 For inspiration, a student might sketch in the “Egyptian artists’ room” filled with plaster casts and artifacts from ancient Middle Eastern cultures. The collection of over 250 casts of portrait busts of “famous men from all ages” encrusted the walls of the school’s central open rotunda and might have provided inspiration in their varied physiognomy for Carlyle’s burgeoning interest in painting the human form. The life drawing classes presented the model modestly draped.

28 formation, 1864 – 1890

While both men and women students attended classes together, exposure to the undraped human figure was limited to casts of classical statues including the popular Venus de Milo.50 In addition, the painting collection would have exposed Carlyle to the possibilities with paint and canvas.51 The classes helped her to establish friendships and make contacts with her contemporary art students and established Canadian artists. Teachers at the school throughout the decade represented many leading names in Canadian art at this time: William Cruikshank, John W.L. Forster, F. McGillivray Knowles (1859–1932), Lucius R. O’Brien, and Charlotte Schreiber.52 In 1887 Will Carlyle graduated from McGill with first-rank honours in Natural Science, winning the British Association gold medal. He continued on at the university with graduate studies, well on his way to fulfilling his father’s goal of high intellectual achievement for his sons. At some time during 1887, however, Florence Carlyle’s studies at the Toronto Art School inexplicably ended. She returned to teaching art in St Catharines to earn money to carry her on toward further studies. Her sale of a painting to Princess Louise in 1883 was widely remembered in Woodstock, so that when in January 1888 she made plans to set up a small studio offering painting classes in the town, she had no trouble attracting students. She placed an advertisement in the local newspaper: “Art Class. – Miss Florence Carlyle, having returned from St. Catharines, intends beginning immediately a class in painting. If found desirable she purposes holding the class in a centre part of the town. Any wishing to join will please communicate with Miss Carlyle.” 53 Working as an art instructor was one option available to Carlyle to achieve financial independence and to sustain a professional practice. Women were beginning to gain prominence as art educators in ladies’ colleges and girl’s schools in Canada. Teaching was viewed as a respectable occupation for unmarried women, an extension of the maternal role.54 Laura Muntz (1860– 1930) returned to Canada around 1888 after a brief period of study in London, England, and opened a studio in Hamilton above Thompson’s Art Store. She taught art classes there, saving for further training and travel.55 In the fall of 1891 she went to Paris to begin study at the Academie Colarossi. Carlyle considered using the red barn behind her family’s home as a classroom, but heating it would be a problem. Presumably in a family with seven children there was little space for a studio in the house. This dilemma was solved when Carlyle set up a teaching studio in the larger residence of one of her students, Carrie Scarff, at 368 Simcoe Street in Woodstock. The class was made up of local young women including Margaret Whitelaw,

Contacts, 1883– 1890 29

Annie Richards, and Willy Pollock.56 Carlyle also gave private classes in oil painting to more advanced students. Her cousin Cecile Davis from Uxbridge, Ontario, was one of these. In addition to painting in oils, Davis worked in diverse media including wood carving, leather craft, and china painting.57 The Woodstock art class, as well as allowing Carlyle to save for future studies, enabled her to buy canvas, paint, and frames for her work. Perhaps she visited the artist’s supply store operated by E.N. Hunt at 190 Dundas Street in nearby London, where “English watercolours and oil colours” sold for five and six cents a tube, respectively.58 During this time she also associated with artists in the nearby city. Her old teacher, William Judson, was still running classes there and advertising his portrait studio.59 Here she fraternized with the “slender colony of art students … being taught the rudiments of sketching by local mentors.” 60 Other artists who ran studios in London and advertised portrait businesses locally at the time included Judson’s brotherin-law, John Powell Hunt (1856–1932), Frederic Marlett Bell-Smith (1846– 1923), and William Milroy.61 An artist with whom Carlyle had a long acquaintance was Paul Peel. In early 1880 he had returned home to London after studies at the Pennsylvania Academy of Arts and briefly opened a studio with his sister Mildred, a sculptor and painter. Brother and sister both exhibited work at London’s Western Fair and the Toronto Industrial Exhibition throughout the 1880s. Paul Peel went off to Paris for further study, returning home for the summer and autumn of 1883 and receiving mixed reviews for the paintings he exhibited at the tie’s art gallery.62 He went back to France but continued to make regular visits home. His career was closely followed by his friends and reported in the local papers.63 He and Mildred were to prove valuable acquaintances for Carlyle, instrumental in the translation of her talent to the professional level. If Princess Louise’s purchase of her painting in 1883 was Carlyle’s first glimpse of the larger world, her next taste of its potential for glamour and excitement came five years later. In the intervening years, the influence of life drawing classes at the Toronto Art School had shifted her emphasis away from paintings of flowers to the human figure. By late 1887, at the age of twenty-three, she had begun to paint images of women, a subject that would concern her for the rest of her life. One of her early figure paintings was the dramatically titled The Flowers’ Revenge (fig. 2.2). The subject is unusual and ambitious. In the centre of the painting a beautiful young woman lies on a bed with her chemise and hair in disarray. Her attitude shows her in the

30 formation, 1864 – 1890

throes of a dream; still not awake, she has flung herself to the edge of her bed. The atmosphere of Gothic fantasy is further heightened by the demonic incubus squatting behind her pillow. In the foreground, emerging from an apparently innocuous vase of flowers, a snake hovers menacingly over the sleeping woman. There is a resemblance between Carlyle’s painting and The Nightmare (1781) by the Swiss-born painter Henry Fuseli (1741–1825), an outstanding figure of the Romantic movement. Fuseli was active in England, and by the 1880s his work in reproduction would have been well known in Canadian schools of art including the osa school in Toronto. Although Carlyle never recorded what she was attempting to express in The Flower’s Revenge, the painting lacks the dark atmosphere of the Fuseli. Her female subject embodies the traditional concept of feminine beauty and presents woman as object of the male gaze. Yet significantly in this work, at this relatively early stage in her career, Carlyle was grappling with issues of women’s experience of sexuality. Carlyle family folklore explains the painting by suggesting that the flowers are seeking their revenge on the woman because she has dared to be more beautiful than they.64 At a superficial level this explanation allows us to engage with the work; however, the painting achieves powerful narrative that goes well beyond convention. Carlyle depicts a woman in the grip of a nightmare, and the scene is charged with erotic overtones. The painting is a revealing investigation of sexual imagination and, indeed, may express the artist’s awareness of her own sexuality. The narrative seems to suggest conflict between a woman’s sexuality and contemporary moral restrictions on women’s sexual activity and knowledge. The artist’s treatment of this theme is an introspective exploration, complete with a range of erotic sensations and fantasy creatures. Danger or sin is implicitly linked with female sexuality. An observation by Rosemary Betterton on the nudes by Carlyle’s contemporary Suzanne Valadon (1865–1938) might apply equally to The Flowers’ Revenge: Betterton notes that such works focus “upon women’s sense of the relationship between their state of mind and their experience of their bodies.” 65 In 1887 Carlyle was unique among Canadian women artists in exploring the themes of women’s sexuality, pleasure, and morality so explicitly in her artwork. The painting was not sold but was hung in the family home until 1891 when Carlyle gave the painting as a wedding present to Will and his fiancé, Helen Muirhead Spiers, said to be the model for the painting.66 Carlyle was now at a crossroads. In 1888 she was twenty-four years old. At this time a unmarried woman in her mid-twenties was considered to be

Contacts, 1883– 1890 31

fig. 2.2 The Flowers’ Revenge, Florence Carlyle, ca. 1888.

“on the shelf.” Social convention dictated that she put her efforts into finding a husband, not an artistic career. Carlyle, however, wanted to become a professional artist. She had to make a serious commitment, perhaps training abroad, leading a self-determined life, and eventually earning a living – none of which was readily compatible with marriage. Marriage was expected to put an end to women’s professional activity. Victorian British artists such as figure painter Anna Mary Howitt (1824–1884) and portraitist Anna Mary Severn (1832–1866) both gave up careers upon marrying. Figure painter and illustrator Florence Claxton (fl. 1859–79) stopped exhibiting at the Royal Academy after she married, instead exhibiting her work in less conspicuous venues.67 Harriet Hosmer (1820–1908), a successful American sculptor, identified the conflict between art and marriage and childbearing in a letter of 1854: “An artist has no business to marry. For a man, it may be well enough, but for a woman, on whom matrimonial duties and cares weigh more heavily, it is a moral wrong, I think, for she must either neglect her profession or her family, becoming neither a good wife nor a good artist. My ambition is to become the latter, so I wage eternal feud with the consolidating knot.” 68 Not only did women artists of Carlyle’s generation believe that marriage would jeopardize their independence and freedom to work at their art practice, but they likely shared the belief of other women professionals who thought that working full time at a career would inhibit their ability to be a

32 formation, 1864 – 1890

good mother. “It’s such a hard life for any woman,” Laura Muntz warned her niece. “I wanted you to marry and have children … and you can’t do both – don’t try to do both.”69 Some Canadian women artists including Muntz and Charlotte Schreiber did try to combine career and marriage, but both these women had established art practices prior to marrying in middle age. Marriage at a younger age – before thirty – was relatively rare among Canadian women artists of this era. Another of Carlyle’s contemporaries, Canadian figure painter Sophie Pemberton (1869–1959) from Victoria, British Columbia, the first woman to be awarded the Prix Julian for portraiture in Paris in 1899, gradually turned away from her emerging career after marrying in 1905.70 The career of figure and landscape painter Marion Nelson (1866–1946), from St Catharines, followed a similar course after she married Frank Hooker, a lumber merchant and widower with six children about 1908 and moved to the town of Selkirk, Manitoba.71 The aspiring sculptor Clara Louise Peel (1862–1938), sister of Paul and Mildred, was interviewed for a newspaper article in February 1888 in the Church Street studio in Toronto she shared with Mildred; twentysix-year-old Clara is quoted as saying that she hoped to study art in France like her siblings.72 Twelve months later she married Reuben Booth Belden (1848– ?) and had two children. Although she socialized with the art community in Toronto, she never fulfilled her desire to have a career as a sculptor. Others among Carlyle’s contemporaries married fellow artists, perhaps thinking to combine matrimony with a professional career. Mary Hiester, a successful flower painter, married George Reid; George Reid’s second wife was the painter-printmaker Mary Wrinch. Elizabeth McGillivray Knowles married F. McGillivray Knowles, and Gertrude Spurr married William Cutts. All these women were able to continue their careers with moderate success. Less successful in professional terms were the marriages of two of Carlyle’s close friends, figure painter Sarah Holden (act. 1886–1907), from Belleville, Ontario, and Edith Lalande Ravenshaw (act. 1890–1922), originally from Surrey, England. Holden’s career was launched in Canada in the 1890s following her Parisian art studies but declined after her marriage.73 Similarly, following years of art studies abroad, Ravenshaw’s painting career floundered after her marriage to Canadian portraitist Andrew Dickson Patterson (1854–1930).74 The potential negative influences of marriage on a woman’s profession would have become apparent to Carlyle during coeducational studio classes in Toronto and later when she studied art abroad. At some point she had

Contacts, 1883– 1890 33

acquired a belief in a woman’s ability and right to pursue a professional career – her mother’s role in the formation of this attitude was no doubt a key factor. Emily Carlyle passed on to her eldest daughter the importance of self-confidence and determination: “We were taught … to respect ourselves, never to belittle our power to attain the goal we set, but let that goal be high.” 75 It is also likely that her mother’s sacrifice of her professional independence was not lost on Carlyle. In 1888, as Carlyle celebrated her twenty-fourth birthday, she reached a private decision. Having exhausted the limits of regional facilities and teachers, she was ready to go abroad. This was an adventurous decision by the standards of the time and would have required a strong belief in herself. Carlyle was intent on shedding her amateur practice, which signified dependent domesticity, and she assumed the expectation that she would become selfsupporting, economically and socially. She would have to make her own way in the world. There is no evidence that her father expressed anything but displeasure at this plan. However, even if his daughter had managed to gain his consent, the fact remained that her family was not prosperous enough to support her aspirations. They had often “faced difficult times and all the children at a very early age learned to be self-reliant and how to ‘make do.’” 76 First to lend support to Carlyle’s ambition was her mother. Although we will never know what domestic dramas preceded this endorsement, it appears that once her daughter was firmly committed to this course, Emily Carlyle supported her. She may have hoped that in time her daughter would return home to pursue a conventional path. Or, in facilitating this transition to professional training, she may also have been articulating her own unfulfilled wish to have continued her teaching career.77 At any rate, it was she who helped raise the money,78 for several years offering room and board to a student attending the cli and setting aside this income for her daughter.79 Will, in Montreal pursuing his own education, lent moral support to his sister’s plans but at this point could not contribute financially.80 The true measure of a professional artist in Canada in the 1880s and ’90s was art training abroad in Paris, London, or New York. Difficult though it was, Canadian women of Carlyle’s generation were beginning to gain access to the advanced art educations that would allow them access to the art world as professionals on par with male colleagues. Many of Carlyle’s contemporaries began their formal art training close to home, and then on the recommendation of a teacher, continued their further studies abroad.81 Laura Muntz followed her studies at the Toronto Art School around 1882–83 with

34 formation, 1864 – 1890

training at the South Kensington School of Art in London, England. However, to earn some of the money for further art studies herself, she returned to Canada, teaching in Hamilton several days a week and conducting a class at St Margaret’s Girls School in Toronto.82 Sydney Strickland Tully, (1860– 1911), a grandniece of the pioneer writer Catharine Parr Traill, finished at the osa school about 1884, studied for two years at the Slade School of Art in London under Alphonse Legros, and then continued in Paris’s ateliers. Tully was from a prosperous family; her father was architect Kivas Tully, and she had no worries about financing her trips abroad.83 Sarah Baldwin Holden began her art studies at the Art Association of Montreal (aam) School under William Brymner and Robert Harris (1849–1919) during the 1880s, before leaving for the Paris ateliers. Florence H. McGillivray (1864–1938) studied at the Toronto School of Art under William Cruikshank before moving on to Paris.84 In the next generation of Canadian women artists, Montreal painter Helen Galloway McNicoll (1879–1915) also attended the Slade School. Her early art studies in Canada were with Brymner at the aam School. In 1902, on Brymner’s advice, she continued her studies in London, England.85 The closest and so least expensive alternative to European study for Carlyle would have been one of the well-respected American art academies such as the Pennsylvania Academy of Art or the New York Art Students’ League. Kingston-born painter Elizabeth Adela Armstrong (1859–1912) had studied from 1877 to 1881 at the New York Art Students’ League under William Merritt Chase. Subsequently she studied in Newlyn in Cornwall, England, marrying the English painter Stanhope Forbes in 1889.86 Painter Mary A. Bell (later Eastlake) (1864–1951) studied in Montreal with Robert Harris and at the New York Art Students’ League under William Chase. Bell’s friend Mary Ella Dignam, later the founder of the Women’s Art Association of Canada, also studied in New York. And Canadian Mary Martha Phillips (1856–1937) and Montreal landscape and figure painter Margaret Houghton (1865– ca. 1922), later co-principals at the Victoria School of Art in Montreal, both studied abroad during the 1880s and early ’90s, Phillips at the Art Students’ League in New York, and Houghton in Paris with Bouguereau.87 Rather than the United States, Carlyle looked to Europe, then the most popular destination for Canadians seeking professional art training. In the fall of 1889 she might have scanned local newspapers for information on the cost of overseas travel and begun making plans to make her dream a reality. To the right of the theatre bills published in the London Advertiser, the steamship ticket offices promoted “Ocean Passages” with the “lowest

Contacts, 1883– 1890 35

fares.” The Cunard Line offered one-way passages from New York to England with cabin accommodation beginning at $60, less for steerage passengers. From England, Cunard offered further connecting passages to Le Havre in France and other ports on the continent.88 Carlyle started to assemble her plans. Along with most of the London-area art community, she was well acquainted with the rising star of Paul Peel. When Peel was awarded a medal the next spring for his painting After the Bath at the Salon of the Société des Artistes Français, all the local papers praised his achievement.89 If, in their pride for a local boy made good, they exaggerated his success somewhat, the national and civic honour was nonetheless of great significance to the artists of London’s Western Art League who had followed his fortunes. In mid-July 1890 Peel returned home from Paris in response to a telegram telling him of his mother’s serious illness.90 His intentions were apparently to stay only for three weeks. He left his wife, the artist Isaure Verdier, and their children in Paris but brought with him a large number of paintings, perhaps intending to capitalize on Canadian publicity about his recent success at the Salon. The Western Art League celebrated his return with an official reception, where he and Carlyle renewed their acquaintance.91 Peel’s stories of the Parisian ateliers and the inspirational teaching of the great masters fuelled Carlyle’s ambition. This was the opportunity she had been waiting for. When Peel returned to Paris, she would go too. Something akin to panic over came her when she realized she was so close to realizing her dream. She later wrote that this time should have been a “wonderful event in a girl’s life! But simple words cannot express the tumult of fear, joy and marvel that spread in my soul – a soul so remote from Europe and so profoundly inexperienced!” 92 Suddenly she was conscious of her provincial origins and fearful of appearing gauche. Despite her self-doubts, she put the case to her parents. She had the remainder of the summer to convince them and prepare to leave. As Paul Peel travelled to Toronto to visit his sisters and made sketching trips to Niagaraon-the-Lake and the St Lawrence River, Carlyle waged a battle of wills in Woodstock.93 She received no backing from her father.94 An article written during her lifetime stresses that she herself saved enough money from teaching to take her to Paris.95 However, Emily Carlyle also contributed, and would regularly cable to Carlyle the money she made from taking in a boarder. Although a reluctant advocate of a professional career for her daughter, she was nonetheless her most enthusiastic fan.96

36 formation, 1864 – 1890

When Paul Peel, his sister Mildred, and their father, John Peel, left Canada, bound for Paris on Monday, 3 November 1890, Carlyle went with them.97 Thus chaperoned, she travelled by rail to New York City. The party may have sailed to the port of Antwerp on the Red Star Line ship Westerland, which left New York on Wednesday, 5 November.98 Florence Carlyle was entering, to use the title of one of her paintings, her Vagrant Days, her time of searching and learning.99 Her first excursion abroad would have profound implications for her freedom and experience of a more cosmopolitan world.100

part two

Emergence

1890–1899

This page intentionally left blank

3 The Bohemia of Paris 1890–1896 

1

In Paris the Peels helped Florence Carlyle find accommodation and briefly introduced her to the city before they travelled on to Rome.2 Carlyle had the choice of several housing options for foreign women students resident in Paris at this time. The most expensive choice was to take up residence in a pension or a hotel “run on more or less dull or English lines.”3 This option offered respectable housing for unchaperoned women living and studying in the city. Three years after Carlyle’s arrival, American philanthropists and Paris’s Protestant community, concerned with the perceived lax moral life of the growing number young female American art students in Paris, would open the American Girl’s Club in Paris in 1893 as a supervised women’s residence. The four-storey chateau had previously been a boys’ school and for about eight dollars per week offered several dozen dorm-like rooms, along with reception rooms for receiving guests, a restaurant, a library with Englishlanguage periodicals, and an evening Protestant religious service as well as matronly supervision.4 The founding of this facility points to the apprehension North American families had for the welfare of their daughters studying abroad. American periodicals and newspapers expressed concern that, freed from family supervision, these young women would plunge into the bohemianism of art-student life. To economize, they would rent furnished

40 emergence, 1890 – 1899

rooms in “places where all the peoples of the earth congregate,” drinking, smoking, holding open house for all sorts. Such freedom, it was feared, would contribute to a laxity of morals and a gradual slide into slatternly and immoral behaviour.5 Victorian Canadians shared these fears. As an independent, aspiring artist wishing to experience the emancipated novelty of life in the Latin Quarter, the twenty-six-year-old Carlyle opted for her own appartement au deuxième, or au troisième, at number 18 Rue de Milan. The less expensive apartments were located up many flights of stairs, looking out over the Paris rooftops. Carlyle’s choice was made according to her worldly wealth, or lack of it, and probably on the advice of Paul Peel with his many years’ experience of living in Paris. Her accommodation likely consisted of a bedroom, sitting-room and studio all in one, and a small bathroom and kitchen.6 In letters home she described the sitting room with its French windows, large mirror hung on white walls, and a blue lounge and table.7 This more than satisfied her requirements, for she was keen to focus on working and studying and absorbing the metropolitan life about her; money was short, and she didn’t know how long the privilege would be available to her. As she settled into her rooms in the late autumn of 1890, it seemed to her as if life would not be life anywhere else but in Paris. Students of painting had been going to Paris in growing numbers since the curriculum reforms of the mid-1860s at the École des Beaux-Arts. The French academic art tradition attracted many American students,8 and Canadians too were arriving in increasing numbers. William Brymner, Maurice Cullen, and Robert Harris were all drawn to Paris in the 1880s. Paul Peel, there since 1881, introduced George Reid and his wife, Mary Hiester Reid, to various atelier studies during their stay in 1888–89.9 In the 1880s and ’90s James W. Morrice, Henri Beau, Marc Aurèle de Foy Suzor Coté, William Blair Bruce, and William Atkinson were there too. Among the women were Sydney Strickland Tully, Mildred Peel, and Laura Muntz.10 So immensely popular was the pilgrimage to Paris that more than 150 Canadian artists visited France for study or instruction of some form between 1867 and 1914.11 On the whole they were poorly funded. Numerous articles in the Canadian press attacked the government for not supporting the development of art by funding the training of its artists abroad. In 1890 Hector Fabre, the Canadian commissioner in Paris, and artists including Maurice Cullen and Philippe Hebert, organized an exhibition of Canadian artists studying in Paris in hopes of bringing the quality of their work to the attention of two visiting Canadian mps. In his speech to the exhibition audience, the commis-

The Bohemia of Paris, 1890– 1896 41

sioner, quoted in the January 1890 Dominion Illustrated News, regretted that Canadian artists must rely on their own resources and exertions for funds. Compared to fellow aspirants from other lands whose personal economic situations were “stimulated by prizes, grants, and orders for public institutions,” Canadians were at a disadvantage in pursuing art studies abroad.12 For Canadian women art students, the chronic shortage of funds was even more extreme. Yet Carlyle in her memoirs gives the impression of excitement and gratitude at being able to study there at all. Paris offered women artists independence. It gave them access to life drawing in the ateliers, with a nude human figure (or in the case of the male figure, partially draped or wearing loose-fitting drawers).13 Women art students operated within a different set of social rules than their male colleagues. If they wished to keep their reputations untarnished, they had to keep within the norms of respectable feminine behaviour. Unescorted or unchaperoned women were discouraged from dining or attending evening entertainments in large cities.14 Polite society frowned upon women who visibly participated in the “masculine” world of business, commerce, or entertainments, questioning their morals, viewing them as “fast” or, alternatively, “mannish.” 15 Yet many Canadian women such as Carlyle, Sydney Strickland Tully, Laura Muntz, and Harriet Ford were now managing to live and study abroad without their independent spirits being greatly inhibited. Although Carlyle had had little prior experience of travel or independent life, her time away from home through the 1880s in Toronto and the Niagara region had whetted her desire for self-direction and autonomy. Perhaps she had read the advice offered by May Alcott Nieriker, an American painter and the sister of Louisa May Alcott, author of Little Women. In her self-help guide for women wishing to study art in Paris, Studying Art Abroad and How to Do It Cheaply, Nieriker provided specifics on everything from teachers to the costs involved.16 At any rate, faced with the reality of her dream in Paris, Carlyle did not back down. After helping her to settle into rooms on the Rue de Milan, the Peels left her to pursue her “lone venture.”17 While they kept in touch, they apparently let her find her own way.18 In her first few days in Paris, “she did not know even which school she would enter.”19 The principal art academy of France, the state-supported École des Beaux-Arts, admitted no women; her choices were to petition a recognized painter known to give private lessons to take her on, or to enrol in one or more of the private ateliers. Entrance requirements were generally not rigorous. Fees were generally more expen-

42 emergence, 1890 – 1899

sive if paid on a monthly basis rather than signing on for the year, so enrolling in an atelier also meant deciding on a length of study.20 The ateliers had originally been established to prepare male art students to enter the École, and although some ateliers admitted no women until 1897, by 1890 others were accepting women from many different countries including Russia, England, Canada, and the United States. Even so, many art schools, even the Colarossi and the Académie Julian, favourites for women students, were still organized in terms of sexual difference, and women were often assigned to classes separate from men.21 Other schools limited the numbers of women or restricted their access to certain art classes;22 life classes in particular were seen as not an appropriate setting for women.23 The Peels likely offered Carlyle advice on schools and teachers, recommending instruction with famous masters.24 Henri Doucet (1856–1895), Jules Lefebvre (1836–1911), and Benjamin Constant (1845–1902) were critics at the well-known Académie Julian, which Paul and Mildred likely suggested as an option.25 Paul had studied under Doucet and Lefebvre; on her first visit to Paris in 1886, Mildred had studied with Constant, possibly attending classes at the Académie Julian.26 Many celebrated artists of the day worked at Julian’s as critics, making weekly visits to assess students’ work. Carlyle was ultimately influenced in her choice of atelier by the recommendation of another woman student she met in Paris, “an agreeable, good-natured girl who was enthusiastic about her school.” Having no firm plan of action, she “decided to go with” her new friend’s recommendation and try it out for a short while.27 Carlyle’s choice may still have been one of the many ateliers at the Académie Julian, as one visiting tutor who made a lasting impression on her during his weekly inspection tour, Adolphe-William Bouguereau (1825– 1905), had headed a class at Julian’s since 1882, and his criticisms were known to be severe.28 In 1890 Bouguereau was an immensely successful French painter who had great influence in the “Salon,” the annual exhibition of the Société des Artistes Français. An exponent of Academic art, Bouguereau painted precise and polished portraits, sentimental religious works, and nudes.29 One day during a life-study class, Carlyle was crouching on a low stool, “taking all sorts of pains with the head, changing and [reworking it]” (fig. 3.1),30 and did not notice Bouguereau behind her. “For God’s sake, tell her to put a body on that thing!” he announced in rapid French. Trying not to betray her feelings, Carlyle continued working but “took several minutes to recover” from the derisive dismissal.31 Unused to such public and blunt crit-

The Bohemia of Paris, 1890– 1896 43

fig. 3.1 Studio Study of Male Model, Florence Carlyle, ca. 1893. [plate 5]

icism, she was deeply humiliated. She decided soon after that this atelier was “not giving her the help she wanted” and began looking for an alternative. A school she happened upon purely by chance in the Latin Quarter appealed to her immediately: “Setting out one day on a tour of investigation, [I] came upon half a dozen students working away in a basement. [Climbing] down through a hole under the sidewalk … [I] found there was something doing there.” 32 Her serendipitous discovery was the Académie Delecluse, a smaller, less established school. She enrolled immediately. The intimacy and relaxed mood of the mixed classes of men and women from all over the globe set her at ease. The director, French painter Auguste Joseph Delécluse (1855–1928), was just beginning to establish the small atelier and, as Carlyle

44 emergence, 1890 – 1899

later recorded with pride, she and her student friends “‘made’ him, for our enthusiasm kept bringing others to the school.” 33 Class numbers grew steadily until eventually the basement quarters were exchanged for a larger garret room “up seven flights of stairs.” But at last, she wrote, “we got too many for him there, and he was able to build a new studio for his pupils.” 34 Delécluse’s new studio is thought to have been in Montparnasse on the Left Bank, not far from Luxembourg Gardens, emerging as the centre of the bohemian art scene in Paris.35 Although two distinguished masters came twice a week and were kept busy “running from seat to seat” criticizing and counselling students, the help that students gave to each other was also invaluable.36 Carlyle met a number of Americans at the atelier, which would become a particularly popular school among American women students in Paris.37 It may have been here that her interest in portraiture emerged; she managed to earn small amounts of money by drawing portraits of fellow students from the United States in her class.38 The highlight of the season’s work by students and artists in Paris was the annual Salon, opening in Paris at the beginning of May and usually lasting two months. Although in 1891 Carlyle had not reached the level at which she could submit a painting to the jury of selection on her teacher’s recommendation, she undoubtedly visited the exhibition to view the art, including Paul Peel’s painting La jeunesse.39 She would also likely have met two other Canadian friends of Paul Peel exhibiting at the Salon that season, William E. Atkinson (1862–1926) from Toronto, and A. Curtis Williamson (1867–1944), said to have lived briefly with the Peels in Paris.40 (At this time Paul Peel and his wife and children lived at number 65, Boulevard Arago.41) Once the Salon was over, the art schools and ateliers closed for the summer months, and most students left Paris for the countryside. As one art student wrote in 1895, Paris during the summer “was hot and impossible in its whiteness, the brilliancy of the light stone-work of its buildings, combined with the glare from the asphalt, dazzled one’s eyes and drew all the heat in the shimmering July sky … The cafes on the Boulevard began to pall; the little room ‘au sixieme’ certainly was stuffy, and the familiar faces on the street became more and more rare. It was time to go to the country.” 42 Paul and his wife, Isaure, had plans to visit her family in Denmark,43 but Carlyle preferred to stay in France in search of picturesque locales to paint. Two places especially drew her: Barbizon and Brittany. Both were popular at the time with artists with a taste for rural imagery and peasant themes. Forty miles southeast of Paris, the town of Barbizon on the out-

The Bohemia of Paris, 1890– 1896 45

skirts of the forests of Fontainebleau had given its name to the landscape painters of the Barbizon School. Theodore Rousseau (1812–1867), the central figure of the group, settled there in the late 1840s. The Barbizon School advocated painting direct from nature, and Rousseau was one of the pioneers of landscape painting en plein air, in the open air. It was to Barbizon that Carlyle went first. To broaden her skills in landscape painting, she enrolled in plein air classes.44 When the session ended, she continued on to Brittany. A popular resort area in France since the 1870s, Brittany with its picturesque costumes and “unspoiled” pastoral life acted as a magnet for foreign artists, especially Americans. Art colonies had sprung up in Honfleur and Pont-Aven. Carlyle could have read articles that described the town and Brittany itself as the “chosen land for the painter of ‘paysage.’” 45 No doubt she would also have heard of it from students at the Académie Delécluse. The Peels likely talked about the area too: Paul Peel had been a frequent visitor to the Pont-Aven colony and other sites in Brittany since 1881. It was there that he met his wife, Isaure, in 1884. When Carlyle arrived in Pont-Aven in 1891, it was the location for a group of painters associated with Paul Gauguin (1848–1903). Artists were drawn to Brittany as a pure, untouched, and natural landscape, a survival of ancient way of life in a modern world. A contemporary writer described it as “wild and as bare of cultivation as the moors of Scotland.” The Breton peasants were “strong, erect figures … the women with white caps and wide collars … [remind one] of the French painters of pastoral life, Jules Breton, Millet, Troyon, and Rosa Bonheur.”46 Many artists went not just for the scenery but to nourish their spirits. Brittany, wrote the American painter Cecilia Beaux (1855–1942), “could not only be observed but absorbed, and applied to the great need of one who was open to the allure of multifarious attraction.” 47 Nancy Mowll Mathews has observed that young middle-class American women were both fascinated and repelled by the dirt and poverty of rural peasant life.48 In marked contrast with their own privileged backgrounds, they had probably never witnessed first hand the rural poverty that they saw in the French countryside. Yet the setting and the cultural differences made the privations of the French peasantry seem picturesque, noble, primitive relicts of an earlier age. The peasant subjects Carlyle found in Brittany appealed to her, and throughout the summer she sketched portraits of peasant women and cottage interiors. Unlike Paul Peel’s paintings, which tended to romanticize and mask the social realities of rural life, her paintings of

46 emergence, 1890 – 1899

the people and their humble homes showed more grubby reality than sentimental sweetness.49 Returning to the Académie Delécluse in the autumn, with her sketches and quick oil studies stored in her portfolio to be worked up later in the studio, Carlyle took up her position before the easel with a new-found sense of competence and experience. Although she had yet to distinguish herself, she was learning how the system worked. Her aims were set high. In reaching for her goal of a self-supporting career, she later wrote, she tried to be guided by a favourite quotation by the American writer Ralph Waldo Emerson: “The hand can execute nothing higher than the character can inspire.” 50 Although her life of independence must surely have been arousing much speculation back in Woodstock, her grounding in the family’s Christian faith and later at Woodstock’s Literary Institute seems to have kept her from the notorious temptations of the Parisian boulevard. Her activity centred on work, friends, and the studio. In November 1891, her brother Will married Helen Muirhead Spiers of Lindsay, Ontario. Having spent the summer roaming the countryside of France alone with unconstrained freedom, Carlyle could have had few fears of travelling back to Canada unchaperoned, but she did not return home for the wedding. No doubt this was due to financial constraints. She wrote to convey her wishes that the couple should have her painting The Flowers’ Revenge as a wedding present 51 (fig. 2.2). Having graduated with a master’s degree from McGill, Will had been appointed at the university as Special Lecturer of Mining and Metallurgy. He was now in a financial position to come to his sister’s assistance and from time to time would send money to her in Paris.52 That winter Carlyle attended studio classes at the Académie Delécluse and worked up her summer sketches into finished oil paintings in her rooms. In January Paul Peel moved to new living quarters in the comfortable Paris suburb of Passy in the sixteenth arrondissement, his financial position doubtless improved by the sale to the Hungarian government of his painting After the Bath (1890).53 According to an 1895 interview with Carlyle, he continued to keep a “kindly eye” on her, and she likely visited the family in their new home in Passy.54 At this time the French painter Berthe Morisot had been a long-time resident here.55 By early February 1892 Carlyle had completed two canvases inspired by her summer rambles, An Interior in Bretagne and A Bretagne Peasant. Perhaps with the notion of gaining public exposure for her painting in addition to augmenting her funds with a possible sale, she sent both paintings to

The Bohemia of Paris, 1890– 1896 47

Canada, entering them in the annual spring exhibition of the Art Association of Montreal (aam).56 The practice of Canadian artists living abroad shipping paintings home to exhibition venues was relatively common. Paul Peel regularly sent works to the rca and aam exhibitions. While some artists complained of the expense, especially if the works did not sell, others found the exposure and participation in Canadian art venues beneficial to their professional practice.57 This was especially true for artists such as Carlyle who planned to return to Canada after training abroad. For Carlyle the aam exhibition was her first participation in a major art exhibition and also her first important Canadian venue. Montreal in 1892 was one of the main centres of artistic activity and collecting in Canada. The aam, incorporated in 1860, had grown out of the earlier Montreal Society of Artists founded in 1847 by a group of citizens and painters that included Cornelius Kreighoff (1815–72). Exhibitions were held in a rented space until 1879 when the aam built an imposing gallery on the east side of Phillips Square. The aam Art School opened the same year in October, and in 1882 the gallery added a library.58 The aam exhibition of April 1892 included Toronto-based George A. Reid’s Foreclosure of the Mortgage (1892) and Berry Pickers (1890). Sydney Strickland Tully exhibited a portrait of her father, Kivas Tully (1820–1905), the architect of Victoria Hall in Cobourg, Ontario. She had received accolades in Canada just a few years earlier in 1888, for her portrait of the influential essayist Professor Goldwin Smith of Toronto. Critics were enthusiastic about Quebec painter Ozias Leduc’s (1864–1955) still-life painting of an open book.59 Carlyle’s portrait of a Bretagne peasant was offered for sale for $200, and An Interior in Bretagne was priced at a more modest $75.60 For an emerging artist new to the Canadian art scene, she had set high prices on her works. We might speculate that she had been given advice on pricing by a more experienced artist, and that the quality of the painting merited such prices. Although the two works remain unknown, her training to this point suggests she was working in the style of Academic Realism, a relatively unadventurous style for the time but one taught in most art schools in Paris where women trained.

 After travelling through Brittany again during the summer months in 1892, Carlyle returned to Paris intending to make a change of school. Having studied with Delécluse since just after her arrival in Paris, laying the foundation

48 emergence, 1890 – 1899

of her competence as a painter, she was ready for the larger, more structured and established Académie Julian. She was hungry for challenges and ready to embrace them. Founded in 1869 by its director Rodolphe Julian (1839–1907), the Académie Julian offered professional art training for men and women and drew students from far-flung corners of Europe and North America. It was by far the most popular of the art academies for Americans in Paris.61 The many Canadians who had studied there included Paul and Mildred Peel, George Reid and Mary Hiester Reid. Sydney Strickland Tully had studied there under Benjamin Constant from 1886 to 1888.62 By the 1890s the Académie Julian was the largest school of art in Paris with a congeries of studios.63 It was known for the quality of its critics. Each had achieved success in the art world by exhibiting extensively in the Salons and winning prizes such as the Prix de Rome. The venerable Jules Lefebvre and the celebrated Salon painter Tony Robert-Fleury (1837–1912) were among those who taught Carlyle.64 Julian’s was also known for its advanced stance of allowing women access to life classes and to the nude model.65 Even so, women were still isolated in special classes. Although they had access to the life model in classes alongside men until 1879, after this date women were placed in separate studios, charged greatly inflated fees, and excluded from the less expensive maleonly drawing sessions.66 May Alcott Niericker in her handbooks Studying Art Abroad (1879) and The Art Student in Paris protested that Julian’s fees for women students at this time were double those for men.67 Women enrolled on a monthly basis were charged 100 francs, men 50 francs; women were charged 700 francs for full-time study on a yearly basis, while men paid only 300 francs. The rationale given was that “many of the students are not studying professionally, and consequently instruction as a luxury is put at a higher price.” 68 Fortunately for Carlyle, her brother Will was able to supplement the money regularly sent to her by her mother. Carlyle was then still living in her own small apartment in the Rue de Milan. She settled into classes at the Académie Julian feeling like a seasoned student of the arts. She described her daily routine in an article later published by a Toronto newspaper: “Monday morning comes … amid a murky grey light … with its six days of possibility held out to you to use, or not … Slipping from a warm bed into the chill of a fireless room, you light the candle and spirit lamp, placing water to boil over the latter for your morning coffee. By the time the very uncomfortable ablutions are performed and your student’s garb assumed, the water is bub-

The Bohemia of Paris, 1890– 1896 49

bling away with [a] … cheerful sound. An art student’s breakfast … of coffee and roll from under an inverted stone crock … is seldom elegant, and an art student’s room is the oddest place imaginable.” 69 One North American writer of the time remarked that a woman art student would astonish her visiting relatives “with her emancipation” and that they would “often wonder how she manages to do most of her own housework, cook, and at the same time take art so seriously.” 70 Yet such domestic arrangements with their attendant freedom to travel and enjoy the public spaces of the city were the preferred choice of women such as Carlyle, who had struggled to break with convention. Her memoir continues with her daily work at the Académie Julian. She reveals her considerable pleasure in the beauty of Paris and in her freedom of movement throughout the city: “Breakfast done, you don cloak and tam,’ catch up your painting traps … down six or seven flights of stairs, emerging into the streets as the bells chime half-past seven. [On the bus] you clamber to the top … it is three cents cheaper on top …The streets are filled with mist and steam from the horses’ nostrils, groups of blue bloused workmen … white coiffed women trundling carts of fresh-made bread, glimpses of the Seine, Notre Dame outlined through the mist; glorious pictures everywhere!” 71 In 1892 the Académie Julian had many ateliers in various locations in Paris. Carlyle may have attended the women’s classes at the female branch established in 1888 at 5 rue de Berri. She may also have attended classes at the principal atelier at 31 rue du Dragon. Here the monthly exhibitions, in which students from all the ateliers competed for prizes, were held in five large studios.72 Dramatically she described the studio setting of the women’s life drawing class: “Who has experienced it will never forget the sensation of entering the studio early … the hush … the forest of easels, the unchalked floor, the grey light filtering through the old patched skylights …You don the blue blouse … feeling a desire to dance down the long vista of cleared floor so soon to be compactly occupied …instead you begin a close inspection of brushes and palette. The great stove is glaring with heat already and Annette, the servant, is filling the hissing reservoirs. Other students come trooping in, all ages and nationalities … Friend greets friend.” 73 The day-to-day running of the studio was supervised by Julian himself. He also hired the visiting critics, who commonly alternated periods of onemonth duration.74 Students worked from eight in the morning to noon and again from one to five o’clock. In some schools in women’s classes the male

50 emergence, 1890 – 1899

models wore drawers, but at Julian’s they worked from a draped model in the morning, and a nude female or male model in the afternoon.75 Thus unlike their female colleagues at Britain’s Royal Academy school, women’s classes at Julian’s in 1892 were able to sketch and paint the “academy figure,”76 an exercise with the nude figure usually in one of the “heroic” stances dating from the Renaissance.77 An aristocratic young Russian figure painter who attended the Académie Julian ten years earlier, Marie Bashkirtseff (1858–1884), made specific mention of the nudity of the male model in her journal published in 1890: “Today [I went] to the Julian studio, the only serious one for women …A nude man was posing.” Between the men’s and women’s classes, “there is no difference. There was a difference when the women had only the dressed model; but since they do the academy figure – the nude man – there is none.” 78 In her memoir Carlyle describes beginning the studio work on Monday morning with Julian establishing the life model’s pose for the week: 79 “The massiere, or superintendent, appears. Annette calls in, one by one, the few models chosen from fifty or sixty who clamour at the studio every Monday morning. The best one is chosen by vote. We throng about the model-stand, waiting until a supple, bronzed, broad chested fellow vaults onto the stand and takes a ‘pose’ that calls forth a ring of applause. The pose selected, then comes roll call, and as each [student] is called the one called chooses her place. Finally the crowd is placed, each portion of personal territory chalked out on the floor around each artist, [and the] scratching of charcoal begins, and in ten minutes almost complete silence reigns.” 80 As a woman student of the time explained when questioned about the propriety of women working from the nude model, “If a woman wants to be a painter, she must go through the same training [as a man]. The trial to a modest young woman is at first great; but as soon as she is possessed of the art feeling, [embarrassment] quickly wears away. In the atelier, excessive modesty in a woman painter is a sign of mediocrity; only the woman who forgets the conventionalities of society in the pursuit of art stands a chance for distinction.” 81 Although the nude male model was available to women’s art classes in many Parisian studios, Tamar Garb observes that women artists usually chose a female model when tackling the naked body.82 In a pastel life figure sketch by Carlyle dating from her time at the Académie Julian (fig. 3.1), she has confined herself to depicting the male model’s head and upper torso. While notions of propriety may have conditioned her choice of depicting a half-figure only, we may assume that the model was in fact nude.

The Bohemia of Paris, 1890– 1896 51

American portraitist Cecilia Beaux (1863–1942), who studied at Julian’s in the late 1880s, complained that the women’s studio classes were overcrowded. Individual work spaces, described by Carlyle as marked out with chalk around easel and chair, left students with scarcely any elbow room.83 Other female students were more accepting of what Beaux termed “pitiless mechanical work.” Invigorated by the sense of a shared experience, by friendships and rivalries with fellow women students, they saw it as the means to achieve their own art practice as professionals on par with their male colleagues.84 Carlyle’s memoir continued: “Oh, the thrill of those silent hours, standing shoulder to shoulder in the army of ardent, splendid, hard working women. The bared, outstretched arm, the supple wrist, the quick fingers, [and] lips compressed, half-closed eyes peering intently from under paper shades fastened over the head. What a union of … feeling and purpose … Arms have begun to ache … when again the call C’est l’heure … Laughter and upheaval … for one short hour, then work until 5.” 85 The master or critic visited the studio once or twice a week, allotting on average two minutes to each student for what she was working on.86 Criticism could consist of anything from a brief, fleeting word to a prolonged discussion with promising or favoured students: “Friday morning you are on the alert, nervously alive to the great man’s arrival. He walks to the easel nearest the door and the terse, severe criticism has begun. He passes from canvas to canvas talking to each student in a low voice, which is yet heard distinctly throughout the room. How clearly he reveals your mistakes. A word of praise from his lips is well worth all the striving. Rarely he takes brushes and palette from a girl whose work interests him unusually and paints in an entire torso. A moan of appreciation bursts unconsciously from the group around him. Others beside myself have felt the tears slipping down their cheeks.” 87 Competition and rivalry for the master’s praise was intense. Marie Bashkirtseff wrote in her journal: “It is stupid; but the envy of those women grieves me … I am of their opinion when they say that studio glories are nothing, for here are at least two or three who will remain deplorable mediocrities, while passing for artists of the first order among the other students.” 88 There is evidence that at one point Rodolphe Julian considered Carlyle to be one of his most promising women pupils. Marie Bashkirtseff had been a favourite of Robert-Fleury, a teacher whom Carlyle much admired ten years later.89 Robert-Fleury was described by an American woman contemporary of Carlyle’s as a “young-middle-aged and very handsome man, with a face in which there were deep marks of disappointment; his eyes, grey and

52 emergence, 1890 – 1899

deeply set, smouldered with burnt-out fires.” 90 It was said that he gave lavish personal attention to his most promising female students. Bashkirtseff wrote of being singled out by him: “Robert-Fleury is an excellent professor, he leads you on step by step, so that you feel the progress that you make. He raised the corner of the curtain and showed me a more spacious horizon. I care little for the man, but much for the master.” 91 Such personal attention, combined with a free, unchaperoned atmosphere, made a heady environment for young women living abroad on their own. Inevitably they were drawn to experienced instructors, and a note of adulation frequently occurs in memoirs. It was easy for a young woman to develop a romantic attachment to her instructor. In her biography of Mary Cassatt, Nancy Mowll Mathews notes that although the older male teachers were flattered by such attentions, relationships usually ended innocently with the return of the student to her home county.92 Less commonly, the relationship might result in marriage. American Elizabeth Jane Gardner (1837–1922) eventually married William Bouguereau after an engagement that lasted twenty years.93 In the midst of this challenging and exciting time for Carlyle, tragedy struck when Paul Peel died after a short illness. Taken ill suddenly at the home of an artist friend, he died at his home in Paris eight days later, on 3 October 1892, apparently from “an attack of haemorrhage of the lungs.” 94 Coming just one month before his thirty-second birthday, Peel’s premature death occurred when his career was in the ascension after years of struggle. Carlyle felt the loss of her trusted mentor keenly. However, instead of yielding to sadness, she was more determined than ever to have a painting accepted for exhibition at the spring Salon. Alone after class in her rooms during that winter of 1892–93, she began work on a portrait of an elderly Dutch woman neighbour (fig. 3.2). When it was finished she took it to her master, hoping to receive permission to submit it for exhibition in the Salon. In an interview years later, she described what happened. The master “wanted to know if [Carlyle] had sat on her model’s knee” to do the work.95 This “famous critic” who spoke with such sarcasm was identified in an 1895 magazine article on Canadian women artists as none other than Bouguereau, the teacher whose crushing criticism Carlyle had encountered during her first months in Paris.96 Another source, drawing on the artist’s memoirs, describes Bouguereau’s reaction to the painting as “explosive.” “Salon!” he cried. “Go back to your drawing! It is very disagreeable.”

The Bohemia of Paris, 1890– 1896 53

fig. 3.2 Une dame hollandaise, Florence Carlyle, 1893. [plate 6]

As Carlyle stood in the busy studio, “stunned and embarrassed, a friend tried to console her, saying, ‘Never mind, you can always try again next year.’ [Carlyle] picked up her canvas and made to leave the school. ‘Thank you,’ she said, ‘but I shall try again this year.’” 97 She took the picture home, scraped it off, and began once more.98 Bouguereau’s criticism, while severe, may have had an ulterior and positive side. Another Canadian, John W.L. Forster (1850–1938), who also studied at the Académie Julian and later had a successful career as a portraitist,

54 emergence, 1890 – 1899

described a similar lashing at the hands of Bouguereau: “As he continued the criticism I felt myself growing smaller. Then he placed my canvas beside one of his own. Oh! That was the last shrivelling touch. He turned and smiled, saying, ‘You perhaps think me severe. Yes, I would not have been so severe, but I know you are worth it, and believe you will make good.’” 99 Carlyle finished her new version quickly and felt that it had “improved 100 (fig. 3.2). This time there was only praise from Bouguereau, who granted her permission to submit the canvas to the Salon jury. She did this right away, probably in March on the “sending-in day,” when the artists brought their works to be rejected or accepted.101 After many anxious days she received a notice informing her that the “jury for the Salon was pleased to accept Une dame hollandaise for exhibition at the spring 1893 Salon of the Société des Artistes Français.” 102 She immediately cabled the wonderful news home to Woodstock. When the cablegram arrived, Emily Carlyle sent Russell, her youngest son, flying downtown to give the news to the artist’s father. William Carlyle was addressing a solemn meeting at the town hall when Russell burst into the room, waving the cable and calling out to his father, “It’s from Bird – her picture is in the Saloon!” 103 The Salon had been a government responsibility from 1791 until 1881, when its organization was given to the artists of the Société des Artistes Français. The annual exhibition was on a colossal scale, involving the selection and hanging of several thousand works, estimated as approximately eight miles of paintings. While the system was losing both appeal and authority by the mid-1890s, it was still an opportunity for publicity that conferred a degree of respectability on the works exhibited.104 The painter Gerome noted that the Salon meant survival for young artists “who have only this means of establishing a relationship with the public, with art lovers, to sell [paintings] … and this can only be achieved by showing what one has done.” 105 It was an important opportunity for women aspiring to a professional career; from 1890 to 1895, the period of Carlyle’s residence in Paris, a significantly high proportion of Canadian artists listed as exhibiting in the Salon were women.106 In March 1893, after sending her painting into the jury, Carlyle received a prestigious invitation to have tea at the British Embassy in Paris. The invitation came from Harriot Rowan Hamilton, Lady Dufferin (1844–1936), who had lived in Canada from 1872 to 1878 as the wife of the governor general, Lord Dufferin. By chance at an exhibition of paintings in Paris in 1882,

The Bohemia of Paris, 1890– 1896 55

Carlyle had been introduced to Lady Dufferin and her daughters. Lady Dufferin was “delighted when she found Miss Carlyle was from Canada.” 107 Many years previously, she told Carlyle, Lord Dufferin too had studied at the Académie Julian. The invitation to tea was an important social contact. The Dufferins were far above Carlyle socially; Lord Dufferin had recently served as British ambassador to Russia and to Turkey, had acted as high commissioner for Egypt, as viceroy of India, and ambassador in Rome. In March 1893 he was serving as British ambassador in Paris.108 Lady Dufferin was a relatively emancipated woman for the time, the first governor general’s wife to travel with her husband through the Canadian West. She had some interest and ability as an artist herself, and sketched Native totem poles and canoes at Skidigate and at other points on the coast of British Columbia.109 Her invitation to Carlyle caught the interest of Canadians at home and was reported in Toronto’s Saturday Night social column later that month.110 By March 1895 Carlyle had visited Lady Dufferin several times in Paris, and social columns in Canada reported her “great interest in Miss Carlyle’s work.” 111 The countess’s social promotion of a colonial woman artist was perhaps an expression of her regard for the country and its women. In this she acted as a valuable mentor of Carlyle’s emerging identity as a professional artist. This also confirms the reputation that Lady Dufferin held in Canada for many years for her “great and untiring work done …for those of her own sex.” 112 During the last week in April 1893, Carlyle visited the Salon exhibition in the Palais de l’Industrie on the Champs-Elysees for the “varnishing day” or vernissage,113 when artists applied the final touches to their paintings, and varnish was applied with wide brushes.114 The biggest fear of new or unknown artists was to have their works hung in an unfavourable position. Since the paintings were hung in tiers, to be “skyed,” or hung close to the ceiling where one’s work was practically invisible, was a fate to be dreaded, since it implied criticism. While Carlyle’s Une dame hollandaise (fig. 3.2) was not skyed, it was also not hung in the best position “on the line” at eye level just above the dado. But in fact her portrait of the Dutch woman received favourable attention. Although the critics noted the promise of “la jeune artiste,” she may have felt that the glory dimmed somewhat as they accorded much of the credit to her teacher Jules Lefebvre: “Mlle. F. Carlyle … peint simplement, sans pretention, et surtout sans a l’effet, absoluement comme elle voit son modele: n’est-ce pas le plus grand merite et celui pui denote une nature pleine de

56 emergence, 1890 – 1899

fig. 3.3 La vieille Victorine, Florence Carlyle, 1893. Carlyle wrote, “Victorine posed for me, peering out from an odd pointed hood, as she grasped a big blue gamp, she rested her chin on the top of her hands and scrutinized me with a touch of the baleful.” [plate 7]

promese?… Le grand peintre Jules Lefebvre a felicite tout particulierement la jeune artiste; c’est la plus qu’un encouragement, deja une recompense.” 115 The French academic training that Carlyle experienced under Lefebvre and her other teachers Delécluse, Bouguereau, and Robert-Fleury was similar to that of many Canadian artists of this period. Inevitably, her work, especially in the early years, showed the influence of French academic training based on a thorough grounding in technique and careful study of the Old Masters. Her paintings from her time in France (figs. 3.2 and 3.3) lack the high degree of finish evident, for example, in much of the work of Paul Peel. The

The Bohemia of Paris, 1890– 1896 57

decisive, relaxed brushwork of Une dame hollandaise reveals her style as looser and more expressive than the more polished Academic classicism. The shadows and lines around the model’s eyes and mouth emphasize the effects of time and contradict all conventions of feminine beauty, yet the portrait conveys vitality and intelligence. This painting and La vieille Victorine (fig. 3.3), done that summer suggest that Carlyle was interested in conveying the emotions and inner life of the women she painted rather than in detailed representation. As she increasingly focused on domestic images of women, we see a tender attentiveness to women’s personalities.  Notre bon camarade : 116 Canadian Colleagues and Exhibitions In 1893 much attention of the Canadian art world focused on Canada’s participation in the international art exhibition held at the World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago, Illinois. Among the international galleries in the Art Palace was an exhibit of work by Canadian artists chosen by the committee headed by Robert Harris, president of the rca. Curiously, Carlyle missed exhibiting her work in such an important venue, although a large proportion of her contemporary Canadian women artists were represented. Her friends in France, Margaret Houghton and Sarah Holden, both participated. Sarah Baldwin Holden (act. 1886–1907) from Belleville, Ontario, a painter of figures whose career is now largely forgotten,117 exhibited A Brittany Interior. Her painting was awarded a gold medal, an especially high accolade for a woman painter early in her professional career. Underlining the merit of her win was that the esteemed Canadian painters Horatio Walker, Robert Harris, and George Reid were the other gold medal recipients.118 Laura Muntz, also studying in Paris, exhibited A Fairy Tale; Sydney Strickland Tully exhibited four paintings. Other Canadian women artists showing work included Toronto painter Mary Hiester Reid and landscape painter Gertrude E. Spurr (1858–1941), who had emigrated to Toronto from Yorkshire in 1890.119 Reid, married to Toronto painter George Reid, was gaining critical acclaim in Canada for her landscapes, domestic interiors, and especially her paintings of flowers. Her work showed the influence of Japanese printmakers and the work of James Whistler (1834–1903). She was elected an associate of the rca that same year.120 Mary M. Phillips and Mary Ella Dignam, two painters instrumental in the recent founding of the Women’s Art Association of Canada, had work in the show, as did figure painter Mary A. Bell (later Eastlake).121

58 emergence, 1890 – 1899

But the summer of 1893 found Carlyle again on an unhurried ramble through the French countryside. She was developing her interest in depicting everyday domestic scenes, and peasant themes continued to exert their influence on her painting. She especially admired the work of a founder of the Realist style, Jean-Francois Millet (1814–75), famous for his scenes of rustic life; his The Angelus (1859) was one of the most widely reproduced paintings of the nineteenth century.122 While in Normandy Carlyle followed the custom and walked from house to house asking permission to sketch the inhabitants, who would agree to sit in return for little or no money.123 The paintings she later worked up from these sketches show women engaged in daily tasks or taking their ease, each portrayed with realism and dignity. Carlyle stayed in the home of a woman named Mère Adele, who was said to have been one of the models for Millet’s famous painting in her youth. In a memoir written by Carlyle’s niece, quoting from a now-lost memoir, Carlyle recalls the family folklore surrounding Mère Adele. As Carlyle worked from the sketches she had done during the day, Mère Adele would talk to her “of the days when she stood in a potato field for Monsieur Millet.” 124 Carlyle asked to paint a friend of Mère Adele, an older woman named Victorine. The model’s forceful personality, self-confidence, and direct gaze dominate this painting, La vieille Victorine (1893, fig. 3.3). In her memoir Carlyle described how “Victorine posed for me, peering out from an odd pointed hood, as she grasped a big blue gamp between her knees. She rested her chin on the top of her hand and scrutinized me with a touch of the baleful.” 125 That autumn Carlyle again took up her studies at Julian’s and finished several paintings, including that of Victorine. In March or early April, after sending the completed La vieille Victorine and another entitled Portrait for consideration by the jury for the spring 1894 Salon, she made a short trip to London, England. Described in the local Woodstock newspaper as “a pleasant holiday,” it was a change from the toil and challenges of the studio but it involved much more. During the visit Carlyle was clearly structuring her professional artistic practice and establishing contacts with the British art world. Her hometown paper reported that she “received marked attentions from eminent people in the social, literary and artistic world, due to her being an object of interest there as a relative of the Sage of Chelsea.” 126 Given the barriers that women artists had to contend with, it was astute of Carlyle to use her family relationship with her eminent great-uncle to professional advantage. Undoubtedly she realized that it would be only enough to provide her with an entrée into certain circles, and that her abilities would have to sustain this initial interest in her.

The Bohemia of Paris, 1890– 1896 59

La vieille Victorine and Portrait were selected for exhibition at the Salon. On varnishing day Carlyle was pleased to see that both were hung at the most coveted position “on the line.” 127 In the weeks following opening day her paintings were praised by the French critics. One review in the Organe des interets Canadiens et Francais, a publication that followed the careers of Canadian artists, was effusive in its praise: “Deux tableaux au Salon des Champs-Élysees de Mlle Carlyle, dont nous avions signalé les oeuvres précédentes et le succès qu’elle avaient obtenu aupres des bons juges. Cette fois, la jeune et gracieuse artiste, si richement douée, expose deux délicieuses toiles.” 128 The painting of Victorine (fig. 3.3) was considered a strong and effective character study by the critics. Like Une dame hollandaise (fig. 3.2), shown at the Salon the previous year, it depicted a woman in a way that was the antithesis of the feminine ideal at the time, Carlyle’s naturalistic treatment of the older woman’s clothing, hair, and skin honestly expressing the effects of ageing. One review applauded this non-idealization, comparing “sa vieille femme” to the portraits of Leon Bonnat (1838–1922), noted for their realism. Clearly, at this time Carlyle was excited by the notion of capturing in her painting truth to nature, “sa note personnelle et vraie.” 129 In September she began studying with an expatriate American painter, Julius Rolshoven (1858–1930). Little is known of what triggered this move. There was much pressure on students to make their mark early and to attach themselves to the most prestigious teacher, who would help them achieve the skill and visibility needed to make the transition to professional. Carlyle may have received advice from contacts during her summer visit to England, where Rolshoven was known; a British journal from 1895 reported that Rolshoven, “more than any other professor in Paris, studies each student’s individual capacities and tastes.” 130 Born in Detroit, Rolshoven attended the Chicago Art Institute, leaving America at sixteen to study in Dusseldorf and Munich under Frank Duveneck. In Paris he studied with Carlyle’s teachers Robert-Fleury and Bouguereau. At the time that Carlyle began studying with him, he was known as a dynamic young portrait painter with new ideas and dramatic flair. He had gained fame in 1889 when he won a gold medal and the coveted Hors de Concours for his self-portrait at the Salon. This triumph saw the career of the thirty-one-year-old Rolshoven rocket. He went from unknown American painter to one whose life classes in Paris “gained international attendance,” and his friends now included the likes of fellow expatriate James McNeill Whistler.131 Carlyle had always had a talent for likenesses, as her success in the

60 emergence, 1890 – 1899

Salon and her history of selling portrait drawings of her fellow students in Paris demonstrated. Her pursuing studies with Rolshoven indicates that she had decided to give portraiture a central position in her production.  Sisters in Art : 132 Friendships The lives of Carlyle and her fellow women art students in Paris were characterized by independence, financial autonomy, the freedom to travel, an enjoyment of the city’s public spaces, and the company of friends of both sexes – but particularly other women. An 1866 article on a group of American and British women artists renting rooms in the same house and studying at the same atelier reveals a fruitful interdependence: “Companionship,” one of the students interviewed affirmed, “is one of the pleasantest bits of our student life.” 133 Young women art students often hosted small studio-home teas or musical evenings with “Bohemian camaraderie about them” at which “girl and even men student friends will gather.” 134 Estelle Kerr, a Canadian artist and journalist who studied in Paris several years after Carlyle, observed that while it was the “glamour about the art student’s life in Paris” that lured artists from far and wide, it was not the classes or professors which made the most lasting impression on them. Kerr identifies the “little restaurants on the boulevards, where you sit down out of doors in the summer and dine so well for so little,” and the social camaraderie of life in Paris as having made a lasting impact.135 Her description provides evidence that the public cafes were meeting places for women artists in Paris. Here the circles of women “met twice daily and talked long … on art, and then again at night … [sipping] coffee while they listened to music.” 136 Clearly, as with travel, the companionship among women art students made it possible for them to comfortably enjoy public urban space. Another meeting point central to the social relations of women artists was the school’s studio. Carlyle described how she and women friends “metamorphosed” the studio at mealtimes, arranging “groups of stools, with large portfolios on top [to serve] as tables, a sheet of fresh drawing paper as a table cloth; eggs are boiled in the ‘reservoir’ [attached to the stove].” 137 The social structuring of sexual difference, a central organizing quality of the late nineteenth century, had negative implications for women seeking to work as professional artists; 138 however, it also tended to generate strong and supportive relationships. Often cloistered together in women’s classes,

The Bohemia of Paris, 1890– 1896 61

they worked and travelled together, shared models or modelled for each other, gave constructive criticism of each other’s work, and shared living spaces. These friendships, a form of “matronage,” to use Deborah Cherry’s term,139 often misunderstood or hidden from history, functioned as vital circuits of support.140 Female companionship had distinct social and economic benefits. In addition to the pragmatic economy of shared accommodation, travelling together made it possible for women to make extended journeys unaccompanied by men. A novel by Canadian writer Sara Jeanette Duncan (1861– 1922), A Social Departure: How Orthodocia and I Went Round the World by Ourselves (1890), told of one such journey abroad by two unchaperoned young women.141 The trend went back to the 1840s and ’50s when coteries of British middle-class women went abroad on study and sketching tours to admire and paint the landscape.142 Travel appears to have been an important aspect in the formation of women artists’ identity as professional and involved. As Deborah Cherry writes, travel “enhanced” the artist’s “sense of self,” developing “a feminist subjectivity which was self-motivated, physically active and creative.” 143 Mary Cassatt and Eliza Haldeman, best friends from the Pennsylvania Academy of Art, travelled together on painting excursions from Paris to the French countryside in the 1860s and accompanied each other on seaside holidays in Normandy.144 Their relationship is characterized by Cassatt’s biographer Nancy Mowll Mathews as one of close companionship characterized by a sharing of artistic and intellectual interests.145 Such relationships between artist women friends of the time were primarily organized along class lines; 146 factors such as access to education and materials made it highly likely that women artists in this generation were from the middle and upper-middle classes.147 Cassatt and Haldeman came from families of equally distinguished social standing.148 Carlyle and her cohort also tended to be from middle and upper-middle class Canadian backgrounds. Mary Hiester Reid’s education reflected the privilege and private means that could foster and encourage an artistic career.149 The wealthy background of Helen McNicoll (1879–1915) made it possible for her to live with works of art in the family home and also gave her access to private collections such as that of art collector and family friend William Van Horne.150 Many supportive friendships between women artists forged during student years evolved into long-term bonds. Laura Muntz’s close friendship with New York artist Wilhelmina Douglas Hawley, dating from their meeting in Paris in the mid-1900s, was one such example. They shared accommo-

62 emergence, 1890 – 1899

dation in Paris, and together led a group of North American artist students through Holland on a teaching holiday. In 1898 Hawley accompanied Muntz to Toronto, where they opened a studio in the Yonge Street Arcade and conducted life classes jointly, “Miss Muntz … in oils, Miss Hawley in water colours.” 151 The two friends remained close companions until Hawley married and moved to Holland in 1901.152 Attending many of the same schools, and classes, belonging to the same women-only artist associations, many of this generation of Canadian women artists knew each other. For example, Margaret Houghton (1865–ca. 1922), like Carlyle, studied under Bouguereau and Robert-Fleury;153 Houghton and Sarah Holden were both members of a small group of women active in the formation of a Montreal society of women artists in the mid-1890s.154 Houghton and Mary Alexandra Bell (1864–1951; later Eastlake) became close friends while studying in Paris from about 1888 to 1892. A biographical sketch of Bell published in the Ladies’ Pictorial Weekly in 1892 reported the adventures of the two friends abroad: how they shared a Paris studio apartment, enrolled in the same art classes, and travelled together on painting trips in France and to St Ives in Cornwall.155 The narrative of their exciting, independent journeys carries the implicit message that while a young respectable middle-class Canadian woman could not travel alone, it was socially acceptable for women companions to travel together unchaperoned. Helen McNicoll and British artist Dorothea Sharpe (1874–1955) met while studying art in St Ives around 1905. Sharing companionship and studio space, living and travelling together, both artists were known for their Impressionist-influenced paintings of girls in landscape settings. This long friendship endured until McNicoll died in 1915.156 Sydney Strickland Tully and Mrs Dean-Drummond, an artist from Victoria, British Columbia, shared a small studio in Chelsea from ca. 1895 to 1897.157 Carlyle enjoyed the companionship of women friends in Paris and throughout her life. Travelling together and sharing accommodations, she and Gertrude Spurr spent a summer around 1900 painting in Cape Cod.158 Although it is not known if Carlyle socialized with Houghton, Bell, or Muntz in Paris, in light of the small community of Canadian women art students and the later friendship between Carlyle and Muntz, it is likely that they did. In 1905 Carlyle and Muntz shared the financial burden of accommodation and studio space in New York City.159 Carlyle was friends with Sarah Holden, who studied at the aam school under Robert Harris and William Brymner, for a year at New York’s Art Stu-

The Bohemia of Paris, 1890– 1896 63

dent’s League, and for three years at the Académie Julian.160 Both women were students of Robert-Fleury and Lefebvre, sharing an interest in portraiture and figural painting.161 Carlyle also was close to the painter Edith Lalande Ravenshaw (later Patterson) (act. 1893–1922) originally from East Sheen, Surrey. The “pranks and fun” that the two friends had enjoyed together in Paris hint at the texture of a friendship forged by shared experience.162 In later years, having lost touch, they were reunited by chance in March 1903 at an art exhibition in Toronto. Ravenshaw was then living in Toronto, having married the Canadian portrait painter Andrew Dickson Patterson about 1899. Ravenshaw was primarily a landscape painter but around 1913 began producing and exhibiting etchings. Her husband had earlier bought an etching press from Stephen Parrish of Philadelphia, where he had briefly studied, and may have encouraged Ravenshaw to expand her production to include etching. In 1914 the National Gallery of Canada bought one of her coloured etchings entitled Il Monte Rosa.163 The independent life of women art students living in Paris offered singular possibilities for paid, professional work in the arts. According to Deborah Cherry’s analysis of early feminism among British artists, classspecific beliefs in the value of work was one factor propelling feminist commitment to paid employment for middle-class women.164 Student life abroad sometimes enabled these young women to begin to determine a career and make the transition from amateur to professional endeavour through paid work. In Paris Carlyle executed several portrait commissions of American art students.165 Muntz is said to have largely supported herself in the position of massiere in the Académie Colarossi where she was studying, one of the five principal academies in Paris attended by Americans during this period.166 Her duties included engaging models, “looking after new students,” and translating criticisms for those not understanding French, for which she was paid and received free tuition.167 Her close friend Wilhelmina Hawley also had paid employment at the Colarossi as a teacher of watercolour painting.168 The history and glamour of life in Paris thrilled Carlyle, and visits to galleries and long walks were a daily occurrence. She carried a sketchbook and paused along the way to draw buildings or people, or simply wandered. Her later descriptions of these walks around Paris, particularly in public gardens such as the Bois de Boulogne or the Luxembourg Gardens,169 reveal her nostalgia for the days of the French aristocracy: “[I would] seek the beautiful [Luxembourg] gardens that so appeal to [my imagination] … the stately ‘corridors’ of lawn and trees of that old world green that suggests irresistibly

64 emergence, 1890 – 1899

the days of Watteau, or, perhaps, Mme. Recamier and her admiring court of ‘Kings and Queens.’ Every turn of the grand old gardens thrill with romance, [I am] lifted out of [myself, and] wander about in the sunlight and perfume.” 170 Something of the spirit of a Rococo fête galante, a dreamlike escape into nature, imbues Carlyle’s words and suggests the girl in Summer as she listens to birdsong (ca. 1901, fig. 3.4). Carlyle had a romantic view of the past and shared the Victorian nostalgia for earlier times. Several of her paintings, including When Mother Was a Girl (1903) and Grandmother’s Gown (ca. 1903), reflect an idealized view of the past. Informing her knowledge of history were her great-uncle Thomas Carlyle’s essays and his book The French Revolution, which she undoubtedly read.

 In March 1895 Carlyle sent La vieille Victorine to Canada to be exhibited in the aam spring exhibition 171 (fig. 3.3), offering it for sale for $200. Among those present at the opening night “private view” were many of the country’s foremost citizens and artists, potential patrons, and clients. The “Misses Van Horne,” perhaps relatives of the railway magnate William Van Horne, attended, as did members of the wealthy Montreal Drummond family, and artists William Brymner and Edmond Dyonnet (1859–1954). A“Mr Carlyle,” likely William, now teaching at McGill University, was also in attendance. In the spring of 1895 he was finishing his year’s term in the Chair of Mining and Engineering at McGill University in Montreal and was about to take up a new position as the provincial mineralogist and director of the Department of Mines in British Columbia.172 Although La vieille Victorine did not find a buyer, the painting and its artist received favourable attention from Canadian critics. The Montreal Star praised the painting as “very clever” and reproduced it in sketch form on the front page with a short biography of the Carlyle.173 The following month the work was accepted for exhibition at the Royal Canadian Academy (rca) gallery on King Street West in Toronto. Since Carlyle was not an associate of the prestigious rca, this was a portentous honour.174 Victorine, as the painting came to be called, brought critical attention to her representations of women. The biographical survey The Canadian Men and Women of the Time, published three years later in 1898, included a short biography of Carlyle and reveals that following the exhibition of Victorine in the Parisian salon in 1894 “there have been numerous requests sent to …[Carlyle] for its

fig. 3.4 Summer, Florence Carlyle, ca. 1901. Critic Hector Charlesworth wrote that the painting showed “a woman under trees apparently listening to bird-song. The power of the drawing, the dash of the brushwork, the lovely pattern of sunlight and shadow make it a remarkable work” (“Pictures by Florence Carlyle,” Saturday Night, 6 June 1925). [plate 8]

66 emergence, 1890 – 1899

exhibition in other places.” 175 Presumably these requests came from Canadian art societies, since Victorine was exhibited in at least three different Canadian art venues between 1895 and 1898: the aam, rca, and the Woman’s Art Association of Canada (waac) annual exhibitions.176 In spring 1894 Carlyle’s friend Sarah Holden had come home to Montreal for a visit before returning to Paris the following spring.177 In April 1895 at the annual meeting of the rca general assembly at the Toronto Art Gallery, her name was among those elected associate members of the rca. Her win of a medal at the Chicago World’s Fair two years previously had likely contributed to her successful election. At the same meeting of the rca, Peleg Franklin Brownell (1857–1946), an Académie Julian trained figure and landscape painter who had been teaching at the Ottawa Art School since 1886, was elected to full membership as an academician.178 Laura Muntz was also admitted to associate status with the rca that spring, and British-trained Canadian artists Harriet Ford and Gertrude Spurr were elected “on the Ballots.”179 Carlyle seemed poised to do the same. But her career now took a different turn. Having polished her studio work in Paris with Julius Rolshoven, Carlyle supplemented this with a period in the studio of the Social Realist painter Léon-Augustin Lhermitte (1844– 1925), described in contemporary accounts as a “celebrated group painter.” Lhermitte stressed the narrative content of his paintings, and his figures were known for his fluid treatment of gesture and expression.180 Following her studies with Lhermitte, Carlyle went on a short holiday to Italy. Soon after, in the summer of 1895, she left Paris and moved to London, England.181 After four and a half years of study in Paris, her decision to live and begin her art practice in England must have come as a surprise to family and friends in Canada. A contemporary Canadian writer speculated that it was probably difficult for her to contemplate leaving “the brilliant art life of Paris, to settle in Woodstock.” 182 The prospect of giving up her own apartment, the stimulation of busy ateliers, fellow artists, exhibitions, and avant garde ideas of Paris, of relinquishing the freedom of her Bohemian life, likely seemed utterly unacceptable. In its place she foresaw a return to narrow, unsophisticated town life in Canada where she would have been expected to move back into her old room in her parents’ home. Her four and a half year sojourn in Paris was a considerably longer time than many Canadians spent studying abroad. Most of her cohort of Canadian women painters duly returned home after months or a year or two of study abroad. By the spring of 1895 many of these were busy establishing

The Bohemia of Paris, 1890– 1896 67

themselves in the Canadian art world. Seen in this light, in her refusal to yield to the pressures on her to return to Canada, Carlyle was breaking with the more common pattern. In consequence, she had to face certain realities to do with her financial position as a thirty-one-year-old unmarried woman, her main means of economic support her mother and her elder brother. While she had earned small amounts from her portrait studies, this was hardly enough to support herself.183 She did not take up other options, like Laura Muntz, such as working as an atelier monitor.184 She must have negotiated a short reprieve, perhaps a few months support from William, now in British Columbia as the director of the Department of Mines –enough time and money to give her a chance to start an art practice of some kind in London. Clearly, she was attracted to life in a large cosmopolitan city, and London, where the summer before she made some connections, was her first choice. She found herself an apartment on the King’s Road in the Chelsea district, once a peaceful riverside village with views of the Thames that had attracted the “Chelsea Set” of writers and artists. A host of the famous had lived there, including George Eliot, J.M.W. Turner, Dante Gabriel Rossetti, and Swinburne. The American-born Whistler had lived in Chelsea during the 1860s and painted Thomas Carlyle, another Chelsea resident.185 Carlyle set up her apartment as “Carlyle Studios.” 186 Sydney Strickland Tully, who had attended the Académie Julian just prior to Carlyle,187 also had a small studio in Chelsea,188 and the two women may have socialized at this time. Another acquaintance Carlyle likely renewed was with Julius Rolshoven, who had moved to London about 1895 to teach and paint portraits. Over a ten-year stay, he moved in fashionable society, friend to Henry James and John Singer Sargent.189 His portrait studio was located in the Fulham Road in South Kensington, not far from Carlyle.190 Given her success with her portraits of older women and her aptitude for catching the likeness of fellow students, Carlyle’s production most likely focused on portraiture. However, to make a living in this genre, one counted on word of mouth for commissions and on connections with the social elite. She had precious little of either. Although known in Paris within her circle as “Miss Carlyle, who had made so much progress in so short a time,” whose paintings had hung in the Salon in pride of place “on the line” and received praise from the critics, in London she had no family, few acquaintances, and a great deal of competition from more established artists. It is not known if she obtained any commissions, but she began work on a painting entitled

68 emergence, 1890 – 1899

Out-patients that she intended to submit to the summer exhibition of the British Royal Academy of Arts that coming season. On July 26 she attended the opening of a museum in the former Chelsea home of Thomas Carlyle at 24 Cheyne Row. As she signed the visitor’s book, the curator wrote beside her signature, “Miss Carlyle is a grand-niece of Thomas Carlyle.” Her tour of the modest 1708 terraced house where the writer had lived between 1834 and 1881 impressed her with its memorabilia, books, letters, and many personal effects. Standing in the Sage of Chelsea’s attic study, she may have imagined the leading intellectuals of the time, Charles Dickens and William Thackeray, Alfred, Lord Tennyson, John Stuart Mill, and John Ruskin all visiting her great-uncle here. In an effort to contribute to this memorial, she worked from photographs and Thomas Carlyle’s own death mask, also at the museum, to complete several sketches and a portrait, which she donated to the museum.191 Later that month she orchestrated some publicity by arranging to have herself interviewed by a popular English ladies’ magazine, The Gentlewoman.192 The article, while outlining her Canadian birth and her Parisian studies, placed much importance on her relationship to Thomas Carlyle and to her early sale of a painting to Princess Louise. Carlyle herself may have emphasized these points as appealing to English readers. Unfortunately for her pocketbook, no mention was made of her portraiture business in Chelsea. The author of the article may have concurred with the beliefs of the day that gentlewomanly behaviour did not include involvement in business. At home in Woodstock Emile Carlyle proudly informed the local newspaper that an article on her daughter’s career had appeared in The Gentlewoman. The Woodstock paper lost no time in reporting the honour. Clearly Mrs Carlyle saw an opportunity to reply to those townspeople who queried why her eldest daughter was still in Europe instead of coming home and settling down before she was left “on the shelf of spinsterhood.” 193 The time in Chelsea, while unsuccessful as a business proposition, ended with one triumph for Carlyle. In the spring of 1896, her painting Out-patients, completed over the winter, was accepted for exhibition at the Royal Academy of Arts.194 Following the summer opening, she at last returned home. The English media had described her work as “full of power and promise,” but after a year of dwindling resources and few commissions, she yielded to the necessity of establishing her professional practice in Canada.195

4 Brass and Copper Alternatives and Strategies 1896–1899  1

I don’t advise anyone to take [painting] up as a business proposi tion unless they really have talent, and are crippled so as to deprive them of physical labor. – Grandma Moses (1860–1961) 2

Carlyle’s reunion with family and old friends in Woodstock occupied the summer. Will and Lillian had both married while Carlyle was abroad, and Ernest and Edwin were away pursuing studies at university. Carlyle now shared the house with her father, still a county school inspector and active in town council affairs, her mother, her younger sister Maud, and Russell, the youngest, who was going to school in Woodstock.3 Friends and relatives were curious about her time abroad, and the request, “Tell me about your life in Paris,” frequently recurred. As one contemporary wrote, her “lips opened to answer, and then quickly closed speechless. One knew that the whole panorama of those six years of work had swept across her, and stricken her dumb. Those years were too great, too big with meaning to be spoken of lightly.” 4 But perhaps this explanation for her reticence is too simplistic. Carlyle may indeed have found it difficult to encapsulate the diversity of her experiences in France and to discuss the evolution of her self-image as a professional artist. She may also have been concerned about shocking her audience with the details of her independent bohemian life in Paris. She responded lightly with amusing incidents and brief word sketches. Woodstock townspeople were not the only ones following her career. Her women artist colleagues also were aware of her professional work. Just before she left England in May 1896, her work had been recognized at a sectional

70 emergence, 1890 – 1899

art conference mounted by the Women’s Art Association of Canada (waac) at the National Council of Women of Canada (ncwc) annual meeting in Montreal. Both organizations were firmly committed to the advancement of women’s participation in Canadian social, political, and artistic life;5 the recently formed ncwc especially had a political mandate with regard to women’s rights. The conference was hosted by the council’s patron, the Countess Lady Ishbel Aberdeen, wife of the Earl of Aberdeen, Canada’s governor general from 1893 to 1898. In addition to founding the Victorian Order of Nurses, Lady Aberdeen was the ncwc’s first president. In her speech to the waac Montreal conference in May 1896, Lady Aberdeen noted that the ncwc “will always have a tender feeling for this [Women’s Art] Association as it was the first society to affiliate with them.”6 The event was attended by successful Canadian women who represented every aspect of Canadian society and culture, including the poet Pauline Johnson (1861–1913). Speakers included the outspoken journalist Alice Freeman who wrote the “Woman’s Empire” column in Toronto’s Empire under her nom de plume Faith Fenton.7 The highlight of the event was an evening lantern show of photographs of paintings by contemporary Canadian women painters who had exhibited in the Paris Salon, the Royal Academy in London, and the 1893 Chicago World’s Fair. Included was work by Carlyle, Sarah Holden, Mary Bell, Harriet Ford, and Margaret Houghton. Carlyle’s recognition by a national women’s association dedicated to encouraging “women to effort in the promotion of art thought, art culture and artistic industry in Canada” may have indicated to her one avenue for setting up her professional practice as an artist.8 To establish a name for herself in Canada, she knew she would have to take full advantage of every opportunity to exhibit her work in professional associations, including societies of women artists and alternative venues. She may have once again considered portrait painting. At this moment in her career, the words of another Canadian artist, Estelle Kerr, were particularly apt: “I have known girls who have studied painting for years in Paris and then, finding it necessary to support themselves, have returned home and taught –French!” 9 For a woman, making the transition from amateur to professional artist required both versatility and tenacity. Deborah Cherry identifies a number of factors as influential for women in attaining a professional art practice in late nineteenth-century Britain.10 A middle-class background seemed to be advantageous; Canadian women artists’ experience appears to support this research. Middle-class women

Brass and Copper, 1896– 1899 71

such as Sydney Strickland Tully, her sister Louise Tully, Laura Muntz, and Carlyle all had access to a sound general education and some art education, materials, and (notably in the case of the Tully sisters) studio space. Sydney and Louise Tully were seen by contemporary Canadian accounts as privileged. They had an “ideal” studio space on the top floor of the family home overlooking the treed ravines of Toronto’s elite Rosedale. Their advantaged access to nature and to art education abroad were identified in an 1898 article by Jean Grant, as “recognized materials for the making of an artist,” a “very expensive … luxury of which most of us enjoy very little.” 11 They had a second “working” studio in the Yonge Street Arcade between Richmond and Adelaide Streets. Built in the 1880s, the arcade was a popular location for artists’ studios, art schools, and commercial art dealers such as the Art Metropole. Artists with studios in the arcade included Henrietta Vickers, Mary Wrinch, Mary Hiester Reid, and George Reid, and later, the young painter Henrietta Mary Shore (1880–1963), printmaker Estelle Kerr, and male colleagues William Cruikshank, A.C.G. Lapine, C.M. Manly, and Robert Holmes.12 The note of envy in Grant’s article may be contextualized in the light of the fact that in addition to family money and encouragement, the Tully sisters were well connected within artistic circles in Canada. Cherry identifies kinship relationships, such as a mother or aunt who were amateur or professional artists, as an additional factor influencing women toward professional art practice.13 Louise and Sydney Tully’s mother, Maria Strickland, was the daughter of Lieutenant-Colonel Strickland, brother of the author Catherine Parr Traill and author-painter Susannah Moodie (1803–1885). Traill and Moodie may have offered instruction or simply served as real-life examples of women who worked independently in cultural matters and had successful careers. Sydney Tully undoubtedly received support and encouragement from her aunt, noted wildflower painter Agnes Moodie Fitzgibbon (1833–1913); the two were known in family circles as being “great friends.” 14 Fitzgibbon remarried, to Colonel Brown Chamberlin, owner of the Montreal Gazette and later appointed Queen’s Printer. Living in Ottawa, the couple became friends with Lady Dufferin.15 While it may be coincidence that Lady Dufferin was supportive to art-student Carlyle, she may have been sensitized to the need to support women artists studying art abroad by the self-taught Agnes Fitzgibbon. Being “free from all home cares,” a goal more easily accessible to women from the middle classes, was a central factor in women becoming artists.16 In

72 emergence, 1890 – 1899

addition, the research of Catherine Hall indicates that nineteenth-century class-specific beliefs in the value of work was a driving force behind feminists’ bid for paid employment for middle-class women.17 Cherry has also observed the importance of networking in women artist’s success.18 Religious, social, friendship, family, and voluntary associations are all networking activities characteristic of the middle class. The women in these associations, which included women’s art alliances such as the waac, were able to draw on considerable organizational abilities.

 In the summer of 1896 Carlyle had much of a practical nature to think about. One of her first actions was to set up a studio in the family’s red barn behind the house on Wilson Street (fig. 1.4). The old barn surrounded by tall trees was a dramatic change from cramped garret quarters or working elbow to elbow in an atelier. A friend who visited the studio described it: “[One] entered the fine old grounds of the Carlyle home, and emerged from the tree-bordered walk in front of the spacious, rambling cottage … its broad verandah, vine-covered, [and crossed] the lawn and through the barn door that opened on her interesting studio. Inside, the walls were lined with pictures, the worktable, easels … it was all disappointingly orderly, although [the artist] insisted that the floor had not been cleaned for weeks.” 19 The abrupt shift from cosmopolitan life to the quiet community of Woodstock appears at least to have suggested new subject matter. The paintings Carlyle produced during that summer and fall, such as Sketch, Darning Stockings (ca. 1896),20 reflect her growing fascination with domestic scenes of women working, reading, or enjoying a quiet moment in the family parlour.21 Prior to 1890, as eldest daughter in a large family, she had been all too familiar with domestic duties, and her work in Paris and Brittany showed her attraction to material outside her immediate experience. Six years later, she viewed the mundane tasks in her family home with a fresh eye (fig. 4.1). Her subjects, like those of her contemporaries Mary Cassatt and Berthe Morisot, are sisters, nieces, her mother, women she knew intimately. In her study of Berthe Morisot’s paintings of women family members and friends, Anne Higonnet asserts that such paintings may be viewed as extensions of these personal relationships.22 Carlyle’s images through the years similarly express and reaffirm such bonds. The casual intimacy, the feathery brush strokes and contemporary subject matter of An Interesting Chapter (1897) indicate Carlyle’s debt to the

Brass and Copper, 1896– 1899 73

fig. 4.1 An Interesting Chapter, Florence Carlyle, 1897. One of Carlyle’s first paintings completed on her return to Canada, described in a London Free Press review in 1898, this painting remains unlocated.

Impressionist painters whose work she had been exposed to in Paris (fig. 4.1). During her years in Europe, the tenets of Realism had influenced her choice of subjects and her academic approach in Une dame hollandaise (1893) (fig. 3.2). The return to her roots in Canada seemed to precipitate a gradual shift toward Impressionism and her focus on aspects of women’s domestic life. She found what she needed at her door; her paintings from this time on express a woman’s experience and signs of home. That autumn she gradually re-accustomed herself to life in Woodstock. She rejoined the Saturday Reading Club, the literary group founded by seven women in the mid-1880s, which still met weekly in the town to discuss and debate. Carlyle had been an early member, and when she sailed for Europe she had taken with her an enthusiasm and appreciation for literature. The impact of this society may be measured in the number of women who belonged to it during the years of Carlyle’s membership, who later had distinguished careers in publishing or writing in Canada. These included her

74 emergence, 1890 – 1899

close friend Isabel Ecclestone MacKay (1875–1928), who was pursuing a career as a poet and short-story writer.23 Holding weekly meetings at each other’s houses in turn, Carlyle and her fellow members evidently had to endure some “masculine jeers,” albeit light-hearted, betraying a reluctance on the part of Woodstock’s male population to take women’s intellectual activities seriously.24 Apart from the Reading Club, however, there is little evidence that Carlyle participated further in Woodstock’s social life. Her centre of activity was her studio, where she painted diligently in preparation for the coming Canadian exhibition season and gave careful thought to how she could establish herself in her profession.

The Footpath: 25 Professional Practice At the turn of the century a successful artistic career required income from a variety of sources: sales at exhibitions or direct from the studio, commissions from private, commercial, or state clients, publication of articles, and teaching.26 With years of thrift behind her, Carlyle understood the risks of launching a professional practice and knew that while talent was mandatory, financial resources were vital. Anna Lea Merritt (1844–1930), an Americanborn, British-resident artist, noted in her article “Letter to Artists: Especially Women Artists” that at this time two hundred pounds was required to establish oneself and pay one year’s expenses, including studio, models, and materials: “There is no income so fluctuating as that of the artist,” she cautioned female readers.27 Artists had to work as entrepreneurs and conduct their art as a business; they had to possess technical knowledge, be familiar with the market, and carefully court dealers, critics, and clients. Especially skilful manipulation of these prerequisites was required from women artists, acting within the restraining definition of femininity and with little experience of commerce. Lack of capital was only one barrier. Male artists were free to conduct business in either public or private spaces; not so for their women colleagues. Social strictures curtailed them from meeting male clients on their own. The system clearly gave male artists the advantage with respect to commissions, sales, and contracts for paintings. In nineteenth-century England this asymmetrical economic structuring situated women artists unequally in relation to income levels, profits, supplementary earnings, and finance cap-

Brass and Copper, 1896– 1899 75

ital.28 There is little to indicate that the state of affairs for Canadian women artists was any better. Institutionalized ideas of the time also kept women out of artists’ societies or placed them into special categories. Britain’s Royal Academy of Arts, with which Carlyle had exhibited a painting in the spring of 1896, barred women from membership throughout the nineteenth century. Although at its foundation in 1768 there had been two women members, no other women attained membership until 1922, and women were not elected to the status of academician until 1936.29 Carlyle encountered similar barriers as she made submissions to the Royal Canadian Academy of Art in the autumn of 1896. The rca, Canada’s premier and most distinguished art association, described in the 1898 American Art Annual as holding “the most important Canadian exhibition of the year,” had two grades of members: academicians, known by the letters rca, and associates, known by the letters arca.30 The rca had elected Charlotte Schreiber as a founding academician member in 1880; yet between 1880 and 1896 women artists were barred from full academician status and could only advance to the level of associate upon election by an exclusively male group of academicians. The rca’s constitution stated that “women shall be eligible for membership … but their names shall not be placed upon the list of rotation for the council.” 31 The distinction between the two levels was a significant one for women artists. Unlike doctors or lawyers, artists could not gain accreditation through formal examinations; their professional status was defined and regulated by the art societies. The initials rca or arca after an artist’s name were badges of professional status that gained sales and commissions and advanced a career. The lower classification of women as arca was not simply discrimination but part of a broader problem of gendered power relations. Carlyle and her female colleagues undoubtedly understood the limitations placed on their membership and their exclusion from decision-making processes in the rca, yet recognized it as the path forward. The rca jury was known to decline membership and to refuse to exhibit work. Carlyle’s colleague Mary Ella Dignam, waac founder and president, exhibited with the rca yet was never elected to associate membership.32 Hedging her bets, Carlyle ensured that her paintings would be included in a variety of Canadian venues by receiving permission to exhibit her work with the waac exhibition tour. She had clearly been impressed by the waac’s inclusion of her work in the sessional meeting in Montreal the previous

76 emergence, 1890 – 1899

spring and aligned herself with forward-thinking women who were successfully championing the cause of women artists in Canada. The waac exhibition was a wise choice for her first spring of full participation in the Canadian art world, assuring her wide exposure. This women-only exhibition would travel across Canada from its opening venue in Toronto to the waac branches in Hamilton, St Thomas, and Brockville, then on to Montreal and to Saint John, New Brunswick. Equally important, Carlyle had aligned herself with her contemporary Canadian women colleagues. Women of her generation embarking on professional artistic careers and seeking broad public forums for their work, a prerequisite for professional practice, formulated strategies for dealing with special categorization by art institutions. One response was the founding of art and cultural societies devoted exclusively to work by women. By far the most popular women-only cultural or arts groups among the artists of Carlyle’s generation were the waac with its branch associations and the Toronto Heliconian Club.33 Although such societies had emerged in Britain in the 1850s, in Canada (while precursors dated from the 1870s) it was not until 1887 that Mary Dignam had formed the Woman’s Art Club in Toronto. At its beginnings the group had twenty members who met in one member’s Toronto studio. Later the club provided studio premises where women artists could gather to hold exhibitions and attend lectures.34 In 1892 it was incorporated as the waac. Its leaders encouraged women in other cities to form branches.35 With its close affiliates such as the Ontario’s Woman’s Art Club in London (wacl), it helped link Canadian women artists by professional interest and facilitated networks of friendship. By 1897, when Carlyle first exhibited with it, the waac had grown to include hundreds of members from Manitoba to New Brunswick. It promoted a range of women’s artistic activities. For example, in spring 1897 a local newspaper reported that among the seventy-odd members of the St Thomas branch, “some copy and some do original work; some are amateurs and some are critics; all are united and interested in one another’s welfare.” 36 In the larger centres such as Toronto, the waac also organized lectures that were open to the general public. In January 1897 Carlyle and her colleagues might have attended a lecture on William Morris by James Mavor (1854–1925), professor of political economy at the University of Toronto and a highly respected critic of contemporary Canadian art.37 A central concern of the waac, however, was to create exhibition opportunities. The main

Brass and Copper, 1896– 1899 77

exhibitions often toured from branch to branch, giving local artists the opportunity to exhibit alongside professionals.38 Exhibitions were held annually in smaller centres such as Portage la Prairie, Manitoba, and St Thomas, Ontario, where opportunities for women to show work in public was limited. But rural communities were sometimes unable to sustain art clubs in the long term; this was the case with the Portage la Prairie branch, which formed in 1896 and became inactive in 1901.39 Women’s art clubs such as the waac, open to both amateurs and aspiring professionals, and Toronto’s Heliconian Club 40 may have functioned as a bridge for women to move from exhibition in a socially acceptable venue toward exhibition with male colleagues and the increased public exposure of professional practice. Yet some women still had misgivings about selling their work in public exhibitions. French artist Berthe Morisot disliked selling paintings to strangers, and much of her work was kept or given to family and friends. Women of her generation or their families often felt it was wrong to sell work that “seemed invested with family love or friendship, for economic gain.” 41 These tendencies reflect a reticence toward public display grounded in social expectations and women’s amateur tradition. Even a generation later, the notion of public exhibition hindered the work and public recognition of British painter Gwen John (1876–1939): “I paint …but I don’t often get a picture done – that requires, for me, a very long time of a quiet mind and never to think of exhibitions.” 42 There is no evidence that Carlyle suffered from a lack of confidence about exhibiting her work in public. Her studio saw a flurry of activity all winter as she prepared for the Canadian spring exhibitions. Warmed by a small woodstove, well-stoked so that she could comfortably paint, the interior brightly lit by a large double corner window, she worked up sketches into several new paintings to add to others dating from her years in Paris.43 These new paintings, like those of other Paris-trained painters, showed the influence of French Impressionism.44 In the mid 1890s, some twenty years after the appearance of the movement, a number of varieties and adaptations of the style existed at an international level; Carlyle’s particular style may be viewed as a version of Academic Impressionism, a term that may be understood as referring back to a tradition of standards of craftsmanship taught in the nineteenth-century academies.45 Carlyle was indebted to the surfaces of Impressionism rather than slavishly adhering to its principles. In Summer (ca. 1901, fig. 3.4), the influence of Impressionism is visible in her freedom of brushwork and recognition of

78 emergence, 1890 – 1899

fig. 4.2 The Garden, Florence Carlyle, 1913. The artist’s youngest sister, Maud, is shown hanging laundry in the garden of the family home in Woodstock. Also known as The Garden at Englewood, the painting was first exhibited at the rca exhibition, Ottawa, February 1900. [plate 9]

the effects of sunlight filtering through the trees and onto the figure. Other outdoor subjects such as The Garden (1913, fig. 4.2) are distinguished by their immediacy, fluid paint application, and rich colour schemes. Carlyle’s concern for the effects of sunlight in an interior are developed in paintings like Golden Rod (1901, fig. 4.3) and Before Her First Communion (ca. 1903,

Brass and Copper, 1896– 1899 79

fig. 4.3 Golden Rod, Florence Carlyle, 1901. Golden Rod received an Honourable Mention at the Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo, New York, 1901. [plate 1o]

fig. 4.4). In them, she synthesizes these broadly painted surfaces and rendering of the effects of light associated with Impressionism with characteristics of her academic training. In The Tiff (1902), another painting from this period, a softly lit interior scene is painted with gentle, precise brush strokes (fig. ii) rather than the looser, bravura manner seen in Golden Rod and The Garden. In February Carlyle sorted and readied her work. Each painting had to be framed, touched up, crated, and shipped to the venues. Since many Canadian show dates overlapped and involved shipping to different cities, she assigned each painting to one exhibition.

fig. 4.4 Before Her First Communion, Florence Carlyle, ca. 1903. First exhibited in Ottawa at the rca exhibition in the spring of 1903, in 1911 the painting was owned by John Campbell of London, Ont. Illustrated in “Florence Carlyle, Artist,” Christmas Echo (London, Ont.), December 1911. [plate 11]

Brass and Copper, 1896– 1899 81

 “The Practice of Her Profession”:46 The Business of Art Carlyle arrived in Toronto the day before the opening of the waac 1897 spring exhibition. When she stepped off the train and walked through Union Station,47 Toronto’s population was nearing 200,000. Electric streetcars had been operating on Church Street for several years. Many buildings that would become landmarks were newly completed or under construction: the Parliament buildings at Queen’s Park had recently opened, and construction was completed on Massey Hall and Victoria College. The waac exhibition was being held at a prestigious private art gallery, the Roberts’ and Sons Galleries at 79 King Street West. Carlyle was struck by the elegance of the bright modern space. The paintings were hung in the main room of the gallery in the usual salon fashion, in two or three tiers easily visible to the viewer. A large skylight allowed natural illumination for the scheduled afternoon private view, and electric lights hung every few feet around the ceiling perimeter. Although she was largely unknown to Toronto critics, Carlyle’s work was received with great interest. Her choice of paintings showed her work at its most conventional. Several, such as Old Canal and Spinning Woman, she had completed in France. Traditional scenes of Breton peasant life like La vieille Victorine (fig. 3.3) indicate that she was shaping her public exposure to appeal to a conservative venue and audience. For this exhibition she changed the title of Victorine to the unambiguous declaration, “Mère Adele” (The Model Who Posed for Millet’s Angelus). The Toronto papers and the Canadian Home Journal made much of the connection between Millet’s model for one of the most popular and widely reproduced paintings of the century and the model for Carlyle’s painting, an old “peasant woman sitting [with] stooped shoulders, [and] work-worn hands.”48 The press reports described it as the picture that attracted the most attention after a painting by Carlyle’s friend Sarah Holden.49 The spring season was off to a promising start for Carlyle. She was mentioned in no less than three articles on the exhibition, and had made valuable acquaintances in the relatively small and close-knit Toronto art world. Two weeks later the exhibition proceeded on to branches in Hamilton, St Thomas, and Brockville, ending in Saint John in early May. Only one blot marred the tour. After the Toronto opening a cartoon appeared on the front page of Saturday Night with the caption “Impressions – Woman’s Art Exhibit” (fig. 4.5). Eight paintings from the waac exhibition, including Carlyle’s Spin-

82 emergence, 1890 – 1899

fig. 4.5 “Impressions – Woman’s Art Exhibit,” reprinted from Saturday Night, 6 March 1897.

ning Woman, were the objects of ridicule. The cartoon accurately maintained the title of each work but changed the subject matter into ridiculous parodies of the original. Carlyle’s study of an elderly peasant woman at her spinning wheel was lampooned as a woman dressed in trousers furiously pedalling a bicycle, raising clouds of dust in unladylike haste. This “scandalous” depiction was perhaps meant to be a derision of the contemporary phenomenon of the liberated “New Woman.”50 Focusing on the Ninth Annual Exhibition of the Woman’s Art Association in this way, the cartoon’s intent was clearly to deride the work and image of “lady artists”– viewed by the cartoon’s creators as legitimate targets for the butt of a joke. rca exhibitions alternated annually between Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa, and occasionally other cities. The tenets of its original concept, which included the goal of holding the exhibition in a different city of the dominion every year, were at best only minimally fulfilled; central Canada was

Brass and Copper, 1896– 1899 83

privileged in its access to Academy exhibitions. Ottawa was the venue in spring 1897. It is not known if Carlyle was present at this second exhibition of her work with the rca, but after careful consideration she had sent what she likely considered three of her best paintings. This was the venue at which to shine.51 As the rca exhibitions attracted national critical attention, she would have been keen to present her most successful and innovative work to colleagues and the public. Having garnered critical praise for Une dame hollandaise (1893) when it was exhibited at the Salon, she may have reasoned that it would remind the rca council of her modest Parisian triumphs and years of academic training (fig. 3.2). As she had done with Victorine, she renamed it, titling it Portrait of Dutch Lady for the exhibition. Its subject matter and treatment reveal the influence of the Realist school and the “tried and true” academic training that likely found an appreciative audience in the older generation of rca academicians. Her choice proved astute. On 10 March 1897, the day following the opening, she was elected an associate member of the rca at the general assembly meeting.52 Ten days later an announcement was made in the Saturday Night art column that “Miss Florence Carlyle of Woodstock … a niece of Thomas Carlyle” was elected an associate. The writer seemed to feel that Carlyle was made more newsworthy by her connection to a famous male relative. There were now ten women associates of the rca, including Carlyle and her friend Margaret Houghton, also made an associate at this time.53 The award of associate status was far from automatic: a number of women artists who continued to exhibit work with the rca in the 1890s were not successful in achieving associate designation. This group included artists who also remained active with the waac, including Mary Phillips and Toronto artists Cary McConnell, Carrie L. Hilliard, Eleanor Douglas, and the previously mentioned Mary Ella Dignam.54 The next opening was the spring exhibition of the Art Association of Montreal. Critics covering the event for national publications such as Saturday Night included the Toronto journalist who signed her columns with the humorous pen-name Lynn C. Doyle (“linseed oil”). According to Doyle, Sarah Holden, who had also attended the rca exhibition opening, was praised for one of her paintings, Paint Me, Auntie.55 At this time Holden was fast gaining professional visibility in Montreal as a genre painter of children, as the title of her painting indicates. Also at the opening were artist Mary Phillips, who had organized the Montreal branch of the waac two years

84 emergence, 1890 – 1899

previously,56 Mr and Mrs George Drummond, wealthy patrons of the arts, and “Lady and Misses Van Horne.” Laura Muntz was in Paris at 3 Rue Bara; however, she sent several paintings of children and “Paris street sketches” to other Canadian exhibitions.57 Sydney Tully was still working and teaching at her Chelsea studio in London, England, and her professional focus was on British, not Canadian exhibitions that year. Within the next twelve months Tully, Muntz, and Carlyle would each gain significant professional reputations in Canada. Along with the muchrespected artist Mary Hiester Reid, they were singled out for recognition in an 1898 article in Toronto’s Mail and Empire. Photographs of the four artists appeared alongside examples of their paintings. The article asserted their talent as well as their personal characteristics of “pluck and endurance” to “pursue the study of painting seriously [and to] have adopted art as a profession.”58 Such public recognition, even on such a relatively modest scale, was a rare boon for Canadian women artists. Eight days after her election to associate status with the rca, Carlyle made the short journey from Woodstock to London, Ontario, for the opening festivities of the Woman’s Art Club of London (wacl) annual exhibition. The women-only group, organized in 1893, had become a branch of the waac between 1894 and 1896 and then reformed as the wacl.59 Carlyle seems to have decided to affiliate with the club to build upon her contacts in the city. This was a sound professional strategy since wacl exhibitions attracted much local attention and the patronage of area residents. The wacl’s aims were similar to those of the national waac: to promote women’s art training and to encourage professional practice among women. Local press coverage from 1897 offers us an account of the commitment and energy of the wacl’s founders and members, who worked to establish “a school for original art training, and to have a work-room accessible at all times to the students, to go there and pursue their studies …in this way to provide opportunity for all girls who may discover the artistic faculty and desire to improve it, [with the goal of ] qualifying themselves for a professional career.” 60 The society addressed many aspects of women’s art education. Short papers were presented and fortnightly meetings were held where “students have the advantage of high professional criticism and the kindly interchange of help from one another.” 61 Carlyle had diverted two of her paintings from the waac’s national tour at the close of the two-week Toronto show to the wacl exhibition opening only days later on 18 March. This exhibition of work by club members, shared

Brass and Copper, 1896– 1899 85

with an art loan of paintings from local collections, was held at the wacl studio in the upper rooms of the London Public Library. After applauding the merits of second-line European “masters,” the critics turned their attention to the work of Canadian artists. Carlyle and her contributions took centre stage. A self-portrait, Sketch of the Artist (ca. 1904, fig. i), gives us a glimpse of her personal style. Her presence at the opening, with her air of continental sophistication, made an impression; the thirty-two-year-old painter seems to have been viewed equally as an object of interest as her paintings: “The young artist, who was herself present, attracted as much attention as did her strong, Frenchy work, for it is not in her painting alone that Miss Carlyle achieves true Parisian chic.” 62 Carlyle’s status as one of the celebrities of the exhibition, while flattering and expedient for beginning an art practice locally, must have had a slightly hollow ring to it. By its very nature the wacl did not set professional standards to membership. Its aim was to teach and to provide a venue for emerging local women artists, many of whom had little art instruction, with only a few educated to a professional level. This mixture of professional and amateur levels was commonplace in smaller women’s art clubs at the time. Deborah Cherry has called attention to the struggle endured by nineteenth-century women artists to forge a public professional identity against forces that tended to dismiss them as amateur and perceived their art as mere accomplishments of graceful “ladies.” 63 The title of one other review of the wacl exhibition referred to the women artists collectively as “Beauties of the Brush.”64 One critic writing in 1897 drew a decidedly domestic analogy between Carlyle’s painting and baking: “This young lady has been studying abroad, and shows every sign of the leaven having begun its work.” 65 An earlier (1894) newspaper article on the wacl, “What Our Women Can Do, How Many London Ladies Secure Extra Pin Money,” reinforced the public image of women artists exhibiting paintings as amateurs amusing themselves with a hobby: “The members of the club can hardly be call[ed] professionals, although nearly all of them sell their paintings for the ‘cold cash.’ They are all the wives or daughters of well-known citizens, and, with one or two exceptions, are not in anyway dependent upon these sales for a livelihood.” 66 The writer displays thinly veiled hostility toward women who aspired to professional art practice, indicating the chilly climate for those who stepped outside the narrow boundaries of what constituted acceptable feminine behaviour. The reception given to Carlyle three years later indicates that

86 emergence, 1890 – 1899

disapproval of women’s involvement in the commercial aspects of selling their work did not seem to extend to European-trained women artists. Carlyle’s extensive education in Europe and her visual presentation of herself to the city’s elite as a sophisticated professional seems to have set her apart from the other exhibitors. Aligning herself with the waac and the wacl, two prominent women’s art societies committed to women’s art education and the active promotion of work by women artists, provided Carlyle with an opportunity to gain exposure across Canada at this early point in her career. Faced with the challenge of earning a living, she seems to have foreseen the importance of London, nearby St Thomas, and Hamilton as a circumscribed geographical area in which to establish a reputation and launch a professional practice. She approached O.B. Graves (b. 1864), the proprietor of an art store at 222 Dundas Street to act as her London dealer. The store sold art, art supplies, and frames. Graves had been a good friend of Paul Peel, exhibiting Peel’s work in his store window during the 1880s.67 He accepted the invitation to act as Carlyle’s dealer for some paintings and advised her on the best approach to obtain portrait commissions locally. Portrait painting was a challenging field. The prominent Canadian artist Lucius O’Brien had earlier advised a colleague, “Success in portrait painting seems to be very much a matter of push and business attack.” 68 Leading Canadian portrait painters at the time included Robert Harris (1849–1919), whose 1883 federal government commission for the large group painting The Fathers of Confederation launched his career as one of Canada’s most fashionable portraitists.69 E. Wyly Grier (1862–1957) had a reputation as the portrait painter of the establishment. Andrew Dickson Patterson (1854–1930), F. McGillivray Knowles (1859–1932), and John W.L. Forster (1850–1938) were also well-known names in portraiture in Canada during the 1890s. Knowles and Forster had studios in Toronto and advertised their businesses in Toronto publications.70 In Montreal, G. Horne Russell (1861–1933) was the favourite portraitist of fashionable society.71 Few Canadian women portraitists in 1897 could boast of a comparable professional practice to their male colleagues. But while life on the margins of the established Canadian art world was undoubtedly challenging, the periphery offered possibilities. Tamar Garb points out in her study of the Union des Femmes Peintres et Sculpteurs, an organization established in Paris by professionally ambitious women artists in 1881, that the margins could be “a position from which to turn the tables on the centre … to enter the world of the ‘other’… and split apart its mythic unity.” 72

Brass and Copper, 1896– 1899 87

Women artists were making gains in the area of portraiture by 1900. In a ncwc publication on the work of Canadian women, and in an 1899 article she wrote on a waac organized portrait exhibition, Mary Dignam acknowledged the professional activity of five Canadian women as successful portraitists. These were Laura Muntz, known for her portraits of children; Sydney Tully, who had gained attention with her portrait commission of Professor Goldwin Smith; Tully’s former pupil, Clara Sophia Hagarty (1871– 1958), Toronto painter M. Cary McConnell (act. 1890–1900), and Carlyle.73 According to Dignam’s article, by 1899 Carlyle had been successful in highlighting portraiture in her professional artistic persona. London was prospering during the 1880s and 1890s and supported a number of portrait artists who advertised locally.74 Carlyle made a favourable impression on the area’s elite with her early exhibitions, and she likely capitalized on this introduction to obtain commissions. The acquaintances she made through the wacl were one networking strategy she could rely on. Many prominent London families were members, patrons, or on the executive committee of the club, with surnames such as Carling, Betts, Gibbons, Smallman, Perrin Williams, and Hyman.75 No doubt feeling she had made practical steps toward establishing her art practice in Canada, Carlyle faced her final exhibition of the 1897 spring season, the osa exhibition, with assurance. She was diverging from the more finely controlled academic style that characterized her work in France; her paintings for the 1897 season show the influence of Impressionism on her emerging style. In the early 1890s. Impressionism had met with resistance by many Canadian critics and collectors who saw the influence of the French school possibly interfering with the development of a national Canadian art based on Canadian life and subjects.76 In the mid-1890s one Montreal newspaper noted, “this subject [Impressionism] is one little understood here.” 77 In April 1897 William Brymner, as director of the Art Association of Montreal School, sought to educate Canadian art enthusiasts to the style in a lecture at the Montreal art gallery. Many Canadian artists, he asserted, saw it as the way forward, as “the modern manifestation of the eternal light between the living and felt, and the dead and stereotyped.”78 That same year, paintings of the Canadian landscape done in an Impressionist style exhibited in Canada met a more favourable reception, indicating a warming towards Impressionism in Canada by this time.79 This appears to have been the case from the critical reception at the aam Exhibition in the spring of 1897 (at which Carlyle did not exhibit) as well as other exhibitions in the country as Paris-trained artists such as Carlyle, Muntz, Cullen, and Morrice rein-

88 emergence, 1890 – 1899

terpreted and integrated aspects of the style. Carlyle, like her colleagues, developed her particular strain of Impressionism. While closely adhering to Impressionist subject matter, in her work from this period her Academic roots continued to assert themselves.  On Exhibition: Women Artists and Canadian Exhibition Venues During the last decade of the nineteenth century, three Toronto exhibition venues were crucial to women seeking professional status as artists in Ontario: the women-only waac, the annual exhibitions of the Fine Arts Department at the Toronto Industrial Exhibition (tie), and the Ontario Society of Artists (osa), the most influential provincial artist association. Founded in 1872, the osa had as its principal aim “the creation of a society to foster ‘original art’ in the province by holding annual exhibitions of work by society members.”80 During the closing years of the century, the osa exercised considerable control over the popular art shows at the tie. In contrast to the rsa, the osa admitted women as full members from the time of its inception, although it still restricted female members’ access to the executive functions of the society. Although the works exhibited were chosen by a jury of member artists, the constitution stated that “women shall not have the privilege of voting or attending the meetings unless specifically invited to do so by resolution of the Society.” 81 During the early years of Carlyle’s career, few women were invited to share in this privilege. One exception was Charlotte Schreiber, a charter member and the only woman academician of the rca. Until her return to England in 1898 she was allowed to attend meetings as she represented the osa on the council of the Ontario School of Art and Design in Toronto.82 Toronto was central in Carlyle’s plans to launch her career. Yet while Toronto was a vital and growing city, problems for artists in the city abounded; support from collectors was minimal, art societies had to implore officials to establish an art gallery, and articles in Saturday Night bemoaned the city’s cultural apathy. Yet it was attracting growing numbers of well-trained, spirited young artists who were ambitious and determined to inject new ideas into the city’s artistic life. By the late 1890s Toronto was beginning to emerge as the centre of dynamic change in the Canadian art world. In 1897 Toronto’s number of commercial art dealers was equal to that of Montreal; at these artists could gain exposure and sell their work. Dealers included the Art Metropole, and Matthews, Gilder and Picture Dealer, both located on Yonge Street, and Roberts’ Art Gallery and the E. Harris Company on King.83

Brass and Copper, 1896– 1899 89

Not the “blare of trumpet and beating of drums, [but] music” marked the opening of the osa exhibition on 13 May 1897 in the Provincial Art Gallery.84 Two years before, the gallery had been established by the Ontario Ministry of Education and the osa in rooms in the Education Department at the Toronto Normal School in St James Square. It hosted the annual osa exhibitions and also housed the provincial art collection comprised of works acquired each year by the provincial government through a program of annual purchases from osa exhibitions.85 The prices Carlyle set for her two paintings, $100 for An Interesting Chapter (fig. 4.1), also known as Dreams, and $75 for “Reminiscences,” were her highest since her return to Canada but within the range set by the most popular, well-established artists at the exhibition. Academician Frederic Marlett Bell-Smith (1846–1923), recently returned from Paris, offered his most costly painting, Island Park, Toronto, for $100; young Torontonian John William Beatty (1869–1941), who would later go on painting trips with A.Y. Jackson, offered his Shore of Humber Bay for only $20.86 The paintings Carlyle chose to exhibit, both in an Impressionist-influenced style, suggest she purposely chose her most experimental work for the Toronto venue. Both were genre paintings, concerned with women’s engagement with everyday domestic life; the narrative element, a still popular notion, was of lesser importance in An Interesting Chapter. Singled out for its tonal qualities of colour and “loose, free handling” of paint effects, it was described in the Toronto reviews as among “the freshest, most original pieces of work to be seen … a study of light grays, with touches of pink.” 87 These light effects may be compared with those in her Summer (1901) painted shortly after (fig. 3.4). In the latter painting the artist conveys the fleeting natural effects of sun filtering through leaves. There is no horizon, no open sky. The boundaries are formed by the circle of green of trees and bushes, at once sheltering and restricting, around the young woman. Only the warm sun dappling her white dress alleviates the pervasive press of vegetation. The single standing figure has a monumental stillness. Critics in 1897 also commented on Carlyle’s rendering of the effects of filtered sunlight in an interior scene, particularly in the play of “vivid bars” of sun through closed shutters behind the seated woman in Reminiscences.88 Her experimenting with the effects of bright outdoor and filtered sunlight demonstrates her awareness of Impressionist concerns. While she did not unreservedly embrace Impressionism, she achieved in her work a compromise between Impressionism and the strict tenets of the Academic tradition.89 This, along with her technical abilities, brought her to the notice of the

90 emergence, 1890 – 1899

Canadian critics. A leading critic of the day, Hector Charlesworth, wrote, “I well recall the days of the [1890s] when she first commenced to exhibit in Canada … one of a small group of women whose technical skill and distinctive individuality gave interest to many exhibitions … In style she was much more modern than her friend and patron, Paul Peel; and the freedom of her brush work was something new and unfamiliar in that period.” 90 As Deborah Cherry has observed, it is the language of critical reception that excludes women from serious consideration as professionals and denies women’s importance as cultural producers.91 At a time when increasing numbers of women were producing art for a living, exhibiting and selling their works, Charlesworth’s comments characterized women artists as a “small group,” likely including Sydney Tully, Laura Muntz, Sarah Holden, Harriet Ford, and Mary Hiester Reid. This positioning of women on the margins lends authority to the exclusivity of masculine claims to professional status as artists. Following the excitement and stimulation of the Canadian exhibition season, Carlyle returned to her red barn studio at Englewood. The quiet amid her canvases and paint pots allowed for thoughtful review of the past months; however, her location in Woodstock meant that she was also relatively isolated from her peers. As a contemporary art critic wrote of the nearby village of Doon, Ontario, where the successful artist Homer Watson spent part of his year, “the most impenetrable solitude it is possible to obtain [is] the solitude of a prosperous, agricultural, art-forsaken corner of Canada.” 92 Rather than a bow to the convention that an unwed woman should live respectably with her parents, Carlyle’s decision to make the red barn her studio was more likely due to financial constraints. To set up a studio elsewhere, she would have to build up a cash reserve from her sales and commissions. Several of her paintings did not reappear in other exhibitions, suggesting she had some sales.93 Once again she attuned herself to village life, taking up old acquaintances and finding inspiration for her paintings in scenes of everyday life. While increasingly interested in figural painting, in July she finished one of her few animal subjects, a small, loosely painted work entitled Joe Boyle’s Dog. The owner of the dog, a St Bernard, was a neighbour, Joseph Whiteside Boyle (1867–1923), who attended the Canadian Literary Institute with Carlyle before going on to a colourful career as a Yukon prospector, entrepreneur, and soldier.94 The painting shows the dog, a St Bernard, on a

Brass and Copper, 1896– 1899 91

rug, warm sunlight from the window highlighting its russet coat. The painting was not exhibited publicly and was likely given to the family as a present. Carlyle, who rarely dated her paintings in the usual manner with a year of production, signed and prominently wrote not only the year but also a specific date and month, “July 27, ’97.” Perhaps the date had a special significance. The end of 1897 saw some social events that relieved Carlyle’s isolation. In early December 1897, the Countess of Aberdeen, wife of the governor general and patroness of the National Council of Women of Canada, visited London, Ontario, and toured the wacl’s special exhibition of painted china.95 Given Carlyle’s association with the society, it is likely that she was among the crowd at the afternoon event. Addressing the reception, the wacl president, Mrs Leonard, expressed her hope that the vice-regal attention would “prove an incentive to greater work and deeper study.” 96 On 28 December 1897, Carlyle and twenty-five hundred other guests attended the Victorian Era Ball held at Toronto’s new Militia Armoury.97 Hosted by the governor general and the Countess of Aberdeen, the historical costume ball (a popular phenomenon of the time) was held to celebrate the Diamond Jubilee of Queen Victoria. Proceeds were donated to aid the newly formed Victorian Order of Nurses. All guests were to appear in costume, and a select group of leading families from Toronto, Hamilton, and London were invited to appear in groups or “sets” of characters related to one of the six themes of the ball, “denoting the progress made in all departments of life under Queen Victoria.” Groups personifying such areas as the Empire, science, and arts and letters were to devise and perform a dance appropriate to the theme while the orchestra played patriotic songs such as “Rule Britannia” and “The British Grenadiers.” 98 Carlyle attended with her mother and father and her aunt and uncle, Dr and Mrs James Carlyle. Although they had received the much-coveted invitations, they were not socially eminent, certainly not enough to belong to the select group dubbed the “Toronto’s Four Hundred.” Many of the costumes were imaginative; Augusta Beverley Robinson, the youngest child of the former Ontario lieutenant governor, appeared as “Fishing” or “Cod.” Her dress was painted to resemble a salmon can label, and on her head she wore a fishing net and miniature boat. Other costumes mirrored contemporary events. Carlyle and her friend Alice Freeman (aka “Miss Faith Fenton,” well known as the author of the “Woman’s Empire” column in The Empire 99) both dressed in the uniform of English Jubilee nurses –“black dress, Holland apron, Queen’s medal, white cap.”

92 emergence, 1890 – 1899

Among the other artists present were the portraitist Andrew Dickson Patterson, son of a Supreme Court of Canada justice,100 dressed as a herald in the “March of the Pictures” set. Patterson was married to painter Edith Lalande Patterson, Carlyle’s close friend in Paris. Painter and applied-art artist Mabel Cawthra (1871–1943), daughter of the wealthy Toronto Cawthra family known as “the Astors of Canada,” dressed as Madame Recamier after a portrait by David.101 A commemorative book was planned under the direction of James Mavor, the proceeds of sales also to go to the newly formed von. Many of the women artists who attended the function, including Carlyle, Mary Hiester Reid, Sydney Strickland Tully, and Clara S. Hagarty (1871–1958), were asked to provide sketches of guests in costume for the book. So too were a number of their male colleagues, most with established reputations as portraitists: George Reid, F.M. Bell-Smith, Andrew Dickson Patterson, E. Wyly Grier, and Edmund M. Morris (1871–1913). Mavor’s goal in this book was to cultivate “public demand for artistic products” by Canadian artists among wealthy citizens; seeing themselves as subjects of the drawings, the Canadian social elite, who at this time generally preferred to buy European paintings, might be led to lend their patronage to Canadian artists.102 Clara Hagarty drew Miss Langmuir dressed as “Emma Calve as Carmen” for the “Stage” set. Mary Hiester Reid contributed a drawing of Edith Mowat, daughter of Lieutenant Governor Sir Oliver Mowat, dressed as “Our Lady of the Snows,” an emblematic representation of Canada.103 Reid’s husband, George Reid, contributed a pen and ink drawing of the “Pictures” set. Carlyle drew a group from the “Hunting” set made up of members of the London Hunt Club.104 With the coming of the new year the Carlyle family received news that William had resigned his position as director of the Department of Mines in British Columbia and was working as a geologist for the British American Corporation, a mining company in the town of Rossland, B.C.105 While the family’s opinions regarding William’s move from a prestigious government position to the private sector are not known, Carlyle was likely sympathetic to her brother’s move, knowing well the pull of ambition and fresh challenges. She herself was readying a large collection of new work for the spring 1898 exhibition season, her second year of full participation in Canadian exhibitions. The prestigious rca exhibition opened in Toronto’s osa Gallery on the 3 March with six of her new paintings in addition to her critically acclaimed Une dame hollandaise (1893).106 She attended the formal

Brass and Copper, 1896– 1899 93

opening reception, as did artist Robert Harris, the rca president William Brymner, currently director of classes at the Art Association of Montreal School, Peleg Franklin Brownell (1857–1946), a teacher at the Ottawa Art School, and luminaries Lucius O’Brien and Homer Watson. Also in attendance was portraitist Farquhar McGillivray Knowles, with his wife (one of his former students), the young Canadian landscape painter Elizabeth Beach from Ottawa, and the influential Toronto artist E. Wyly Grier.107 Women artists had a strong presence at the opening – in addition to Carlyle, Clara Hagarty, who shared a Toronto studio with the young painter Mary E. Wrinch (1877–1969) during the late 1890s, Henrietta Vickers, another student and model of George Reid, Sydney Tully and her sister, sculptor Louise Beresford Tully, and Emma S. Windeat, known to Carlyle from the waac exhibition the previous year.108 Saturday Night art critic Jean Grant noted that local “newspapers are for once showing some attention to art” in their coverage of the 1898 rca exhibition.109 The Mail and Empire illustrated its reviews with specially commissioned sketches of paintings in the exhibition, including Laura Muntz’s The Gleaner.110 Carlyle’s work figured prominently in several reviews. In discussing the show’s many portraits, the critic Jean Grant mentioned only those of “greater artistic merit,” including three by Carlyle, along with the work of established Canadian portraitists Robert Harris and J.W.L. Forster. In language clearly classifying Carlyle’s work as the production of a woman, he observed that her portraits (fig. 4.6) displayed “delicacy and sweetness combined with power and richness unusual in so young a lady.” 111 The Mail and Empire’s critic assessed Carlyle’s portraits of her brother Russell and her mother as an “amazingly good display. There is a touch of genius in her work, dash, breadth, and truth. The portrait of her brother is strongly drawn … The portrait of her mother is exquisite in feeling, well drawn, and has a fine decorative effect.” 112 Carlyle had every right to be thrilled with the critical reception of her paintings. One more judge had yet to be heard from, however. In early April, just as she was poised to exhibit with the Art Association of Montreal (aam) and at the Toronto osa, the widely read Canadian Magazine published its review of the rca exhibition. The writer, Norman Patterson, with few exceptions offered up unabashed laudatory commentary on established male artists such as Homer Watson and F.M. Bell-Smith. Patterson took the opportunity to critique the critics of the exhibition, and then in the second-last paragraph condescended to assess the work of a relative newcomer: “Miss

94 emergence, 1890 – 1899

fig. 4.6 Portrait of My Brother, Florence Carlyle, 1898. The portrait is of the artist’s youngest brother, Russell Carlyle, known affectionately as “Buster” by the family. [plate 12]

Florence Carlisle [sic] had a number of subjects hung this year, and some of them received a great deal of praise. It is doubtful, however, if it was all merited, although some of it undoubtedly was. We may expect much from her future work.” 113 Grudging though Patterson’s comments seemed, his mention of her in a national publication still constituted valuable publicity. In the wake of the Historical Ball, when she had drawn portraits of a number of London’s social elite, Carlyle began cultivating potential clients in the area. In May she chose to exhibit with the London-based Women’s Art

Brass and Copper, 1896– 1899 95

Club instead of the national waac. At the wacl exhibition she showed her Impressionist-influenced painting An Interesting Chapter (fig. 4.1), now renamed Dreams, along with a relic from her Parisian studies, Une dame hollandaise, this time titled simply A Dutch Lady (fig. 3.2). It might be surmised from her choices, and from the detailed noting of her European exhibitions in the local newspaper, that she was reminding the London social elite of her background and academic training, yet showing she was modern and in step with her most recent work.114 With a few exceptions Carlyle was unsentimental when it came to exhibiting and selling her work. Family members, especially her sisters, often modelled for her, and apart from when they posed for portraits designated to remain in the family, the paintings were treated as part of her professional output. Her goal was to exhibit and sell to build a career. In April she sent a painting to the annual aam spring exhibition and two to the osa exhibition. The landscape Harvest Moon had not sold the previous year, and she chose to exhibit it in the osa show with a new figure painting, Monday Morning, which, although small and offered for sale at $30, was to become a focus of attention. Produced soon after Carlyle’s return to Canada, Monday Morning appears to demonstrate the increasing influence of Impressionism in her work. Although the painting remains unlocated, from contemporary descriptions and a pen and ink sketch of it (fig. 4.7), we may discern Carlyle’s interest in the effects of sunlight and a broad, free handling of paint. An additional element, the concern for painting women in their everyday domestic settings, is seen in the washday subject matter. Monday Morning depicts a woman in a sunny yard; behind her lines of white linens flap in a gusty wind. The young woman looks at the viewer, appearing to have paused momentarily in her task. Neither she nor her task is romanticized nor sentimentalized. Rather, Carlyle draws attention to her strength and the lived reality of the working woman. The title conveys the repetitive reality of the chore, traditionally performed on Monday when a woman would be well rested from Sunday. Tuesday was ironing day, and so on. The painting drew the attention of James Mavor. In his review of the spring 1898 osa exhibition, he made reference to the recent Academy exhibition as “largely composed of the works of the ‘fossil school,’” and then discussed work by artists he saw as representing the “living school” of art in Canada.115 One of these was Carlyle’s Monday Morning: “The bold use of white … the fatness of the colour throughout, the excellent distribution of the colour masses and the breezy energy vibrating through every part of the

96 emergence, 1890 – 1899

fig. 4.7 Monday Morning, Florence Carlyle, 1898. Drawing of original painting reprinted from a review by James Mavor of the osa exhibition in Toronto, 1898. The painting is presently unlocated.

little canvas, make it one of the most attractive features of the exhibition.” 116 The pen and ink sketch of the work (fig. 4.7), possibly drawn by the artist herself, illustrated the article. Mavor’s thoughtful review demonstrates how seriously Carlyle’s art was beginning to be taken. Indeed, the creation of a “living” Canadian art referred to by Mavor reflected the new aims of the 1898 osa constitution. While the society had long wished to foster original art in the province, by 1898 it wished in addition to encourage “native” Canadian art.117 By this it meant to create or foster a distinctively Canadian school, an ideal discussed in Canadian art circles throughout the 1890s. In 1898 J.W.L Forster wrote, “the art of Canada is a mingling of elements. [Canadian artists] who have studied abroad … paint a Canadian sky with the haze of Western Europe. Our Art is not Canadian.” 118

Brass and Copper, 1896– 1899 97

In response to the idea of creating a national art in which “Canadian painters should devote themselves to Canadian subjects,” the writer, artist and critic Harriet Ford replied, “It is the way a thing is painted, not what is painted, which makes a ‘school’ in painting. To paint ‘Canadian subjects,’ no doubt, is a worthy ambition, but it in no [way] detracts from the merits of a good picture that its inspiration comes from abroad.” Ford continued, “What we want is not a body of ‘patriots’ who fondly imagine a Canadian school of painting may be manufactured. What we do want is …the best that is going; a wide cosmopolitanism. In a painter, ‘Art,’ and art only, should be the goal.” 119 By 1898 there was little consensus on the subject of a Canadian school, but the proponents heartily agreed that the climate for Canadian art and artists should be improved by the provision of schools, galleries, public patronage, and unprejudiced criticism. At the close of the spring 1898 exhibition season, Carlyle had emerged as a skilful and innovative painter admired for her portraits and figure paintings. Her domestic genre paintings such as Monday Morning, described as bold, vibrating, and energetic, had gained her a place in the “living school” of Canadian art. As her mind increasingly turned toward the pragmatic aspects of establishing a studio away from Woodstock, her successes acted as catalysts for setting her own agenda. After her independent life in Europe, she no doubt began to feel the constraints of the parental home, and a move away from her family gained importance in her plans. Several things occurred towards the end of the year that might have influenced her toward moving her studio to Toronto. The city had a congenial and growing community of artists. Many began to open their studios to the public on the first Saturday of the month. One could wander through E.Wyly Grier’s portrait studio in the Imperial Bank Chambers, or visit the studio of Lucius R.O’Brien (1832–1899) at 20 College Street. Gertrude E. Spurr (1858– 1941), known for her landscapes and recently returned from studies in England, hosted an open-studio at her Gerrard Street home on Saturday afternoons in December.120 Although Carlyle had not exhibited with the Toronto waac that year, she learned of their plans to work with the National Council of Women of Canada to create a Women’s Department as part of the Canadian Commission at the Paris International Exhibition of 1900. Perhaps spurred by nostalgia for Paris, she served on the sub-committee for the arrangements of the “Art, Handicrafts, Drama and Music” section. Her fellow committee members included artists Mary Ella Dignam and Mary M. Phillips, both active in the waac and Canadian Handicrafts Guild.121

98 emergence, 1890 – 1899

 Sketch of the Artist : 122 Women Writing about Women Artists Articles focusing on Canadian women artists, the great majority written by women, began to appear in Canadian publications.123 A number focused on a single artist and provided substantial biographical treatment, while others addressed careers of multiple women. Each article helped redress an imbalance by directing attention to artists overlooked because of gender. Women writing about art production by women was one strategy for dealing with their exclusion from the literature of art and helped to uncover and promote their activities. December 1898 saw the appearance of one of the first articles devoted specifically to professional Canadian women artists.124 The article, appearing in the Christmas edition of Toronto’s Mail and Empire, outlined the background, art education, and careers of four women artists: Laura Muntz, Sydney Strickland Tully, Mary Hiester Reid, and Carlyle. Included were photographs of each artist (fig. 4.8) and of her paintings. In 1898 Muntz was gaining a reputation as a painter of children’s portraits and especially of mother and child compositions. She trained and travelled intermittently in Europe during the late 1880s and 1890s. Her time in Canada during these years was spent working, and teaching in her Yonge Street studio, where her classes were described in contemporary accounts as similar to the Parisian atelier system. By 1900 she could count many women artists, such as the painter Mary Evelyn Wrinch, among her students.125 Tully had studied art in Paris, at the Slade in London, England, and with William Merritt Chase at his Shinnecock Hills Summer School of Art on Long Island. In 1898, now thirty-eight, she had recently returned from working in London, England, and was known in Toronto as a portraitist.126 One of her most prestigious Canadian portraits was her 1888 portrait of Professor Goldwin Smith, presented by him to Cornell University where he had taught. Tully had passed on her skill at portraiture to her student Clara Sophia Hagarty.127 In 1898 Mary Hiester Reid was well known in Canada for her landscapes and still-life paintings of flowers; the home-studio she shared with her husband, artist George Reid, was a centre for artistic life in Toronto. In 1895 she had diversified her production to include illustration, designing the cover for the 18 April women’s edition of the Toronto Globe. Her design was also produced and sold as a limited-edition colour print.128 Carlyle’s interview contrasted her origins in Woodstock with her accomplishments in Paris and London, and An Interesting Chapter (fig. 4.1) was

Brass and Copper, 1896– 1899 99

fig. 4.8 Photograph of Florence Carlyle, ca. 1898.

illustrated. Her inclusion with the other rising artists in this thoughtful article attests to her growing importance in Canadian art circles. “Canada will hear much of Miss Carlyle in the future,” proclaimed the anonymous author. As friends and family congratulated her on proof that she had finally arrived in the eyes of Canadian critics, Carlyle formed plans. It was once said that on meeting her, the first impression one had was that “her ambition is all for art itself ”; her aim was “to progress, to do better work … to reach the heart of things.” 129 Her ambitions to excellence now would entail a break from home and family. They could also potentially sever the tenuous link she had forged with the Canadian art world. Her sights were set not on Toronto or Montreal but on that dynamic centre of the art world in North America, New York City.

This page intentionally left blank

part three

A Life Apart from Convention

1899–1914

This page intentionally left blank

5 The Village 1899–1903 

Greenwich Village began life as a Dutch and later an English settlement, “Green Wich,” two miles outside the town of New York. In the early nineteenth century it became a thriving suburb, its Washington Square the centre of fashionable life. As New York City expanded northwards, however, Greenwich’s residential district, with the exception of Washington Square, declined somewhat. While it attracted writers such as Edgar Allan Poe, it was not until the turn of the century that it began to acquire a reputation as a mecca for artists and writers. The hustle and bustle of the city did not penetrate the Village’s maze of narrow crooked streets with their tiny delicatessens, inexpensive restaurants, and bars. Rents were cheap as the large, once-prosperous homes were divided into rooms and apartments. Although outwardly many were shabby and crumbling, the interior rooms were high and stately, perfect for bright, airy studios.1 Artists and writers were attracted by the liberal and avant-garde attitudes that seemed to characterize the Village – an eccentric enjoyment of life, easy acceptance of casual lifestyles, and sexual freedom that elsewhere would have been shocking. Whether serious in their pursuits or merely acting out roles subsidized by a monthly cheque from home, the artistic inhabitants often shared an educated, middle-class background.2 The freedom especially appealed to women, and as one writer of the era commented,

104 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

“there were girls by the score, young and lovely and eager; wanting to write, to paint, to act, to see life and live it.” 3 American artists living in Greenwich Village at the turn of the century included society portraitist Cecilia Beaux (1855–1942), who had a studio in up-market Washington Square.4 Beaux had attended the Académie Julian several years before Carlyle in 1888. Painter Ellen Gertrude Emmet (1875– 1941) opened a studio downstairs from Beaux in 1900. Everett Shinn, a member of the Ash Can School and one of “The Eight,” had a studio at 112 Waverly Place.5 By 1906 the stables of Macdougal Alley, which once housed the horses and carriages of the aristocratic houses in Washington Square, were being remodelled into spacious ground-floor studios, some with additional loftspace, especially popular with sculptors.6 By 1909 when the young sculptors Frances Loring (1887–1968) and Florence Wyle (1881–1968), who later settled and built careers in Toronto, set up a joint studio in a converted stable at 6 Macdougal Alley, Greenwich Village was the American equivalent of Paris’s Left Bank.7 It was to this creative atmosphere that Carlyle was attracted, ten years ahead of Loring and Wyle, when she left Woodstock in 1899. Funded by savings from three years of sales and commissions, she set up a studio in one of the beautiful, crumbling old houses. Her bold decision to move, following close on her recent modest success in the Canadian art world, surprised her family and colleagues. As one Canadian critic speculated, she obviously “realized that success was more readily attained in larger centres.” 8 No doubt she moved to Greenwich Village with the idea of earning her living with portrait commissions in a studio of her own. (She was not the only one of her siblings to leave Canada in 1899. Also in this year her brother William, after serving only one year with a private geological company in British Columbia, accepted a new position as the general manager of the Rio Tinto Company, a mining firm located in Rio Tinto, Spain.9) It was not unheard of for Canadian artists of the time to be attracted to bigger centres in the United States. Often such a move was precipitated by a need to earn a living. “It is true,” wrote art journalist Margaret Laing Fairbairn in 1901, “that in the past ten years many good artists have left [Canada] for one reason or another.” 10 If the profession of artist were only more remunerative in Canada, pointed out the Canadian artist, painter, and printmaker Estelle Kerr, “our cleverest artists [would] not be driven to the States to seek their fortune.” 11 In the early years of the twentieth century, David Milne worked as an art illustrator in New York City; several years later Toronto

The Village, 1899– 1903 105

artists Elizabeth McGillivray Knowles and her husband, Farquhar, left established Canadian art practices to work there.12 Competition among portrait artists in Greenwich Village was keen, and Carlyle had to fall back on her dwindling savings. According to one writer from London, Ontario, who drew on Carlyle’s contemporaries and friends for details, for some months she “almost starved.” 13 Certainly she lived a very frugal existence, as she had previously done in Paris. The things in which she could indulge, which cost very little, were visits to public art museums and commercial galleries, educating her eye with the latest art trends. An unpublished memoir by her cousin Helene Youmans, travelling companion and sometime model, who lived briefly in New York with the artist, reveals details of this time.14 One of Carlyle’s favourite pastimes was to window-shop or prowl through antique shops. She enjoyed wandering in department stores, stopping at the yard-goods bargain tables: “Here she would revel in the odd pieces of old velvets faded to a soft copper from its original brown, or a fold of satin with its brittle gloss worn off leaving a clouded brightness of muted colour in its depth, all invaluable to drape around a model or to create a rich backdrop for some lovely picture. She had trunks of this sort of thing, but was always looking for more.” 15 As spring came to New York, Carlyle’s self-imposed separation from the Canadian art world seemed complete. Perhaps imprudently, she had decided not to exhibit with any of the annual spring exhibitions, with the exception of a special exhibition of the waac where she had made many friends. Early in the year she had responded to a request by the organizing committee to contribute a portrait to their upcoming Loan Portrait Exhibition. This Toronto show would showcase both historical portraiture and the work of the best contemporary Canadian portrait artists, male and female. Carlyle sent word to her family in Woodstock to send to Toronto her portrait of her mother (ca. 1898), praised the year before when it was exhibited with the rca. The opening was on 3 April 1899 in the Temple Building at the corner of Bay and Richmond Streets. While it is not known whether Carlyle or her family attended, the Loan Portrait Exhibition was a glittering social occasion, the focal point for a series of events held in the exhibition rooms in the city that included musical programs and gala dances throughout April. The society aspects surrounding the waac exhibition underline the important social connections enjoyed by the middle-class artists affiliated with it. Patrons in attendance included their excellencies the governor general and the count-

106 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

ess of Minto; Sir Oliver Mowat, the lieutenant governor of Ontario and former Ontario premier; and Arthur S. Hardy, the present Ontario premier, and Mrs Hardy. Artistic patrons present included E.F.B. Johnston, owner of a large collection of art. “In Canada” one review pointed out, “a few names stand for por traiture.”16 The exhibition included work by historical and contemporary Canadian artists, including Paul Kane’s (1810–1871) Mrs. Gamble, Wife of John Gamble, Surgeon of the Queen’s Rangers, loaned by the Honourable G.W. Allan. Portraits by Andrew Dickson Patterson, F. McGillivray Knowles, J.W.L. Forster, Laura Muntz, and Sydney Strickland Tully were on view. Robert Harris’s work was represented, as was E. Wyly Grier’s portrait of E.F.B. Johnston’s wife.17 The inclusion of Carlyle’s portrait of her mother in company with work by Canada’s leading portraitists, both historical and contemporary, was further acknowledgment of her acceptance by the Canadian art world. The catalogue reveals that Emily Carlyle officially loaned the painting. Other Canadian lenders to the show included C. Egerton Ryerson, John Ridout, the Jarvis family, and the Drummond family of Montreal.18 Carlyle’s absence, both physically and in her non-participation in the spring osa and other Canadian exhibitions that year, was keenly felt by James Mavor, one of the country’s leading writers on art, who had admired Carlyle’s work the previous year. In his review of the 1899 osa exhibition, he noted among the defects of the show a lack of representation by some of the province’s best painters.19 He urged the society to invite Canadian artists of reputation, “whether resident here or not,” to send their works to the exhibition. Otherwise, he warned, “if the [osa] desires to have a little private exhibition of the works of its own members no one can have any serious objection to it, nor any very serious interest in it.” He noted the absence of paintings by (among others) Miss Carlyle, who though not a member of the osa, had previously exhibited as a guest. “Inferior work cannot be excluded from the walls excepting by superior work, howsoever it be obtained,” he concluded; 20 Canadian art societies had the responsibility to invite emerging artists such as Carlyle to show work, thus giving mutual benefit both to the development of exhibiting societies in Canada and to osa artists. While Carlyle left few records of her movements between New York and Canada during this period, she likely spent some time at Englewood during the late summer of 1899. Many of her paintings completed or begun

The Village, 1899– 1903 107

during this time have associations with flowers, gardens, and fruit harvests; the hollyhocks in her Hollyhock Time bloom from July to September and thus help to place the time of her visit. She also began a formal portrait of her sister-in-law Blanche and another of her sister Maud with her distinctive head of red hair. In The Garden (1899, fig. 4.2) Maud is shown hanging washing on a line, with a flower garden in the foreground. Carlyle’s unrestrained palette and treatment of the figure and landscape show her tendency to brilliant colour and loosely applied brush strokes when interpreting figures out of doors.21 The Garden captures a place of luxuriant natural beauty and gendered domestic tasks. It and a later painting, Summer (ca. 1901, fig. 3.4), provide contrasting examples of the broader theme of a woman in a garden setting. In Summer the woman is idle, listening and looking at the beauty around her; she herself is beautiful. In contrast, The Garden depicts an active woman, her hair and clothing in a simple, practical style, working outdoors. This garden is a place of utility and woman’s industry; women hanging laundry out of doors is a pastoral genre subject with a long tradition. In both paintings, Carlyle’s female subject is confined within a barrier of rampant summer vegetation. In The Garden the natural growth blocks our vision of the woman. Instead of sheltering her, the flowers and luxuriant vegetation confine her while obscuring her identity, threatening to make her just one more element in the landscape.  Artistic Events At the century’s end the rca was viewed as a “staid, respectable, slowly progressive” national art institution.22 However, changes were in the wind. Following the death of Lucius R. O’Brien, who had served as the rca’s president since the time of its foundation twenty years previously, Robert Harris filled the vacancy. The academy report notes the election of the painters F.S. Challener as an academician and Maurice Galbraith Cullen (1866–1934) of Montreal to associate status. Cullen had returned from Paris in 1895; his canvases were important in the dissemination of Impressionism in Canada.23 In 1900 the issue of a purpose-built art museum building for Toronto was of pressing importance for the artists and patrons of the region. The existing Provincial Art Gallery, under the supervision of the minister of education, was located in the Toronto Normal School. The osa had spent years lobbying for an art museum in Toronto. On 15 March 1900 the matter was

108 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

discussed at a large meeting of representatives of art societies and individuals, and an Art Museum Association was proposed.24 The annual rca exhibition of 1900 was slated to open at the National Gallery on 15 February in Ottawa. The capital was described in contemporary press reports as possessing a poor artistic reputation, “unfavourable alike for good attendance [at art exhibitions] and for sales.” Critics lamented Ottawa’s “unsympathetic surroundings” for art, despite the wealth of its inhabitants.25 When the rca show opened in snowy mid-February, Carlyle was represented by four figural paintings including a portrait, likely a commissioned work, since it was not offered for sale.26 While she continued to live in Greenwich Village, she apparently reconsidered her previous year’s lapse of participation in the Canadian exhibitions. Significantly, the prices Carlyle set for the other three paintings had dropped compared to previous years. The Garden (1899, fig. 4.2) was offered at a modest $30. Her most expensive work in the exhibition, at $100, was a group scene in a church interior entitled “We Beseech Thee to Hear Us, O Lord” (fig. 5.1). A contemporary review described it as “a typical village church interior, with four of the congregation, a sweet-faced young girl, a widow, and an old man and woman, their heads bowed in prayer.” 27 The painting evoked little response from the critics and did not sell. When it was exhibited at the osa at a later date, re-christened with the more succinct title of Amen, it was praised as a distinctively Canadian painting, the figures at prayer described as “all familiar Canadian types.” In addition to the nationalist reading of the painting, the critic approved of the “devotional feeling” and “general poetic effect and … symbolism which is shown in the fact that the atmosphere is not of any earthly conventicle.”28 We might speculate that Carlyle was familiar with George Reid’s earlier treatment of the religious narrative of three generations at prayer, Family Prayer (1891).29 Carlyle’s painting may have sold at this showing, as it did not subsequently appear. The large size and emotive treatment of the group at prayer raises questions as to Carlyle’s spiritual beliefs. Helene Youmans remembers her only infrequently attending church in Woodstock.30 Family folklore also recorded that when chastised by her father for not writing home often enough while she was living in New York, Carlyle replied with a letter addressed to him that began, “Our father, who art in Woodstock.”31 Despite her irreverent humour, she held spiritual beliefs that manifested themselves in paintings such as Amen and Before Her First Communion (1903, fig. 4.4) depicting a young girl wearing a white veil in preparation for the sacrament of first communion. The artist’s approach to her religious subject, however, appears to be that

The Village, 1899– 1903 109

fig. 5.1 rca exhibition in Ottawa in February 1900. Carlyle’s painting “We Beseech Thee to Hear Us, O Lord” (1900) is visible as the large painting at the extreme right. This painting is known only through descriptions and this photograph.

of the observer. At this time she may have felt increasingly distanced from the traditions of middle-class family life. Perhaps spurred on by a feeling of loyalty to a group that had encouraged her career, she consistently maintained her ties to the waac. The twelfth annual waac exhibition for 1900 was held in the association’s Confederation Life Building studios in Toronto at Yonge and Richmond Streets. One prominent critic lamented the lack of patriotic military paintings in this exhibition and felt that Canadian artists should commemorate Canada’s participation in the Anglo-Boer War in South Africa. Carlyle’s patriotism was seemingly beyond reproach: one of the four paintings she sent to the exhibition, With the Boys in the Transvaal (ca. 1900), expressed her backing of the Dominion’s role in support of the British Empire.32 The osa exhibition that same month held special importance for Carlyle, as she had now succeeded in attaining membership with the society. Her Canadian reputation as a portrait painter was reinforced by one critic describing her painting Portrait, Blanche as “bright in effect, refined and

110 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

original in treatment and excellent in technique.” 33 Although now expatriate for much of the year, Carlyle remained one of the rising stars of osa exhibitions. It was common for Canadian artists to leave the cities in June for working holidays sketching and painting in the countryside or travelling abroad. Many artists from the urban centres of Montreal and Toronto went on summer painting holidays in rural Canada. In the summer of 1900 painter W. St Thomas Smith painted on the coast of Nova Scotia, Sydney Strickland Tully went on a painting trip in the rural Quebec countryside and to Quebec City, and Edmund Morris painted the lakes and forests of Ontario’s Muskoka region. In May, as reported in a Toronto newspaper art column, Laura Muntz was sketching en plein air with her class of art students from Toronto’s St Margaret’s College prior to leaving on a painting trip to Paris and Holland.34 That summer the Paris Exposition beckoned many Canadian artists including J.W.L. Forster and Mary Ella Dignam.35 George and Mary Hiester Reid were once again teaching Canadian artists at painting classes in the artists’ colony in Onteora in the Catskills of New York State, where they had a summer residence.36 In June Carlyle was visiting Woodstock. Her summer plans included a vacation with a group of women artist friends including painter and handicraft artist Gertrude M. Minhinnick (act. 1895–1905) from London, Ontario, and landscape painter Gertrude E. Spurr from Toronto. Carlyle family correspondence and contemporary Toronto art columns recount how Carlyle visited the eastern seaboard of the United States with Spurr, Minhinnick, and a “Miss Lamuel.” Originally from England, Spurr had settled in 1890 in Toronto, where she maintained a painting studio and enjoyed moderate success in selling landscape paintings.37 Minhinnick had served on the executive committee of London’s Women’s Art Club.38 The “artistic friends” left Woodstock in June to spend several weeks painting in Cape Cod, renting a “little summer cottage on top of a huge sand dune in Provincetown, Massachusetts.” 39 Provincetown was becoming increasingly attractive to artists. The year before, Charles W. Hawthorne had founded the Cape Cod School of Art there, inspired by the success of William Merritt Chase’s Shinnecock Hills summer school.40 As the titles from Carlyle’s paintings Sunset, Cape Cod, and Coal Schooner Waiting for the Tide suggest, the women spent their days sketching and painting by the water. Spurr produced landscapes of the harbour. Carlyle was drawn to depict women in the coastal landscape as indicated by Coming Tide and

The Village, 1899– 1903 111

Portuguese Girl at Cape Cod. Later that summer the women travelled to Concord where they visited the home of the American poet and essayist Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882), whose writing Carlyle had long admired.41 Back again in Woodstock, Carlyle arranged to exhibit five paintings with the Art Department of the tie. The osa had two representatives on the tie’s Fine Art Committee and exercised significant control over tie exhibitions between 1890 and 1915, when Carlyle was a frequent exhibitor.42 Artwork chosen annually by the commissioners formed “a representative exhibit of current Canadian Art …from the annual exhibitions of the [rca, osa, aam,] and the Canadian Art Club.” 43 In the view of the prestigious art guide-book of the time, the American Art Annual, the tie’s Art Department “undoubtedly constitutes one of the most valuable functions of the [osa], as it reaches a great mass of the people from all parts of the Province.” 44 A contemporary Toronto newspaper noted that to the “rural population” the tie was a “Mecca.” 45 Carlyle had exhibited at the tie at least since 1883, when her work was bought from the “Ladies Department” section by Princess Louise. In the intervening years, women artists had made some gains in positions of power within the tie Art Department. At first glance the executive of the exhibitions appears to have offered women artists increased, if unequal, representation. Mary Hiester Reid, who enjoyed a reputation as among the best Canadian flower painters, was nominated in 1907 to a position as the only female member on the Executive Council. The following year Mary Wrinch was the sole woman representative.46 However, among the thirteen photographs of council members included in that year’s art catalogue Mary Hiester Reid was one of two members whose picture was not included. Several women, including Wrinch and Sydney Strickland Tully, participated between 1908 and 1911, but in 1912 and 1913, after the fair changed its name to the Canadian National Exhibition, the executive was exclusively male.47 Women artists’ access to decision-making powers was inconsistent, their representation on the executive council minimal and sporadic. Between 1907 and 1913 the executive Committee of Selection and Arrangement was exclusively male. Despite this unequal representation (by no means exclusive to the osa/ tie exhibitions), the tie was an important public forum for women artists in Canada. Here women’s art was presented alongside art of British and American artists in a setting accessible to a broad range of social classes. One-third of the entries were work by non-Canadians, presented in the con-

112 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

text of “Celebrated Foreign Artists.” 48 The work of internationally renowned artists such as painter Elizabeth Thompson, Lady Butler (1846–1933), could be viewed alongside paintings by Carlyle and other Canadian women artists such as Francis W. Loring and Helen McNicoll.49 Artists complained that sales from exhibitions were generally poor and that “men and women who have to live by their art [must] paint … what is certain to sell.” Blame was cast on the lack of patronage by wealthy Canadians who, when seeking to buy artwork, went “elsewhere to spend their money.” “Out of all this great [rca] exhibition,” observed arts journalist Mary Agnes Fitzgibbon (1862–1933) in 1901 under the pen name “Lally Bernard” in the Toronto Globe, “probably not six hundred dollars worth of pictures will be sold.” An active supporter of women’s art societies in Canada, Fitzgibbon wrote that portraiture was said to be the only way to earn enough money to pay for paint and canvas, affording artists little time to devote to “composition pictures.” 50 In addition to portrait commissions, Carlyle had discovered other strategies to earn income from her work. Rural scenes and landscapes dominated her paintings at the tie in 1900, each moderately priced to appeal to the buyers at between $15 and $50. While her larger canvases were still priced above $100, she was learning to guide her production and to offer for sale some smaller, less expensive paintings more likely to sell at exhibitions.  The Story Teller : 51 The Pan-American Exposition There is every indication that Carlyle returned to New York City for the winter of 1900–01 and, between completing commissions, worked on new canvases for Canadian exhibitions. Uppermost in her mind were the paintings destined for the rca exhibit that coming April. It was from these entries that paintings would be chosen to represent Canada at the Pan-American Exposition in Buffalo, New York, set to open 1 May 1901. Canadian art circles had been carefully monitoring American preparations for the Buffalo Exposition. The previous June, Jean Grant’s art column for Saturday Night announced that Buffalo would be building a new art gallery to be named the Albright Gallery after the private donor. Grant speculated that it would take just such a personal gift to provide funds for a Toronto gallery, since government assistance was not forthcoming. Canadian enthusiasm for the Pan-American Exposition was strong, and Grant suggested that Canadians should look to the example of Buffalo, “should we ever aspire to an Exposition of our own.” 52

The Village, 1899– 1903 113

The Exposition was planned to highlight scientific and cultural achievements of the United States and the “colonies, such as Canada, Mexico, and the Central and South American states.” The rca was responsible for choosing an “academy collection” of Canadian work to be exhibited.53 Carlyle, as an associate, was clearly hoping to have an example of her work included. Alternating between Ottawa, Montreal, and Toronto as was the custom, the twenty-second annual rca exhibition opened on 12 April 1901 at the osa gallery in Toronto. Carlyle exhibited a total of eight pieces, including figural paintings, landscapes, and still lifes. Foreclosure of the Mortgage by George Reid and The Bathers by William Blair Bruce (1859–1906) took full honours. The enthusiasm for figural painting extended to Carlyle’s Grace before Bread, described as pre-eminent among the smaller canvases, and as “an idyll and a means of grace.” 54 Mary Fitzgibbon, writing as Lally Bernard, forecasted an upswing in Carlyle’s career. “The work of the women artists is altogether a credit to their sex,” Fitzgibbon wrote. “Miss Carlyle’s [Grace before Bread] is really marvellous. The effect arrived at, with the merest ‘touches’ of the brush is so wonderful that one’s breath is taken away at the completeness of the artist’s conception of the subject before the palette was touched.” Fitzgibbon concluded, “If an ‘outsider’ may be allowed to prophesy, it will one day make that author famous.” 55 Fitzgibbon was well known in Toronto as a journalist and a society figure. At the 1897 Victorian Era Ball, she had appeared as “Princess Von Leinengen,” Queen Victoria’s mother, and was described as “the most beautiful woman at the ball.” Prominent portraitist E. Wyly Grier captured her likeness in a drawing published in the commemorative book of the occasion.56 She was socially well connected, the niece of Sir John A. Macdonald’s wife, Baroness Macdonald of Earnscliffe. She was more than a society beauty, however. As Lally Bernard she championed the cause of recognition for Canadian women artists. She also was an active participant in the networks supporting women artists and women’s art societies, a prominent member of the National Council of Women of Canada (ncwc) researching and promoting handicraft work by Doukhobor women and supporting the efforts of the waac.57 Carlyle’s paintings gained her a place in the rca collection bound for Buffalo. However, it was not the esteemed Grace before Bread that was tagged to go but her understated Golden Rod (1901, fig. 4.3).58 In it Carlyle captured the effects of strong summer sunlight in a quiet domestic interior. In a seemingly unposed composition, she fits the woman between the lines of an interior that encloses and restricts. As in Berthe Morisot’s images of women,

114 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

Carlyle uses borders to enclose and frame: the mirror, the window sash, the shelves all delineate the boundaries of an enclosed place. The woman’s gesture as she adjusts the bouquet of flowers, ordering the domestic space around her, is the painting’s focal point. Her action is reflected in the mirror to her left. The light falling on the surfaces of the red-painted wood, her hair and dress, express a quiet intimacy.59 Each country in the Pan-American Exposition was represented in its own pavilion and also had floor space within the Fine Arts Building. The Canadian Building was a spacious half-timbered Tudor mansion built to showcase products manufactured in Canada and held reception rooms and offices for the commissioners.60 The Albright Art Gallery, a permanent structure in white marble in the classical style, was in process of construction in a prominent position near the exposition’s entrance. After the exposition closed in November, it would house the collection of the Buffalo Fine Arts Academy.61 But at the last minute it was decided that the Albright Art Gallery would not be completed in time for the May opening, and an alternative was hastily found. This turned out to be a poor substitute, as the temporary building was located far from the midway “where the crowds swarm like flies.” Instead it was near the buildings for States and Nations where, in the words of one New York paper, “comparatively few people are likely to come,” and what people did arrive would do so “with senses … dulled by looking at a thousand different things.” 62 Carlyle may have attended the “Pan,” as it was called. The New York Times carried articles on the exposition’s popularity and its special appeal for women. Articles appearing in the press characterized the many women visitors as “serious-minded, independent and self-reliant.” Groups of women toured the pavilions without male escorts, exhibiting freedom and independence, the characteristics of the New Woman, to the chagrin of the male journalist reporting the phenomenon.63 While artists from a variety of countries in Central and South American entered individual works, Canada was the sole country besides the United States to send an official fine art exhibit. The Canadian art collection, which filled an entire gallery, was a strong representation of the country’s best artists. The rules stipulated that only the work of contemporary artists and work dating from the twenty-five year period prior to the Exposition would be included in the show.64 The old guard was well represented, and paintings by perennial international favourite Homer Watson were numerous. Relative newcomers Maurice Cullen and James Wilson Morrice contributed work. Women artists included Carlyle, her friends Gertrude E. Spurr and

The Village, 1899– 1903 115

Laura Muntz, and colleagues Mary Hiester Reid, Sydney Strickland Tully, and Clara Hagarty. The strength of Canadian art came as a revelation to the American critics. Reginald Cleveland Coxe, president of the Buffalo Society of Artists wrote, “I do not wish to seem condescending to our neighbours, but it is a truth that their strength is a surprise to most of us.” 65 Canadian painting was characterized as being “more French than English in their methods,” an unsurprising statement since many of the artists had trained in Paris. But Coxe concluded, “the Canadians will not think my criticism just, they rather fear we want to absorb them … and are afraid of our in flu ence.”66Another American critic advised that Canadians should improve their skills by studying in New York.67 Canada received a total of twenty-seven awards in the Division of Fine Arts, with gold medals going to William Brymner, Robert Harris, Homer Watson, and William Blair Bruce. Walter Seymour Allward (1875–1955) received a silver medal in the sculpture category. Canadian artists were, on the whole, pleased with their showing. Watson, who had travelled to Buffalo from the studio in England where he spent half the year, praised the Canadian art on view in an interview in the Canadian Magazine: “I tell you that Exhibition was a wonderful revelation …We are working something out of this New-World atmosphere of ours … in the England of today is conventionality… here [in North America] is virility, originality, vivacity and life.” 68 Carlyle’s painting was described in American reviews as an “excellent work and broad in its treatment,” and she was awarded an honourable mention for Golden Rod (fig. 4.2). Considered in the context of the awards given to her Canadian contemporaries, her achievement of an honourable mention was modest. It placed her among well-known American women artists such as Lydia Field Emmet, Ella Condie Lamb, and Anna Lea Merritt (1844– 1930) an American resident in Britain.69 Mary Cassatt was awarded a silver medal. Julius Rolshoven, Carlyle’s former painting instructor, received a bronze.

 In late August Carlyle entered several paintings in the tie art exhibit, including one completed on her vacation to Cape Cod in 1900. Another (presently unlocated) on a domestic subject, entitled Lemon Pie (ca. 1901), or alternatively The First Pie, once again demonstrated her practice of using family and domestic servants as models for her paintings. Her sisters, especially Maud, since she was living at the family home at this time, were recruited to pose.

116 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

In the case of Lemon Pie, letters from a family friend who boarded with the Carlyle family while attending school in Woodstock reveal that the model was likely the Carlyle maid, Ethel, in her late teens at the time.70 In her images of women engaged in domestic tasks Carlyle depicts women’s manual labour with dignity. These paintings, including Lemon Pie, Monday Morning (fig. 4.7), The Garden (fig. 4.2), and The Joy of Living (fig. 5.2), are serious images of women’s lives and activity in the domestic sphere. While we know that Carlyle employed her sisters, friends, and servants as models, much of the manual work of the family household would have been performed by a servant. As Deborah Cherry has pointed out in her discussion of middle-class women artists’ visual images of domestic servants, although women’s labour is depicted with dignity and seriousness, the women are nonetheless codified as servants.71 Their dress is practical, they are industrious, their work locates them in scullery, kitchen, or wash yard. The details of clothes further distinguish their status and duties in the household and contrast to those denoting a “lady.” Similarly, Carlyle’s working women are depicted with kerchiefs covering their hair, sleeves rolled up, skin flushed (figs. 4.7, 5.1, 5.3). These signs were produced and perceived in contrast to those denoting a middle-class woman as seen in Portrait of My Mother (fig. 1.2), The Tiff (fig. ii), Summer (fig. 3.4), An Interesting Chapter (fig. 5.4), and The Studio (fig. 3.5), which all depict fashionably dressed women with white, unmarked skin and slender figures at leisure activities, reading, strolling, or courting. Feminist historians have addressed the various and conflicting meanings surrounding the representation of working-class women. Leonore Davidoff has argued that images of the female servant with bare arms and apron could act as a trigger for a sexualized masculine desire.72 The same repertory of visual signs, Heather Dawkins observes, could also be used to signify endurance, skill in the performance of housework, and physical strength.73 Carlyle’s choice of titles frequently overlays these depictions with a sentimental narrative, for example, in The Joy of Living, her painting of a washerwoman, or The First Pie, where the maid/young daughter of the house is depicted making her first lemon pie. With regard to narrative, Carlyle may have been influenced by Leon Augustin Lhermitte (1844–1925), the painter with whom she studied around 1895 just before leaving Paris. Lhermitte’s paintings placed a strong emphasis on narrative content often overlaid with moral overtones.74 Carlyle increasingly painted domestic scenes with an implied narrative component around

The Village, 1899– 1903 117

fig. 5.2 The Joy of Living, Florence Carlyle, 1910. [plate 13]

women’s roles in both the physical realities and social aspects of the domestic world. In keeping with the notion that a painting should tell a story, the large canvas that occupied her during the autumn of 1901 was the romantic painting The Tiff (fig. ii). A niece recalled how her father, Carlyle’s youngest brother, Russell, posed as the male figure in the painting, with his sister around the family dining table.75

118 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

In February the hanging committee of the osa exhibited the finished canvas prominently opposite the entrance to the 1902 exhibition where it “instantly caught [the eye]” of all patrons.76 The comic and emotional appeal of the painting made it the centre of attention, and the critics raved about the picture in their reviews. The woman is shown receiving an afternoon call from an admirer. A reviewer described the engaging narrative of the painting as showing “two tempersome young folks turning their backs on one another.”77 The moment following the “lovers’ quarrel” focuses directly on the woman’s experience, with the male figure included as a sign within the “indistinct background.”78 The anonymous back view of the male figure emphasises the immediacy of the figure of the woman and her proximity to the viewer. One critic observed “the expression on the girl’s face tells the story,” while others praised Carlyle for “a poetic imagination.” 79 The restrained palette and naturalism in the treatment of the figures place The Tiff within the more conservative paintings in Carlyle’s oeuvre, within her characteristic style of Academic Impressionism. Clothing and setting in a well-appointed parlour distinguish this as a representation of respectable middle-class domesticity. The Tiff is also an anecdote of middleclass femininity. The rose tucked in the woman’s hair and her attire, a “flowered gown of our grandmother’s time,” 80 invest the figure with the connotations of gender and signify her social class. In March at the annual meeting the osa executive council voted to honour Carlyle for The Tiff with the osa prize of the year. The critic known by the pseudonym “T. Square” observed that the painting attracted “the most attention … [and was ] given the place of honor – and deservedly so.” 81 The prize carried with it the sum of $200, undoubtedly a welcome bonus to the perpetually cash-starved artist.82 Then, the Ontario government bought The Tiff for its collection for the enormous sum of $1,000. The public prestige of the award and sale of this one painting elevated Florence Carlyle to a new level in the Canadian art world. No longer simply a talented and promising newcomer, she now unequivocally enjoyed the stamp of official approval, attaining a legitimacy enjoyed by few Canadian women artists of the time. The rest of the year saw her shifting her professional focus back towards Canada. This was likely due in part to her recognition there and her lack of success in the American art world. Having moved to New York to tap into the larger market, it is ironic that at this time her Canadian sales were her major source of income. Instead of Toronto, she chose to re-establish a studio in London, Ontario, where she had friends through the wacl, former

The Village, 1899– 1903 119

teachers, and her dealer, O.B. Graves. She opened a teaching studio in the Masonic Temple Building on the west side of Richmond Street between King and Dundas Streets. London city directories from 1903–04 reveal the studio was located in room 304 in an eclectic professional and retail environment. Besides the Masonic Lodge rooms, the building held professional offices, a telegraph office, tobacconists, and a jeweller.83 Carlyle opened a second small studio in Woodstock near the market square, close to the studio of her friend the poet and novelist Isabel Ecclestone Mackay. According to journalist and art critic Newton McFaul MacTavish (1854–1925), Carlyle and Mackay were “boon companions,” in the language of the time.84 Carlyle was attracted to teaching art not only for economic reasons but also as a means of training for the next generation of women artists. The concept of matronage must again be invoked here, for it is through art education that women access the sphere of professional art practice. Carlyle had gained much from her connections with the wacl when she had returned from France and likely saw the need for art training for aspiring women artists. There had been a glaring absence of professional female art teachers in the Woodstock/London region when she was young. Her students known from her years of teaching in London were all female. It is not clear if this was specifically her choice, the preference of her students, or yet another example of the social imposition of a separate sphere for women. The little that is known about her students indicates that they were drawn from the membership of the wacl. Carlyle’s classes in her London studio can only be documented between 1902 and 1904, although she likely continued private instruction outside of this period. She served as a role model of the productive, independent woman artist for at least two of her students, Caroline Farncomb (1859–1951) and Eva Theresa Bradshaw (1871–1938), who went on to achieve professional status. Each had prior local exhibition experience and seized the opportunity for further studies under a professional artist. Farncomb was born in Newcastle, Ontario, but moved to London and attended Hellmuth Ladies College where her art instructors may have included Carlyle’s former teacher W.L. Judson.85 She exhibited with the waac beginning in 1893 and held membership in and exhibited regularly with the wacl. Before studying with Carlyle, she exhibited at London’s Western Fair, often winning prizes. She was noted in local reviews as “a strong and interesting student.” 86 In 1897 she began exhibiting with the Fine Art Department at the tie.87

120 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

fig. 5.3 Badinage, Florence Carlyle, 1903. The present location of the painting is unknown.

Carlyle’s support of Farncomb and other students can most clearly be understood in the context of matronage.88 Her own immediate financial needs met by the lucrative sale of The Tiff, she discreetly offered economic help to Eva Bradshaw, who had earlier abandoned nurses’ training to pursue a career as a professional artist.89 One can also see evidence of Carlyle’s influence as mentor and guide in her support for her students’ access into the world of professional exhibitions. Both Farncomb and Bradshaw had increased exposure in national exhibitions. Farncomb exhibited extensively in the same venues as her teacher, including the tie/cne, rca, and aam exhibitions, and with the osa where Farncomb was elected a member in 1908. Eva Bradshaw first exhibited with the rca in 1902. Perhaps due to Carlyle’s instruction and influence, she went on to study for several months with Robert Henri at New York’s Chase School of Art. She continued to show work intermittently with the rca until 1924 when she was selected to represent Canada at the British Empire Exhibition in Wembley, England.90 She had a long career as a portraitist and art teacher in London, Ontario; one of her students, Clare Bice, would one day serve as president of the rca.91

The Village, 1899– 1903 121

fig. 5.4 The Studio, Florence Carlyle, 1903. First exhibited in the rca exhibition in April 1903, this canvas may have been painted in either of the artist’s studios in Woodstock or London, Ont. The woman holds a current issue of the popular arts journal The Studio. Ten years later Carlyle retitled the painting Reverie. [plate 14]

Further evidence that Carlyle was concentrating her professional and teaching efforts in Canada occurred with the opening of the tie in September, 1902. The exhibition catalogues record that all of Carlyle’s paintings were offered for sale, most at less than $100. In total she exhibited fourteen paintings, and while many had been shown previously, this was a record number for her in one exhibition.92 Although it was the more prestigious art society exhibitions that made professional reputations, it was at the tie, “the people’s fair,” where clients bought paintings. Whether or not Carlyle returned to New York City during the winter of 1902–03 is unknown. It is likely that she stayed in Canada. Indications are that she maintained her teaching and commercial studios and produced a full collection of new work for the osa, aam, and rca exhibitions in March and April.

122 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

 Always Room for One More : 93 Competition Carlyle still appears to have been drawn to the possibility of gaining recognition in the United States. In early 1903 her interest was aroused by an advertisement in an art trade magazine for a competition offered by a New York art calendar firm.94 The “golden age” of illustration in North America between 1880 and 1910 – so named because of rapid advances in reprographic techniques and the high quality of artwork reproduced in the various pictorial media 95 – offered tremendous opportunities for women artists to earn a living and enhance their public exposure. It was not uncommon for women artists of the era to take work designing illustrations for magazines and book. The regular income helped to counteract fluctuations in the art market and broadened their reputations as artists. Other Canadian artists were attracted at this time by commercial and illustration work in the United States. Charles W. Jefferys (1869–1951), after studying with George Reid, worked as an artist-reporter for the New York Herald from 1892–99 before returning to Toronto in 1901. David Milne (1882–1953), born near the hamlet of Burgoyne, in Bruce County, Ontario, moved to New York for art training in 1903, and around 1905 worked as a sign letterer and show-card maker, and as a commercial art illustrator for several New York magazines.96 Montreal-born Vital-Achille-Raoul Barre moved from Montreal to New York in 1903 where he lived for many years, working as a painter, illustrator, and pioneer film animator.97 New York was an especially dynamic centre for commercial art publication with periodicals such as The Critic, a monthly review of “Literature, Art and Life.” In 1900 it published a series of articles on “Representative American Women Illustrators.” Well-known names in commercial art included Violet Oakley (1874 –1961), Elizabeth Shippen Green (1871–1954), and Maud Humphrey Bogart. (Bogart’s infant son, Humphrey, was a model for her illustrations; he would later become a film actor.) 98 Canadian artist Estelle Kerr, writing for a Toronto magazine in 1913, maintained that “artists who starve in garrets do so because they absolutely refuse to work at anything else.” 99 She advised both aspiring and established women artists to take advantage of the field of commercial art to earn an “extremely remunerative” living to gain financial independence. She encouraged them to pursue work in fashion and advertisement drawing and pointed out that the “highest prices [are paid] in book illustration … there is always

The Village, 1899– 1903 123

a demand at the engraving, lithographing, and advertising establishments for girls with original ideas.” 100 Although Carlyle had not actively pursued this avenue, she would have been well aware of the potential benefits to be gained from commercial art ventures. Clearly she recognized the art calendar competition as an opportunity to further her professional practice. The competition was the first to be offered by the Osborne Company, a New York firm that reproduced paintings in fine-quality lithographs for their “fine art calendars.” Of the various categories specified, she chose to enter in “figure subjects.” For weeks she tried to “coax an inspiration for the work; nothing came – nothing of worth.” 101 As the deadline loomed, she painted her entry in one day and hurriedly sent it in.102 She would have had little time to wonder about her chances throughout the spring, as her involvement with the Canadian exhibition season was at a peak. In March she attended osa opening-night evening festivities in Toronto. The “private view,” described in society columns as a “smart gathering of the artists and their invited friends,” was anticipated as one of the premier spring cultural events. While it was meant to provide the opportunity for a quiet survey of the exhibition, the reality was a chattering crowd. An orchestra played in the entrance hall as George Reid and Mary Hiester Reid received guests.103 The Globe’s review observed that close to half of the exhibiting artists were women. While their participation was in fact about 42 percent, this represented a strong female showing. Joining Carlyle, Sydney Tully, Laura Muntz, and Harriet Ford were a number of emerging women artists such as painter-etcher Mary E. Wrinch, Toronto painter Henrietta Shore (1880–1963), and landscape painter E. May Martin.104 Muntz exhibited April Comes, a figural painting of a child dancing in a meadow. Muntz’s depictions of children, including her portraits, had become the mainstay of her professional practice and always received effusive praise; 105 her standing continued to rise. Rivalling Muntz for press attention was her close colleague Florence Carlyle. Several of Carlyle’s paintings were praised, including the recently renamed Amen (fig. 5.1), previously shown at the rca as “We Beseech Thee to Hear Us, O Lord.” Yet it was Badinage, meaning humorous ridicule (1903, fig. 5.3), that drew the attention of the crowd. Newspaper reviews recorded the lascivious admiration triggered in some “men of the National Club” by the painting’s image of a “laughing girl.” 106 The National Club reportedly made an annual purchase of one painting from the osa exhibition. Male

124 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

club members perhaps saw the candid and relaxed depiction of a smiling woman, with arms raised behind her head, as an image of flirtation or sexual invitation.107 Carlyle was able to congratulate her student Caroline Farncomb on exhibiting several paintings. She shared some memories with her friend, the artist Edith Laland Ravenshaw Patterson, also exhibiting work. Not having seen each other for some years, the two artists, who had known each other as students in Paris, reminisced about the “pranks and fun they enjoyed together” there.108 Ravenshaw Patterson was now married to the well-known portrait painter Andrew Dickson Patterson. The critical success and sales of Carlyle’s work continued to rise. Reviews again praised her paintings at the aam exhibition in Montreal. For the rca exhibition held in Ottawa she sent four paintings and sold three, including The Studio (1903, fig. 5.4).109 A highlight of the rca opening was an address by Sir Wilfrid Laurier. Among the most prominent paintings was Robert Harris’s portrait of Mary Caroline Grey, wife of the governor general, the Earl of Minto (1898–1904). (Lady Minto purchased a painting by F.M. Bell-Smith from the exhibition.110) A photograph of the exhibition (fig. 5.5) shows Carlyle’s The Studio hung nearby Harris’s vice-regal portrait. A closer look at the details in The Studio shows several of the artist’s identifiable canvases in the background and familiar props in the foreground (fig. 5.4); it may depict either her Woodstock or London studio. The painting’s title implies that the setting is the artist’s studio, depicted here as the centre of a woman’s professional production and of her personal freedom. An indebtedness to Impressionism is seen in the loosely painted surfaces and the luminous strokes of colour. A woman reclines on a low divan. The reclining female figure has long had explicitly sexual connotations, as Carlyle would have been well aware.111 Berthe Morisot managed to convey a woman’s psychological presence rather than eroticism in her painting of a reclining woman in a peignoir, Portrait of Marie Hubbard.112 Carlyle’s painting too captures an intimate moment; yet as in Morisot’s Portrait, the woman is chastely clothed from neck to foot. She wears a gown that hints at the form of the body beneath it, but our attention is diverted away from contemplation of this form by the abstract expanse of the fabric, which seemingly slides down and off the sofa. Instead of a fan or another traditional sign of femininity, the woman holds a journal –The Studio, a contemporary journal of fine and applied arts. Carlyle thus skilfully locates the woman physically in a professional space of artistic production and at the same time asserts both her sexual and intellectual presence.

The Village, 1899– 1903 125

fig. 5.5 Royal Canadian Academy Exhibition, Ottawa, April 1903. Carlyle’s painting The Studio is visible to the right of Robert Harris’s large portrait of the Countess of Minto in the centre of the photograph.

In June 1903 a summer exhibition of works by Canadian artists opened in Montreal’s Art Gallery in Phillips Square. Many well-known Canadian women artists participated, including Sydney Strickland Tully, Mary Hiester Reid, Mary Bell (now Mrs Eastlake), and Laura Muntz. Surprisingly, Carlyle’s work was absent.113 One possible explanation is that during the summer of 1903 she may have been distracted by the news that the Osborne Calendar Company had awarded her last-minute entry a prize. Her painting, entitled When Mother Was a Girl, had been unanimously awarded first prize in the “figure subjects” category. It had overcome a controversy among the judges as to whether or not the prize should “be given outside” the United States to a Canadian artist.114 Carlyle was invited to New York City to attend a reception for the winning entries. At the end of August, prior to leaving for the Osborne Company reception, Carlyle had the pleasure of seeing her painting The Tiff (fig. ii), on loan from the Ontario government, hung in the entrance hall of the newly

126 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

constructed Art Building at the tie exhibition.115 Such an honour might have put her in mind of how far she had come in twenty years since at the age of eighteen she had first exhibited in the Women’s Department. The winning Osborne Calendar painting, When Mother Was a Girl, falls into a category of Carlyle’s figure paintings characterized by a strong narrative element. Like another of her paintings, Grandmother’s Gown (ca. 1903), it nostalgically looks back one or two generations and is concerned with the exploration of women’s domestic culture.116 In their strongly implied narrative, both paintings show similarities to The Tiff. Carlyle was clearly drawing on an element of nostalgia for an earlier era to enhance the human interest and perhaps the romantic appeal of her work. Her strategy in exploiting the potential rewards of commercial art ventures paid off handsomely, and the recognition and financial rewards were substantial. The reception to announce the winners was held at a New York City art gallery, possibly Clausen’s Art Galleries. Many of the winning entries were exhibited. As a major prize winner, Carlyle received $500 for the painting. The Osborne Company would subsequently reproduce When Mother Was a Girl on their calendar and circulate the image in postcard format.117 Even more momentously, Carlyle “received a contract to paint twelve pictures a year at a salary of five thousand dollars.” 118 The competition, held annually after this first in 1903, attracted considerable attention within the American art world. The third annual competition would attract over seven hundred paintings. Prizes were awarded to well-known American painters such as Charles C. Curran, whose entry that same year was awarded the Carnegie Prize at the Society of American Artists, a silver medal at the St Louis Exposition in 1904, and the Corcoran Prize at the Society of Washington Artists in 1905.119 By the turn of the century, technological advances in printing were seen as a democratizing trend, extending the influence of artists and paintings into every home. High-speed presses, half-tone plates, and four-colour printing technology allowed colour reproductions of paintings, an advertisement of the time asserted, “with all the qualities of the original retained … doing for art what the invention of movable types did for literature – it puts the printing press at the service of the painter, extends the influence of painting beyond … galleries.120 The “democratization” of art was the Osborne Company’s stated aim in advertisements for their calendars: “Painting was for centuries of little practical benefit … art galleries were few – to ‘common folks’ almost inaccessible. Now, anyone may have good pictures.” 121

The Village, 1899– 1903 127

The calendars framed the colour reproduction of the drawing or painting adjacent to the name and address of the service or company advertised (fig. 5.6), and thus presented “A Practical Use For Art.” Company brochures touted these claims: “Painting is harnessed to practical work. Advertisers are helping ‘common folks’ to an appreciation of good art, while obtaining profitable publicity for themselves.” 122 The utility of art, often linked with its use in calendars, was a recurring theme at this time. A New York Times article in 1904 described the calendar trends of the season: “The gaudy, meaningless … calendar is [absent]. Nearly all have their raison d’etre… in art, literature and a perpetuated usefulness.” 123 Specialty calendars had great popular appeal. While crass commercial claims of “usefulness of art” might be made by the firms involved, the artist’s attitude toward working in commercial art ventures also merits consideration. The Osborne Company could afford to pay for the best. Although some artists complained that to produce paintings specifically for such a purpose was to compromise their work, others could not afford to snub the opportunities offered by public exposure and the attendant profits. During the opening years of the century a significant number of Canadian artists were either producing or working in support of commercial ventures. Around 1908 Sydney Tully received a commercial commission to execute twelve large pastel portraits in oval format of the wives of former governors general of Canada. Although commissioned originally for the Palliser Hotel in Calgary, they were later sent to the Empress Hotel in Victoria, British Columbia.124 Tully was also commissioned to paint a portrait of Queen Alexandra to be part of the decoration in the drawing room of the Alexandra Hotel in Winnipeg. These commissions were important commercial facets of Tully’s mature professional practice.125 Frederick S. Challener designed and painted decorative panels and mural decorations for commercial and public structures in Canada including restaurants, theatres, and the cabin ceilings of steamer ships. He was pragmatic about advertising this aspect of his art practice at Toronto exhibition venues. The panels and preliminary sketches, along with details of which commercial firms had commissioned the work, were on public view at the tie art exhibitions between 1900 and 1904.126 Tom Thomson was working as a photo engraver and designer in Seattle about 1901 and later worked in the art department of the Grip Engraving Company in Toronto. J.E.H. MacDonald apprenticed at this same

fig. 5.6 Calendar painting Miss Mischief, copyrighted by Florence Carlyle in 1905, showing advertising. This painting, among the “stars” of the Osborne Company’s 1907 art calendar line, received the thirdlargest vote for the “popular prize” from forty thousand buyers in the United States and Great Britain. It was reproduced with this title-leaf description: “Miss Mischief – ready for a drive. She has slipped her red riding-coat over the white summer gown and stands in the hall ready to greet the man who comes to take her out – evidently a jolly, funloving, out-door American girl, not the ‘delicate and fragile female’ of the old-time novel, but a girl who can take care of herself, and prove the most entertaining of comrades for a rough drive on a windy day.” [plate 15]

The Village, 1899– 1903 129

commercial firm along with Arthur Lismer (1885–1969). Lismer also worked for the firm. In New York City prior to 1910, David Milne was a magazine illustrator, and Charles Jefferys was an artist-reporter for the New York Herald.127 For women artists the desire for financial independence was one factor in their being drawn to commercial illustration. Women artists were also proud of the utility of their artwork in this genre. A series of articles in 1900 in the New York magazine The Critic, based on interviews with women actively working in commercial art, establish that these artists valued the titles “women illustrators” and “women commercial artists.” They used the titles proudly as professional designations to negate the traditional view of women as mere decorative objects, “precious baubles of inutility.” The titles carried the connotation that their artwork and careers had commercial purpose, as well as being a means to gain earning power for themselves.128 The roller-coaster ride that had begun several years earlier with Carlyle’s impoverished life as a Greenwich Village portrait artist had led to awards and a government purchase of her work in Canada. Her unexpected win of the Osborne prize, defeating all American competitors, offered her an important professional opportunity. Not surprisingly, she embraced the chance to make a name for herself in the cosmopolitan American art world. She saw the Osborne commissions not only as a lucrative venture but as a way to tap into a higher international profile that thus far had eluded her.

6 Acclaim 1903–1911  In the corner of a garden, paper lanterns glow, swinging softly in the night breeze. There, in the circle of lights, stands the daughter of the house, escaped from the merry company within, and now discovered in her hiding place. To carry out the spirit of the game, she snatches a big red lantern from its wire and holds it as a warning signal. Daughter of Eve, she is the incarnation of the eternal feminine.1

The Osborne Company’s description of The Girl with the Laughing Eyes reveals that Carlyle’s work for the company communicated a compelling narrative, a quality highly valued in commercial work of the time. In autumn 1903, after attending Osborne’s exhibition of winning paintings in New York, Carlyle lost no time in beginning the work for her contract with them. For her second try at establishing herself in the New York art world, she moved into a studio-apartment in a more up-market area north of the Village, at 67 West 23rd Street in the Chelsea neighbourhood of Manhattan.2 Her new address reflected her increased income and signalled that at age thirty-nine, with plans to derive a major portion of her living from commercial art, she aspired to a more conventional status than in 1899. That year she had flown to Greenwich Village with no connections and little experience in negotiating a way into the upper echelons of American art societies. Against the odds, she had wrested the Osborne prize from her American competition, providing her with income and sufficient prestige for admission into the American art world. For some months she shared the West 23rd Street premises with Laura Muntz.3 The two women had much in common. Both were from rural Ontario backgrounds and had struggled to attain professional art training.4

Acclaim, 1903– 1911 131

Both studied in the Paris ateliers in the 1890s and exhibited in the same venues in Canada. They had now achieved an equally high position among notable Canadian women artists. “Florence Carlyle and Miss Laura Muntz,” the critic for the Toronto News observed in 1903, “are possessed of a kindred inspiration. Both artists are notable for … human interest and poetic feeling [in their paintings].” 5 While they shared an interest in figure painting, Muntz was known for her child portraits and paintings of mothers and children; Carlyle’s trademark was paintings of women in scenes of everyday domestic life.  The Picture Book : 6 Carlyle’s Commercial Artwork In the autumn of 1903 Carlyle began work with the Osborne Company without delay. Having begun as a small New Jersey publishing company, in 1903 the company had moved to 277 Broadway in New York and a year later had offices at 31 Union Square West.7 It offered an extensive line of calendar paintings in a colour catalogue published annually. In addition to their use as calendar art, the most popular paintings, the stars of each year’s line, were by 1906 offered for sale as coloured reproductions suitable for framing.8 The annual artist competitions were a new strategy to obtain paintings. The company also found material for its calendars by two other means.9 The first was to buy paintings directly from exhibitions using scouts who assessed the mass commercial viability of the work. Often these paintings were prize winning. For Osborne’s 1901 line of fine art calendars, a buyer attended the Pan-American Exhibition in Buffalo, where Carlyle had won an honourable mention for Golden Rod (fig. 4.3). There he studied the crowds surging around the art exhibit until he “became convinced that originals which were so overwhelmingly popular with all sorts of people, ‘high and low,’ couldn’t fail to make equally popular calendars. He was right, orders … abundantly proved it.” 10 The second method was to commission paintings directly from the artist. With the exception of her initial prize-winning painting, Carlyle’s commissioned work for Osborne fell into this latter category. The commissions came with specific requirements as to size, format, style, and subject matter; however altruistic the company’s claims of making “good art” accessible to “common folks,” its relationship with artists was driven by a commercial agenda. “To be profitable,” the company wrote, “a calendar must have a pop-

132 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

ular subject, but with the right subject assured … the better it will please common people and all other people.” 11 Having accepted the $5,000 contract for twelve works for art calendars, Carlyle was bound by the guidelines. Company representatives called on her in her studio to discuss the work to be done; she would work up sketches, and the representatives would chose those best suited to the calendar requirements. She would then begin to work on large canvases.12 She had some difficulty working within the company’s parameters, and for every painting accepted for publication, she submitted three or four. The subject matter in the commercially commissioned artwork tended to be strictly gendered. In a series of articles on American women illustrators published in 1900, Regina Armstrong asserted that “many publishers hold that certain qualities of pictorial interpretation are distinctly the faculty of woman’s delicacy and insight to portray; especially the studies and compositions depicting child life.” 13 Women artists were commissioned for social vignettes, while their male contemporaries worked on scenes of urban poverty and contemporary political or military events.14 For the Osborne calendars, male artists contributed urban scenes, landscapes, and men in “action” scenes, whereas women artists were commissioned for idealized visions of middle-class social life and femininity with titles such as The Debutante.15 Carlyle’s commissions were a case in point. The Osborne Company selection of When Mother Was a Girl (1903) showed a demure young woman. Carlyle’s other known work for them, including The Girl with the Laughing Eyes (ca. 1905), Always Room for One More (ca. 1908, fig. 6.1), and Miss Mischief (1905, fig. 5.6), focus on some aspect of women’s social life. Always Room for One More shows a woman calling to her friends to take cover from the rain beneath her open umbrella. Each of these paintings demonstrates that Carlyle mastered the Osborne stipulations. Those of her calendar paintings that survive contain a clear narrative. The mood is uplifting and the subject matter is idealized. The accompanying calendar description of Miss Mischief (1905) refers to the young woman in the painting as “ready for a drive” in an automobile, a “jolly, fun-loving, out-door American girl … not [a] ‘delicate and fragile female’… but a girl who can take care of herself ” (fig. 5.6). Such adventurous conduct suggests one of the era’s New Women, although this impression is negated somewhat by the fact that she is waiting for a man “who comes to take her out.” Miss Mischief received the third-largest vote for the “popular

fig. 6.1 Always Room for One More, copyrighted by Florence Carlyle 1908. Helene Youmans was the model for this painting, reproduced by the Osborne Company for the 1909 line of art calendars with this “title-leaf ” description: “Outside there may be a chill, wet day, but under the big [umbrella] is the sunshine of youth. The young girl in the red coat … recognizing a friend approaching, waits to offer her own shelter, calling gaily, ‘Always room for one more!’ The mist has curled her thick hair, escaping in soft, damp ringlets and stray wisps. The chill of the weather only brings the blood in fuller measure to her face. What matters the rain to her? As the old song says: ‘It is always fair weather, when good fellows get together’; – and this girl in the red coat is a ‘good fellow,’ a good comrade, hiding beneath the surface of gay flirtatiousness a nature wholesome, refined, kindly, and essentially feminine.”

134 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

prize” when submitted to forty thousand calendar buyers in America and Great Britain.16 Such popularity attests to the appeal of the painting’s female subject. Evident in the pose and direct gaze is an overlay of mild eroticism, inviting comparison to Carlyle’s painting Badinage (ca. 1903, fig. 5.3). While her aspirations for her paintings exhibited in traditional venues were more complex, she recognized the popular appeal of her figure paintings. Characteristics of many of her paintings for traditional venues – images of contemporary middle-class women in domestic settings –cross over and tend to recur in her Osborne commissions. In Always Room for One More and Miss Mischief, for example, she exaggerated the immediacy and direct appeal to the viewer by employing colour and expressiveness in a simple, clear, and direct narrative. In Canada, her “very successful” commercial art style was described by artist Estelle M. Kerr as “excellent in technique … [while containing] sufficient human interest to make it popular in coloured reproductions.” 17 Journalist Margaret Bell claimed that Carlyle “revolutionized popular art” by painting “popular subjects in a good way.” According to Bell, Carlyle’s commercial paintings were informed by a “study of human nature” and were enhanced by her intuitive knowledge “that humanity, for the most part, was made up of individuals who liked the so-called popular subjects in art … pretty girls musing on a June evening, boating scenes.” 18 Helene Youmans described the artist’s dilemma: “Though her interest in commercial art was not great, her financial needs were.”19 Through seven difficult years, Carlyle had learned first hand of the challenges of earning her living as a professional artist. Her strategy now was to operate in the commercial art world in an effort to make substantial profits. She would then use those profits to support her more traditional work as a painter, while the wide exposure of her work throughout North America was a bonus. Her success with the Osborne Prize made it possible to extend her professional career into the United States, but it also marked a dramatic drop in her participation in Canadian exhibitions, up until now her mainstay. While continuing her membership with the osa, she did not show any paintings in the February 1904 exhibition. The absence of Carlyle, Muntz, and other artists from exhibition was noted with regret by the critics who, searching for a cause, thought that “the early date of the [competing rca] exhibition found … artists with unfinished work still in hand.” These artists’ work, wrote the critic “Palette” anxiously, “can ill be spared” from the osa exhibitions.20

Acclaim, 1903– 1911 135

The importance of the 1904 rca spring exhibition, held in Montreal’s Art Association gallery, did not escape this group’s attention, however. From this exhibition would be chosen the entries to represent Canada at the St Louis World’s Fair in the summer. Muntz sent no less than six paintings including The Angel and The Little Scribe.21 Indicative of Carlyle’s absorption in the Osborne contract work, she sent only one painting entitled Reminiscences, first exhibited in Toronto in 1897 and judged then by the Montreal critics to be “considerably below her standard.” 22 The Tiff (fig. ii), which had been on public view in Toronto, was loaned by the provincial government and hung in “the place of honour” in the gallery.” 23 It was this popular work that was chosen by the rca committee to join some 117 works that would represent the best in Canadian art in St Louis. Despite her concentration on commercial art in the United States, Carlyle’s professional standing in Canada had continued to rise. In 1904 one Montreal critic wrote, “this Woodstock lady … is perhaps, foremost among the figure painters of the younger generation in Canada.” 24 Another explanation for her reduced participation in Canadian exhibitions is signalled by her exhibition of four of her paintings with the Society of American Artists (saa) that same spring. She appears to have viewed her neglect of exhibitions at home as temporary and any adverse impact on her Canadian professional reputation as minimal, believing that success in the United States would eventually contribute to her reputation in Canada. The saa’s twenty-sixth annual exhibition opened on 26 March 1904 at the Galleries of the American Fine Arts Society at 215 West Fifty-Seventh Street in New York City. The exhibition included work by such celebrated artists as James McNeill Whistler (1834–1903) and John Singer Sargent (1856–1925). Canadian press reviews of the event proudly referred to Carlyle and Muntz as “the Canadian representative painters in New York.”25 Founded in 1877, the saa was now one of the most important American artist societies. Along with the Art Students’ League, it offered artists an alternative to the more traditional National Academy of Design, which had the reputation of suppressing work by new artists. Gaining admission to such a venue was a landmark achievement for Carlyle, since the society sought to provide a forum for new trends in art; significantly, one of its stated aims was to encourage women artists.26 Her status as a Canadian would not have been an asset in seeking to exhibit or gain membership to American art societies. The inroads she had made were enough to spur her on to commit all her energies to making a name for herself in the United States.

136 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

Carlyle chose to debut her self-portrait, Sketch of the Artist (1904, fig. i) at the saa exhibition. The structure of self-portraiture iconography was difficult for woman artists of the period to negotiate, as it was for many artists who stood outside the white male norm. Carlyle had to grapple with historical and culturally defined precedents of self-portraiture to find a place for herself as both woman and artist. Sketch of the Artist is not a straightforward “occupational” self-portrait, which traditionally shows the artist in the studio or with trade tools, a classic topos.27 The painting asserts her professionalism as observer and artist through her self-confidence, her half-smile and steady gaze out at the viewer, her fashionable appearance, and her stance with hand on hip. Yet there is a further element to be considered in the painting: known for her skilful use of brilliant colour, Carlyle has taken an unexpected turn in employing an almost monochromatic colour pallet. The unrelieved black and white and the shallow, dark, foreground space and dark dress hide the shape of her body. She reveals little of herself as she addresses the spectator from a field of black: hat, veil, dress. Half illuminated, she recedes hauntingly into the dark. Her hat is tilted rakishly, and the convolutions of her veil are the most visible feature of her attire. The veil, a recurrent element in her paintings of women, sets a boundary between viewer and subject. Here the viewer is met with only an impression of a confident and observant professional rather than a clear representation of a woman which would permit us to objectify her. Alternatively, the painting may be read as an opposition of dark and light, articulating the intensity of contrasting life experiences. The subject may be seen as moving between an unlit and brighter room, from exterior to interior. During the summers Carlyle lived the role of unmarried, dutiful eldest daughter; she had helped to care for siblings early in life, and she now continued to keep close ties with her elderly parents. She also actively negotiated her identity as an emancipated New Woman and cosmopolitan professional artist.

 Following the achievements of Canadian artists at the 1901 Pan American Exposition in Buffalo – some twenty awards, including Carlyle’s honourable mention – the rca successfully petitioned for adequate government funding to mount the exhibition of Canadian art at the Universal Exposition. This world’s fair was to commemorate the Louisiana Purchase and was set to

Acclaim, 1903– 1911 137

fig. 6.2 “Art Palace, Official Souvenir World’s Fair, St. Louis 1904.”

open in St Louis on 30 April 1904. Billed as the greatest “universal” exposition ever held in the Western hemisphere, its Department of Art would represent more than twenty-five countries, and boasted an international jury of awards. Canada was allotted a gallery in the Art Palace (fig. 6.2). The crated works, chosen in Montreal in March by a committee of rca members, arrived in St Louis in late April, accompanied by Robert Harris, president of the academy, E. Wyly Grier, and F.M. Bell-Smith. Finding widespread confusion, labourers on strike, and the walls of the gallery totally unprepared for hanging the paintings, they were forced to set to work and complete the work themselves.28 When the jury made its rounds, Canada was awarded a total of fifteen medals, including five silver and ten bronze. A commemorative diploma and gold medal of honour for distinguished services in art was awarded to Harris, and silver medals (fig. 6.3) went to William Brymner, Edmund Dyonnet, Harris, and A.C. Williamson, and to Carlyle for The Tiff (fig. ii). She was the only Canadian woman awarded a silver medal. Bronze medals were awarded to Laura Muntz, Sydney Strickland Tully, Frederick Challener, Maurice Cullen, Clarence Gagnon, George Reid, and Homer Watson.29

138 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

fig. 6.3 Silver medal awarded to Florence Carlyle at St Louis World’s Fair, 1904.

 The Business of Art: Clients, Critics, Picture Dealers Carlyle had established a pattern of spending the summer months at her parents’ home in Woodstock and returning to her New York City studio in the autumn. In about 1904 during one of her visits home she met the journalist and art critic Newton McFaul MacTavish. The Scottish-born MacTavish wrote about numerous Canadian artists, many of whom, like Laura Muntz, he knew personally. In 1906 he would become the editor of the Canadian Magazine.30 While we might suppose that he and Carlyle had met on previous occasions, he saw this visit to her studio as significant, since he included it in his book of reminiscences of his many years in the Canadian art world, Ars Longa.31 Carlyle’s friend Isabel Ecclestone Mackay, a writer whose work appeared in American periodicals, had recently published a book of poems. MacTavish was working as a reporter for the Toronto Globe and was in Woodstock to interview her. Knowing of his interest in art and artists, Mackay told him that Carlyle was in Woodstock and asked if he would like to join her in visiting her friend in her studio. They walked the short distance to Englewood, and Carlyle gave them a tour of the red barn. To take advantage of the fine weather, the three hired a rig and horses and drove out of the town a few miles, meaning to picnic at the highest elevation in Oxford county. MacTavish, though an inexperienced driver, managed the ride to a pond surrounded by large elms, and they spent a pleasant afternoon trading stories, feeding the fish with crumbs from luncheon, and listening to MacTavish’s tales of the art scene.22

Acclaim, 1903– 1911 139

When she returned that autumn to New York, this time to 7 West 42nd Street, Carlyle continued to work on her Osborne commissions. She also focused on gaining access to American exhibition venues and on completing portrait commissions that had begun to come her way. Her new studioapartment was in the home of a Miss Moses who rented space in her large house to several women artists. In 1905 Carlyle shared this accommodation for at least part of the year with Laura Muntz.33 It is unknown whether Miss Moses was herself an artist, but she acted as a model for Carlyle, evidence of a supportive friendship.34 On New Year’s Eve, Carlyle had exhibited for the first time with the venerable National Academy of Design in their galleries of the Fine Arts Building at 215 West 57th Street.35 Only weeks later, three more of her new paintings, including her self-portrait (fig. i), were exhibited at the prestigious Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts in Philadelphia.36 The annual round of Canadian spring exhibitions proceeded that year without her sending a single painting. So complete was her absorption in American venues, and in her studio portrait work, that around this time she let her membership in the rca lapse. This uncharacteristic lack of foresight could only be attributed to her confidence of success in United States. Carlyle’s trek through these years of artistic development is difficult to trace, as is her financial state. In addition to regular work from the Osborne Company and her $1,000 sale to the Ontario government, she appears also to have done well with portrait commissions. In the opening years of the century New York City was rife with portrait painters. Popular society portraitists of the time included John Singer Sargent, William Merritt Chase, Childe Hassam, and Cecilia Beaux.37 Portraiture, by virtue of client specifications and relations, was closely linked to the commercial aspects of artistic practice.38 While competition was keen, the strength of her painting was beginning to be known from the Osborne calendar paintings and her recent American exhibitions. As she was at work one day in her New York studio, “two men came … to give an order for work, and thought her another artist entirely. But [she] … got the work.” 39 During these years she had “many orders” for portraits, and “New York was the greatest buyer.” 40 Another contemporary source recorded that while she was living in New York, she worked “doing portraits mostly.”41 The key to her appeal in such a competitive marketplace may be found in the opinions of Canadian critics and her peers; early acclaim for her portraits had helped secure her a reputation as a painter of distinction. A critic of the rca exhibition of 1898 wrote, “Miss Carlyle displays in [these portraits] … deli-

140 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

cacy and sweetness combined with power and richness.” 42 “There is a touch of genius in her work, dash, breadth, truth … the portrait of her brother is strongly drawn … the portrait of her mother is exquisite in feeling,” asserted another.43 When her portrait of her mother, Mrs Carlyle (ca. 1898), was exhibited in Toronto’s Portrait Loan Exhibition in 1899, the artist was described in the local press as “one of a few names [that] stand for portraiture … in Canada.” 44 Her entries in the portraiture section of the rca exhibition of 1902 were celebrated as “vigorous and striking.” 45 Canadian artist and critic Fergus Kyle, referring to her work during her New York years, commented that in addition to her “splendid technique,” her portraits displayed an “atmosphere of human interest, which [made] them pictures, not mere studies.”46 Art critic Roy Franklin Fleming observed that her portraits of women gave “evidence of a vast and intimate knowledge of feminine character and a technical ability that …[is] almost consummate.” 47 A relationship with a dealer was the key to artists’ sales and commissions. Careful cultivation of a dealer helped them to survive the fluctuations of the market. However, the business of art was structured within the larger context in which women artists were positioned unequally in relation to male dealers, patrons, and publishers. British art dealers, as Deborah Cherry has observed, had “stables” of artists whose work they commissioned, but their dealings with women artists tended to be characterized by tokenism.48 While the name of Carlyle’s New York dealer remains unknown, an anecdote of one dealer’s unrealistic demands indicates that she had one: “A well-known [New York] picture dealer, who felt as though he had ‘discovered her,’ offered her a ‘one man exhibition’ in his gallery … [but] she could not meet the demand [of forty canvases], having sold most of what she had on hand.” 49 Although the name of the gallery is unknown, Carlyle was associated with several New York galleries including Knoedler’s on Fifth Avenue. She also sold paintings through the Fifth Avenue Art Galleries and the Sutcliffe Gallery. Her Canadian dealers included Thomas Jenkins’ Art Galleries on College Street in Toronto as well as O.B. Graves in London, Ontario.50 Canadian artist Estelle Kerr, who had also worked in the field of commercial art, noted the gendered power relations evident in the field of commercial art at the time. She told a story of an influential American magazine editor having interviewed a “modest Canadian girl illustrator,” saying, “Very nice, indeed, but she’ll never get on in New York.” When asked by a male artist what was wrong with her work, he replied, “Nothing, but she’s too much of a lady. She ought to come in and jolly you into giving her a story – that’s how they do it.” In the same article Kerr wrote that when art “is mixed up with

Acclaim, 1903– 1911 141

editors, feminine charms are a great help. When a friend of mine sold her first drawing to Harper’s, an editor dampened her pride by saying: Ah, that’s what comes of being a pretty girl!” 51 While undoubtedly aware that “feminine charms” might assist her to “get on in New York,” Carlyle relied on hard work. She promoted herself and her art with skill and professionalism, and achieved a balance between her public identity as a respected artist and the pragmatic aspects of making a living. In her business affairs she challenged the myth of women as passive, and she clearly possessed the ability to negotiate firmly and lead a self-directed professional life. The years 1905 and 1906 are characterized by her increased acceptance in the leading American exhibition venues. Although three paintings, including her portrait of her landlady, Miss Moses, submitted for exhibition at the Carnegie Institute were rejected, she was successful in exhibiting at the equally prestigious National Academy of Design for the second time.52 In the spring of 1905 she was listed in the leading directory of contemporary American artists, the annual compilation of “Painters, Sculptors and Illustrators” published in the New York based American Art Annual. To secure an entry, an artist had to be a member of an American art society or have exhibited in the United States during the previous two years. Having exhibited with the saa and at other American art venues, Carlyle qualified for inclusion. She applied to the editor, filled out a card listing her name, medium (“painter”), and her studio and home address (not surprisingly, one and the same) at “7 West 42nd Street, New York, N.Y.” 53 In early 1906 several of her paintings, again including her portrait of Miss Moses, were exhibited at the 101st annual exhibition of the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts in Philadelphia.54 In the midst of such resounding success, and busy with the commercial art that clearly paid the bills, she appears to have reconsidered her neglect of Canadian exhibitions. This may show the influence of Laura Muntz, who retained a strong connection with Canadian art venues. Muntz had sent “a notable collection” of five paintings to the aam spring exhibition the previous March.55 Carlyle arranged for a new painting, Like unto a Flower and the reliable crowd-pleaser The Tiff (fig. ii). loaned by the provincial government, to be shown at the 1906 Dominion Exhibition in Halifax organized by the rca and the Halifax Council of Women.56 Later that summer, likely during a visit home to Woodstock, she renewed her association with Toronto’s Canadian National Exhibition (formerly the tie). The classically inspired architecture of the new cne art gallery was

142 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

flanked by a gracious lily-pond. Carlyle exhibited Like unto a Flower and Summertime, described as a design for a window, offered for sale at $300 and $200 respectively.57 The latter painting’s description in the exhibition catalogue suggests that Carlyle was beginning to expand her art practice to include designing stained glass windows. Windows by designers such as Louis Comfort Tiffany (1848–1933), the leading American master of the art nouveau style, were enjoying a vogue in interior decoration. Tiffany commissioned designs from successful artists of the day, for example, Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec and Pierre Bonnard, that were subsequently made into stained glass windows. American artist Lydia Field Emmet (1866–1952), who gained recognition for her society portraits of women and children, also produced stained glass designs for Tiffany’s New York store.58 In Paris during the 1890s, Carlyle may have seen contemporary stained glass windows and their designs on view in the Salon du Champs de Mars and Salon de l’Art Nouveau. The potential application of her own designs into this craft and medium was clearly a part of her art practice at this time.59 Her distancing of her work from the other important annual Canadian art society exhibitions such as the rca, osa, and aam continued in 1906 and the following year. Meanwhile, important changes were underway in Canadian art circles. George Reid was appointed rca president in 1906 and immediately launched a campaign to bring together the academy art collection in a suitable building to establish a national collection and gallery.60 Laura Muntz moved her Canadian studio from Toronto to Montreal’s Beaver Hall Square; here she had a studio beside Maurice Cullen. She does not seem to have been sharing the studio apartment in New York with Carlyle by this date. Helen McNicoll’s Impressionist paintings of women and girls in landscape settings came to the notice of Canadian audiences in 1906 with her first participation in the aam and rca exhibitions.61 McNicoll had received her early art instruction from William Brymner at the aam school in Montreal from 1899 to 1902, travelled to England to study at the Slade, then continued her art studies in St Ives under the direction of Algernon Talmage (1871–1939). Having allowed her membership with the rca to lapse, in 1907 Carlyle also decided to forgo her membership in the osa, yet she still exhibited three paintings, including Badinage (fig. 5.3) and Grandmother’s Gown, in that year’s cne exhibition. Another of her paintings, Rose Birthday, was loaned to the exhibition by its owners, the provincial government.62 That she should seem to be ignoring the prestigious Canadian art venues yet retaining her link

Acclaim, 1903– 1911 143

with the cne exhibition is curious. In the absence of any indication of a falling out between her and any of the Canadian art societies, it must be concluded that she was now choosing to concentrate on American venues. Her continued link with the cne might be explained by her historical connection with the fair and the timing of the annual event, which perhaps coincided with her summer vacations in Woodstock. About 1907 she travelled to Spain to visit her brother William, who had spent recent years managing a mine near the town of Rio Tinto. Like other American and Canadian artists travelling in Europe,63 she also planned to work.64 The bright Mediterranean light, which she had last experienced in the 1890s, inspired several views of traditional Spanish architecture.65 She extended her trip to include Italy, where the atmosphere of history and romance inspired a painting entitled A Lily of Florence (fig. 6.4). The title’s reference to the lily, a symbol of Mary, links this canvas to traditional representations of the Madonna. Back in United States, two of Carlyle’s friends from London, Ontario, came to New York City to study art about this time. Her former student Eva Bradshaw and Dorothy M. Betts, who had studied with another of Carlyle’s protegées, Caroline Farncomb, arrived with plans to study at the New York School of Art, formerly the Chase School. One of their instructors in New York was Robert Henri (1865–1929), an influential teacher and artist whose paintings were to create a sensation at the Macbeth Art Gallery exhibition of “The Eight” in the spring of 1908.66 Carlyle knew Henri and at one time studied with him in New York, possibly attending one of his classes at the New York School of Art.67 Henri had considerable influence in the emerging new school of American Realism, which eventually blossomed in the AshCan School. He urged young painters away from Academism toward the rich subject matter of modern urban life.68 Carlyle confidently referred her former students directly to this dynamic painter. Exhibition records for this time reveal the gradual emergence of a younger generation of Canadian women artists. Montreal artist Emily Coonan (1885– 1971), who exhibited at the aam spring exhibition for the first time in 1908, was one of a number of women artist friends who attended the aam School in the early twentieth century. The group included Coonan, Nora Collyer, Prudence Heward, Mabel Lockerby, Mabel May, Kathleen Morris, Lilias Torrance Newton, Sarah Robertson, Anne Savage, and Ethel Seath.69 They often exhibited together and were associated with the Beaver Hall Group of artists. Prudence Heward, twelve years of age in 1908, received her first drawing

144 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

fig. 6.4 A Lily of Florence, Florence Carlyle, ca. 1907.

lessons and posed for her sister and friends at the aam school that year.70 Emerging women artists also included the American-born sculptor Frances Loring (1887–1968), who in 1908 exhibited two sculptures, Fountain and Sundial, at the cne.71 The Thumb-Box Exhibition, an additional venue for Toronto area artists in 1908, attracted much attention and included work by Frederick S. Haines and Clara S. Hagarty. Carlyle’s friend Gertrude Spurr also contributed work, as did Carlyle’s former student Caroline Farncomb.72 Now a member of the osa, Farncomb was receiving increased public exposure. At the cne Fine Arts Department exhibition in 1908 she exhibited four paintings, including two portrait commissions.73

Acclaim, 1903– 1911 145

While presumably following the careers of her friends with interest, Carlyle again declined to participate in Canadian exhibitions. Eleven years after her initial exhibition with the waac and the Women’s Art Club of London, she continued to widen her public sphere in the United States. She was invited to include a painting in the Exhibition of Paintings by Women Artists at the galleries of M. Knoedler and Co. in New York in April 1908. Knoedler’s, a prestigious commercial gallery that had recently exhibited portraits by Philip Laszlo, was located in a cluster of galleries at 355 Fifth Avenue, several blocks from the Macbeth Galleries that had hosted the sensational exhibition of “The Eight.” 74 Knoedler’s gallery appears to have promoted work by women artists to a certain extent. Several benefit exhibitions were held there in 1912 and 1915 with the proceeds going to the Woman Suffrage Campaign fund. The latter exhibition included nineteen paintings by Mary Cassatt.75 The women artists exhibit in which Carlyle participated was an early example of the gallery’s support and sponsorship of women artists. It brought together the work of fifty-three leading women artists from America and Britain; Carlyle was the sole Canadian artist.76 Her painting A Lily of Florence (fig. 6.4) was exhibited alongside work by internationally respected artists such as society portrait painter Ellen Emmet Rand (1875–1941) and Lydia Field Emmet, the mural painter for the Women’s Pavilion at the 1893 Chicago World’s Fair. Lydia Amanda Brewster Sewall (1859–1926), the first woman to win the Clarke Prize at the National Academy of Design in 1903, exhibited work, as did Mary Hallock Foote (1847–1938), known for her books and illustrations of life in the American West. The Knoedler’s exhibition demonstrates the degree of Carlyle’s acceptance by the American art world and marks a milestone in her career. It differed significantly from earlier exhibitions of women artists in its focus on well-known professionals whose work was presented by important commercial dealers. The critic for the American Art News who attended the opening on 20 April commented that the eighty-two pictures by “prominent women artists” was “both interesting and important.” On a different note, he continued, the show was “greatly superior in quality and effect to that of the Woman’s Art Club now on … nearby. It is a question as to why the Woman’s Art Club did not have the [Knoedler’s] pictures in their display. Is it possibly that there is friction or trouble between the two bands of feminine painters? Can such passions dwell in celestial minds?” 77 The critic’s gently mocking tone toward not only the amateur women artists of the Woman’s Art Club of New York but also the professional and

146 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

prominent women artists at the Knoedler’s exhibition is significant. It confirms the difficulties that women artists even in a cosmopolitan city such as New York in 1908 still had to negotiate in the modest hope of consistent respect for their professional status. This critical reception reinforced the notion that exhibitions open only to women, while assisting in claiming an identity for women artists, were fraught with pitfalls.78 Aims of women’s art societies generally focused on the ideal of community and support between women and the goal of forging spaces in which to train and promote women in their quest for professional status. Women’s art societies wished to lay claim to a collective identity and to promote the cultural presence of women artists. In addition to the direct promotion of art by women artists, such societies had diverse goals and provided useful opportunities for women. The Society of Women Artists formed in Britain in 1856, and the Union des Femmes Peintres et Sculpteurs, the first all-women exhibiting society in France, formed in 1881, both with the goals of addressing the exclusionary policies of the art world of the time.79 These societies and the Canadian waac had the altruistic aims of supporting younger and emerging women artists and educating the next generation of women, as well as a focus on providing high-profile exhibition venues and on selling work.80 The waac created courses and lecture programs and offered experience in art administration for women at a national level. One 1897 newspaper review on the waac’s St Thomas branch reported that, among the seventy-odd members “some copy and some do original work; some are amateurs and some are critics; all are united and interested in one another’s welfare.” 81 Of particular significance to women active in the arts in Toronto, the Heliconian Club was founded and held its inaugural meeting in Toronto in January 1909; its membership was restricted to women. The name of the club refers to Mount Helicon, known as a source of inspiration and as the resting place for the muses in Greek mythology.82 Membership was by invitation only, yet the club was inclusive of women active in widely varying branches of the arts including painting, writing, journalism, music, and drama, who had achieved a high level of distinction. The club held exhibitions and concerts and ran art lessons and other social events on its premises.83 As Tamar Garb describes it, such women-only societies “nourished the ambitions” of women artists.84 Increasingly at this time women artists found it to their advantage in establishing a professional identity not to organize together as women. Fem-

Acclaim, 1903– 1911 147

inist movements at the turn of the century tended to reject special categorisation of women artists. Women’s art societies and clubs, it was argued, tended to reinforce the stereotype that women artists were separate and distinct from their male colleagues, that they required and were often relegated to a separate sphere.85 More and more, the trend was for women to work for inclusion throughout all professional, commercial, and institutional avenues of the art world. Undoubtedly aware of the debates and controversies around exhibitions open only to women artists, Carlyle took advantage of both approaches and all opportunities to exhibit work. Although she did not document her contacts with American artists of the day, she was a friend and a great admirer of Robert Henri as an intellectual leader in art, and was known to have asked him to critique her work. Looking at one of her paintings, he asked her abruptly, “When are you going to wake up?” “If ever I was awake and in earnest, I was when I painted that,” she protested. “No, you weren’t; you were sound asleep,” he insisted. “Anyone who has such perfect command over technique as you have can do better things.” He continued, “Think of a prayer instead of being so consummately clever with your colour.” 86 Henri believed that the artist must be a social force, one whose work is filled with dignity and is in touch with contemporary life. Henri’s advice apparently induced in Carlyle a sense of critical self-examination. She was disconcerted by the thought that her desire for recognition and her struggle for commercial success might have caused her to lose sight of the higher aims of art. Following the Knoedler’s opening in April she left the city for an extended period in Woodstock. Unsure of how long she would be away, she vacated her New York studio and rooms.

 The Toronto art world had seen a number of important additions in the years Carlyle had been working in New York City. The Graphic Arts Club first met in November 1903; women artists would participate in its exhibitions from 1907 onwards.87 In 1907 the Canadian Art Club formed and held a first exhibition in February 1908. Also in 1908 the Arts and Letters Club was established as an association of musicians, artists, writers, architects, and non-professionals with an interest in the arts. Members included art critics such as Hector Charlesworth of Saturday Night, Augustus Bridle of the Canadian Courier, and M.O. Hammond of the Globe. Artists Gustav Hahn and J.E.H. MacDonald and the writer Fergus Kyle were also members. This

148 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

long-lived association became a vital force in the development of the arts in the city. The fact that women were not admitted for many years disadvantaged them with regard to professional recognition and the benefits associated with membership.88 It was in response that, as previously discussed, the Toronto Heliconian Club opened its doors in 1909. By the end of the first decade of the twentieth century the framework for these and other important Canadian art institutions were laid, although the financial support offered to Canadian artists was limited. Outside of Ontario, these years saw the establishment of the Nova Scotia Museum of Fine Arts in 1908; the Winnipeg Art Gallery in Winnipeg, Manitoba, opened its doors in 1912. Commercial and public galleries were concentrated in larger population centres, and art clubs and societies that existed in many smaller centres outside of central Canada remained the primary forum for artists to advance their careers.89

 In 1908 Carlyle reopened her studio in the red barn in Woodstock. Early that summer Helene Youmans, Emily Carlyle’s niece, came for a visit. When the eighteen-year-old Helene had visited the Carlyles in the 1890s, Carlyle had been studying abroad. The cousins met that summer for the first time and at once became friends. Although Carlyle was forty-four, the difference in ages was no barrier to what Helene described as “a deep and understanding friendship [that] formed between us on that sunny summer morning.” 90 Both of Carlyle’s sisters, who had frequently acted as her models, were now married and away from home. Helene enthusiastically stepped into the role. The painting Pippa Passes was begun in July (fig. 6.5). Eager to catch the long rays of morning light and to paint during the cool freshness of the early hours, Carlyle would call up to Youmans at six o’clock the words from Robert Browning’s poem “Pippa Passes”: “Morning’s at seven, the hillside dew-pearled.” After breakfast the two women, carrying canvas and easel, hiked behind the house to a little green valley where the over-arching trees created the illusion of a luminous green cavern. Youmans, depicting Browning’s heroine Pippa, would take up her stance under the trees, and the painting would proceed until the sun got too high, changing the atmosphere and light. As Carlyle worked, Youmans encouraged her to talk about her life. The artist stood at her easel, recounting tales of her girlhood and her art studies abroad. Youmans watched her face intently as she painted. If something

Acclaim, 1903– 1911 149

fig. 6.5 Pippa Passes, Florence Carlyle, 1908. The heroine of Robert Browning’s poem “Pippa Passes” (1841) is shown greeting the morning sunshine: “The year’s at the spring /And day’s at the morn / Morning’s at seven, / The hillside’s dew-pearled / The lark’s on the wing / The snail’s on the thorn / God’s in his heaven – / All’s right with the world!” Although Canadian critics praised what they saw as dark cypresses and the blue skies of Italy in the painting, the artist used the groves and meadows surrounding the family home in Woodstock as the setting and her cousin Helene Youmans as the model.

didn’t look right, Carlyle would frown and peer sidelong at the canvas, impatiently tap her foot, and follow this by removing some paint with a cloth hung over her arm. She would then square her shoulders, taking “a sort of military stance; as of a soldier ready for the ‘forward march’ command” before her canvas. Then she would “tackle the job with fresh determination.” 91 Often she sang as she painted. But while she loved music and played piano by ear, she sang “sharply off pitch.” Youmans was amused by the “strange little songs” associated with art student days in Paris. She gauged Carlyle’s mood, and whether or not the painting was progressing to her sat-

150 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

isfaction, by the song. On days of frustration, Carlyle would sing one of her “rags and patches” tunes with sad, long, drawn-out verses about “Mary, who went daily to call the cattle home across the sands of Dee. One day Mary failed to come back, and it took a long time and a great number of verses to explain.” 92 Painting throughout the summer, Carlyle completed Pippa Passes. Rather than posing her models formally for a painting, she preferred to watch them moving about naturally until she saw a pose that was right for a picture she had in mind.93 After she completed a portrait of Youmans on the lawn of Englewood, her model burst out in admiration, “How proud you must be to do this.” To her dismay Carlyle broke into tears. “I wonder if I shall ever be that,” she said, “there is so little time.” Then she laughed and, giving the painting a long critical look, “tossed brushes, and dried, twisted, paint tubes high in the air; pirouetting around and around her easel as lightly as a leaf blown by the wind,” then broke out singing a scrap of one of her favourite songs: “Gaily the troubadour danced around the water-butt, / down came a brickbat and hit him on the coconut.” 94 In contrast to Browning’s line “all’s right with the world,” Carlyle was clearly deeply unhappy about something. The exact nature of her distress is unclear. It may have concerned her inability to produce the kind of work she wished. Her tearful outburst revealed that she was dissatisfied with her painting, and doubted whether she ever would be satisfied, and that there was “so little time” to achieve what she still wished to do. There is no evidence that she betrayed her concerns to anyone besides her young cousin. She may have felt that colleagues or close family members, in particular her mother, had high expectations for her and didn’t want to disappoint or worry them. With Youmans, however, she had no history and found in her someone in whom to confide who simply admired her for who she was and the beauty she could create. Although her moods sometimes changed daily from “very high, [while] other days she’d be low,” these days were a happy experience for them both. Youmans explained Carlyle’s “low days” as partly due to a need to succeed that drove her to “paint and paint until she was exhausted … Her moods of depression … can be understood. [She] was always reaching for something in her work that she couldn’t attain.” 95 She would stand critically before her canvas and quote out loud, “The little more and how much it is; the little less and how far away.” 96 Her happiest time, Carlyle confided, was when she started a new picture – “Just as if I were going on a wonderful journey or embarking on some great adventure, as indeed I am.” 97

Acclaim, 1903– 1911 151

Besides this natural optimism, she had not lost the quick sense of humour that delighted her family and friends. A close and accurate observer of people, she often described them in an amusingly succinct phrase. On one occasion she advised her cousin about an acquaintance they were to meet: “He is tall and thin, and will appear politely drunk.” Another time, waiting for a client to arrive at the studio, she described him to her mother, “He has red hair and a scar across his cheek from a previous marriage.” 98 The red barn studio seems to have attracted a number of clients that summer. The buyers were all from out of town, and while Carlyle kept no record of them or the prices they paid, the many sales left only “two or three of the smaller pictures.” 99 With the exception of the Knoedler’s Women Artists exhibition in New York that spring, Carlyle seems not to have exhibited at all in public venues during 1908, relying instead on sales from her out-of-the-way studio. This almost complete break extended to the Art Department of the cne, always her mainstay. That autumn she revealed her plan for the direction her art practice would take in the following year. With another lucrative contract from the Osborne Calendar Company, in November she returned to New York, accompanied by Youmans. Having rented a studio apartment “sight unseen” at 32 West 24th Street just west of Broadway, the two women arrived on a wet morning at what had once been a lovely old home.100 Their rooms were up two flights of stairs and consisted of one enormous room with two chesterfield beds and an adjoining bathroom and small alcove kitchenette. Airy and clean, with the right light for painting, it was all they desired. Youmans had come to New York to model for six commissioned pictures for Osborne. As she was engaged to be married the following year, she likely also saw it as a chance for adventure and travel before her marriage. Her memoir is the only detailed and intimate source of information on Carlyle’s work and life in New York. Carlyle worked long hours with Youmans as a model, often setting up two easels and working on two pictures at the same time. When work stalled on one picture, she switched to the other. In the evening she was often too weary to go out, but the women managed to take in a few plays and attended the Metropolitan Opera on several occasions. From time to time they would take a day off and walk about town visiting art galleries and antique shops or window shopping. They particularly loved to window-shop along Fifth Avenue; Tiffany and Co. had recently relocated into new quarters at Fifth Avenue and 37th Street, designed by Stanford White to resemble a Venetian palazzo. Passing the store one day, Car-

152 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

lyle’s attention was drawn by a green glass bowl in the window display. “How lovely to paint,” she kept saying to her cousin. Fearing she would not be able to afford the bowl, she read the price tag, half concealed under the puff of velvet. Eighteen dollars, while a large amount of money to satisfy a whim, was within her budget. The pair entered and asked, a little breathlessly, to see the bowl. Carlyle held it up, turning it to catch the sun and marvelling at the shades. “Eighteen dollars, I understand,” she said. The elderly sales clerk, in his black suit, starched white shirt and diamond tie pin, stared at her. “Eighty,” he said. “Oh!” she replied, and stared back at him. After a silence that seemed like an hour to Youmans, the artist replied in a small, flat voice that she was sorry. The man merely raised his eyebrows and returned the bowl to the window. Youmans feared that her cousin was terribly disappointed, but once out on the street they broke into laughter at the error.101 Working on the Osborne commissioned paintings, both women became fond of their big comfortable studio room and, as Youmans characterized it, “our Bohemian way of living.” She proudly relates how “there were no rules to go by and meals were when hungry; time had no meaning.” 102 During this time, Carlyle’s brother William, on his way to a new post as a consulting engineer in London, England, paid them a visit and took them out to dinner.103 Always Room for One More (1908), one of the paintings Youmans modelled for during this time, was accepted and appeared on an Osborne calendar (fig. 6.1). The calendars were widely distributed, and this one sold as far afield as the Woodstock dry goods store.104 The six commissioned paintings were completed early in 1909 and met with enthusiastic approval from the company. The two women decided to stay on in New York for several more months; Carlyle wanted to enjoy the freedom of painting without the constraints imposed by the commissions. Within two months she had completed five new paintings, three of which sold immediately. She attributed the sales directly to her clients’ familiarity with the work she had done for the Osborne calendars.105 Evidently with an eye to clearing the studio of work, and maximizing her funds before returning home to Canada, she sold two of the remaining paintings in art auction sales in the city.106 The two women returned to Woodstock in early April 1909. Youmans was to be married in the autumn to Harold Eustace Key of Montreal,107 and could not stay all summer; however, in several weeks Carlyle completed two new paintings of her. Girl with a Bowl (1909, fig. 6.6) had been started in New York

Acclaim, 1903– 1911 153

fig. 6.6 Girl with a Bowl, Florence Carlyle, 1909. Helene Youmans is the model. Purchased by John Marr of London, Ontario, from the artist at the 1912 osa exhibition. The present location of the painting remains unknown.

but was finished in Woodstock. The painting shows Youmans with her head thrown back, in an off-the-shoulder gown Carlyle created with draped and pinned fabric.108 The green bowl she holds recalls the eighty-dollar glass bowl from Tiffany’s. Soft opalescent colour dominates the painting. The simple composition and contemplative subject suggest that the artist was eschewing the less subtle narrative style of her Osborne commissions. Perhaps coincidentally, this refocusing of her concerns in her art reflects almost exactly the advice she had received from Robert Henri to show more concern for a painting’s quiet and expressive qualities, “to think of a prayer.”

154 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

 Return Home, 1909 The following months saw Carlyle engaged in preparations to re-enter the exhibition scene in Canada after a seven-year period of only sporadic interest. While her reasons for refocusing her professional energy from New York back to Canada remain unclear, this dramatic reversal may stem from the selfdoubts and disappointments she expressed to her cousin. Two of Carlyle’s friends, Laura Muntz and Gertrude Spurr, marked important milestones in their lives and professional careers at this time. Muntz had never lost sight of her Canadian home ground and had remained strongly engaged with Canadian art venues; in 1909 this careful cultivation was rewarded with an invitation to exhibit as a guest with the Canadian Art Club in Toronto. The club had formed two years previously in 1907 and held annual exhibitions from 1908 to 1915.109 The invitation to Muntz was unprecedented; she was the only woman to this date to ever exhibit with the club. The honour speaks of her high stature among Canadian artists, but may also partly be the result of the influence of Newton MacTavish. An influential collector, critic, and editor of the Canadian Magazine since 1906, he was also a member of the Canadian Art Club and may have convinced the male-dominated club to recognize Muntz’s importance.110 That year Gertrude Spurr married portrait painter and teacher William Malcolm Cutts (1857–1943). The fifty-two year old Cutts, who had been previously married, and the fifty-one year old Spurr left Toronto for an extended painting trip to Cornwall, England.111 After her marriage Spurr successfully continued her professional art practice. The years 1908 and 1909 saw the return to Canada of two Montrealborn painters from travels and art studies in Europe: Clarence Alphonse Gagnon (1881–1942) and Alexander Young Jackson (1882–1974). Gagnon, who had gained an international reputation as an etcher, lived principally in France between 1904 and 1936 but returned to Canada for prolonged visits and maintained contact with Canadian exhibitions and sales opportunities.112 At this time landscape painting was gaining greater visibility in the Canadian art world. The rugged beauty of their native land was inspiring artists to turn to it as a subject for paintings. In 1910 artists such as Tom Thomson (1877–1917), J.E.H. MacDonald, and other artists working in the art department of Grip went on painting trips to Lake Scugog and further afield. Gagnon often painted in the company of Jackson, who returned to Canada around 1909 after studying in Chicago and Paris.113 Jackson painted

Acclaim, 1903– 1911 155

his Impressionist landscapes in Sweetsburg, Quebec, in early 1910 and exhibited his work at the cne exhibition that year. The titles of the paintings, Winter Afternoon, Quebec, and Landscape, and The Georgian Bay, reflect his growing interest in the rocky, windswept coast and islands of Ontario’s Georgian Bay region.114 Carlyle showed five new paintings, including Pippa Passes (1908, fig. 6.5), in the 1910 osa spring exhibition when it opened on 5 March at the Art Museum of Toronto gallery in the Public Library Building on College Street. Her “success and recognition in New York” was a topic for discussion, and her paintings were seen to give “striking evidence of [her] development.” They were hailed by the Toronto critics as “among the most original pieces of work exhibited,” and her “unconventional subjects and treatment [attracted] immediate attention.” 115 Pippa Passes delighted viewers with its literary references. In her maternité painting Mother and Child (1910, fig. 6.7), the glowing firelight reflecting off the subjects prompted one critic’s favourable comparisons to George Reid’s painting of the same name. Reid’s picture was said to “lack the warmth” of Carlyle’s.116 Her small canvas shows her ability to capture the intimacy of an observed moment. Paintings of mothers and children, often with the mother’s gaze directed at the child, were popular subjects at this time. Although evading the sentimentality that frequently characterized contemporary representations of this theme, Carlyle’s Mother and Child can nevertheless be viewed within this context of images of an idyllic maternity.117 She continued her exploration of women in a garden setting with A Book of Verse beneath the Bough. While presently unlocated, it was said to depict a woman seated under trees, a book in her lap. Carlyle’s Shadow and Sunlight (also presently unlocated), described as showing a woman sitting in “chequered and luminous shade” watching a child at play, was seen by critics as a companion piece to Helen McNicoll’s In a Surrey Orchard. The latter work is described as an image of a young girl hanging out clothes to dry under the trees in flickering sunlight.118 McNicoll’s concern for rendering the effects of bright light, and her depictions of women and girls in outdoor settings, were characteristics her work shared with Carlyle’s. McNicoll’s canvases reveal that she was working unreservedly in the Impressionist tradition, whereas Carlyle continued to adhere to a more academic Impressionism. A critic’s comments from the osa exhibit in 1910 made a similar distinction while describing the two paintings as “of similar character”: Carlyle’s canvas was of “slightly more restrained colour and smoother workmanship.” 119

156 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

fig. 6.7 Mother and Child, Florence Carlyle, 1910. A description of the painting appeared in a review in the Toronto Mail and Empire, 5 March 1910: “It is in the colouring of the Mother and Child that this young artist shows her great talent. The figures are ordinary, showing a mother nursing a baby, but the glow of the firelight upon them is wonderful, seeming almost to gleam and fade in its vivid realism” (“Ontario Artists Open Exhibition”). [plate 16]

McNicoll had gained a significant national reputation by 1910, but her premature death in 1915 would cut short an impressive career just reaching its prime.120 Carlyle’s enthusiastic reception by Canadian critics in her reintroduction after a gap indicates that, far from consigning her to anonymity, the Toronto art community was aware of her work and success of the past years. Flatter-

Acclaim, 1903– 1911 157

ing analysis of her paintings, referred to as her “series of studies of beautiful women,” often appears in the first lines of newspaper reviews of exhibitions.121 She enjoyed a warm welcome, interest, and admiration from her Canadian peers, for one of their own who had returned home with considerable success from what was seen as the testing ground of New York. Carlyle did not exhibit at the aam exhibition in April. The Yacht Race and other St Malo sketches by J.W. Morrice were the focus of the Montreal critics’ praise. Morrice was living principally in Paris with only occasional trips back to Canada, yet he continued to pay attention to exhibition opportunities at home. He was friendly with Maurice Cullen, who also attracted much attention in the Canadian art world of 1910. Cullen’s canvases had been among the first to apply Impressionist tenets to the Canadian landscape, and his work played a key role in the dissemination of Impressionism in Canada.122 At the 1910 rca exhibition Carlyle showed Grey and Gold (1910, fig. 6.8), a painting of a fashionably coiffed and dressed young woman absorbed in her reading and oblivious to the viewer’s gaze. Here Carlyle continues to focus attention on the private life of middle-class women. Grey and Gold recalls the many precedents of women reading, such Fragonard’s The Reader (ca. 1776).123 Carlyle’s subject is seated at a parlour table, her book before her; delicate veiling conceals her form. Loose and airy brushwork achieves the effect of transparency. Carlyle had made similar use of veiling in two earlier paintings, Before Her First Communion (ca. 1903, fig. 4.4) and Sketch of the Artist (1904, fig. i). Although presented as a traditional image of a beautiful young woman, with a seductive play of light through the transparency of dress and shawl, the subject is affirmed as an autonomous individual by the choice of a profile view, the position of her head, and private indoor setting. Grey and Gold was bought by the rca from the exhibition for the collection of the National Gallery of Canada for $400.124 Another of her paintings from this time, The Moth, depicts a woman in a drawing room (fig. 6.9). The subject is self-absorbed and introspective. She reclines on a sofa and contemplates the light from the lamp. Her ethereal and meditative mood reflects the Symbolist belief that contemplation, quiet, and daydream are integral to achieving a spiritual state. In the words of art historian Madeline Lennon, The Moth reveals “a felt sense of fragility.”125 The title is an allusion to the saying, “like a moth to a flame,” meaning a temptation to something that would lead to a downfall. Carlyle may have been familiar with Shakespeare’s line from The Merchant of Venice, “Thus hath the candle singd the moath.” Here, as in The Tiff (fig. ii), Miss Mischief (fig. 5.5),

158 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

fig. 6.8 Grey and Gold, Florence Carlyle, 1910. Purchased by the National Gallery of Canada from the artist at the aam exhibition in Montreal in 1910, Grey and Gold was chosen to represent the best in Canadian art at the Festival of the Empire, London, England, in 1910, and was exhibited at the British Empire Exhibition in London in 1924. In 1947 it was among the works chosen to represent early twentieth-century Canadian artists in the osa’s Retrospective Exhibition in Toronto. [plate 17]

Badinage (fig. 5.3), and many other of her paintings, Carlyle employs the title to suggest and lead into the narrative of the work. The Moth was sold in 1910 at the aam exhibition to J. Gordon and Wilhelmina McIntosh.126 As in this example, Carlyle frequently gave titles to her paintings that suggest a meditative mood. While the subject of Contemplation (ca. 1913) remains unknown, her similarly entitled Thoughts (ca. 1902) depicts a young

Acclaim, 1903– 1911 159

fig. 6.9 The Moth, Florence Carlyle, 1910. First exhibited in Montreal at the aam Spring Exhibition in Montreal in April 1910 and offered for sale at $250, it was likely acquired by J. Gordon and Wilhelmina Morris McIntosh at this venue. [plate 18]

woman lost in thought at a piano. In her earlier Reminiscences (1897) a young woman in reverie is seated before closed shutters.127 Eric Brown was named curator of the National Gallery of Canada (ngc) in 1911, and the following year the National Gallery found a home in the newly constructed Victoria Memorial Museum in Ottawa. At this time the gallery set about building a public collection, and its increased purchasing power was of great importance to Canadian artists.128 In addition to buying work directly from artists’ studios, Canadian exhibitions such as the aam, rca, and cne constituted the main source for the ngc’s early purchases. Other Canadian artists’ work acquired in the years just prior to World War I were paintings by J.W. Beatty, Mary Hiester Reid, Laura Muntz, Gertrude Spurr Cutts, and newcomers Henrietta Mabel May (1884–1971) and Berthe Des Clayes (1887–1968).129 The honour of the ngc’s purchase of Carlyle’s Grey and Gold (fig. 6.9) was enhanced by the subsequent selection of another of her paintings shown in

160 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

Montreal, The Joy of Living (1910, fig. 5.2). This painting was chosen to be part of the Canadian Section of the Festival of Empire in London, England. The rca had been asked to form a representative collection of Canadian art to be included in the festival, set to open in London’s Crystal Palace on 24 May 1910. The collection, under the care of the Canadian artist Edmond Dyonnet (1859–1954), no sooner arrived in Liverpool when the festival was cancelled following the unexpected death of King Edward VII . Dyonnet contacted the authorities of the Walker Art Gallery in Liverpool, who agreed to exhibit approximately 113 pictures and five small bronzes for three weeks. Dubbed the “formal debut” of Canadian art in England, the exhibit opened on 4 July 1910 amid substantial British press coverage (fig. 6.10). One Liverpool critic suggested that the cancellation of the festival was fortunate for Canadian artists: “Canadian art,” he wrote, “thus makes its bow to England under much more dignified and congenial conditions than would have been the case if it had emerged as a side show at [the Crystal Palace].” 130 Critical reception varied from frank admiration to dismissive jibes. Critics judged the show to be alternately of “general excellence,” “creditable,” or as one eminent critic put it, “a good show, that is to say, good for Canada, but I do not suppose it to be the beginning of a new era in art.” 131 The Glasgow Herald noted that “Florence Carlyle is generally regarded as one of Canada’s best lady artists.”132 However, The Tiff, one of three of her paintings in the exhibit, was described by one critic as “suggesting the insincerity of the Paris ateliers”– but by another as “quite the best of the few figure ‘anecdotes,’ one which escapes the besetting faults of pictorial narrative.” 133 Many British critics saw nothing to suggest a distinctive Canadian school of art, pointing out that almost all of the artists had availed themselves of European training. Others were delighted in what they saw as evidence of Canadian artists drawing on Canadian subjects and social life for inspiration. Carlyle’s The Joy of Living was especially singled out for this recognition, and was described as an “essentially Canadian” painting. One Liverpool reviewer described it as depicting “a strong, healthy, smiling young woman, standing over the washing tub. In our played-out hemisphere [wash day] is not the day when the joy of living is specially felt. But what is washing day … to this Canadian lass?” 134 Little about the painting’s subject matter, a domestic genre painting showing an indebtedness to the Impressionists, was distinctively Canadian. However, the British critics had their own notions when marking out what they imagined was distinctively “Canadian” in exhibitions.

Acclaim, 1903– 1911 161

fig. 6.10 Canadian Art Exhibition at the Walker Art Gallery, Liverpool, England. Carlyle’s painting The Joy of Living (1910) of a woman standing before a washtub (see figure 5.2) is visible to the left of the corner in this photograph, taken at the exhibition in July 1910.

 The Red Gown:135 Reading Carlyle’s Images of Women In her many paintings of women in the domestic sphere, Carlyle explores the experience of women in what Griselda Pollock has called “spaces of femininity.” 136 Pollock has called attention to how the social restrictions on women in the nineteenth century are expressed in the spaces and figures of Morisot’s and Cassatt’s paintings of women. Characteristics such as lines of demarcation, compression, and shallowness of space are seen as reflecting the social limitations imposed on women, the constraints and enclosure felt by women.137 The “spaces” also include women’s experience of femininity, how it “is lived as a positionality in discourse and social practice.” 138

162 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

Aspects of Pollock’s reading have some application to a reading of Carlyle’s representations of women in the domestic sphere. As previously discussed, in her paintings such as Summer (fig. 3.4), Golden Rod (fig. 4.3), Monday Morning (fig. 4.7), and The Garden (fig. 4.2), constriction of space, clues of obstacles, and lines of demarcation appear to suggest the bounds of women’s domestic world. They suggest that Carlyle saw the domestic sphere as one of contradiction for women, offering comfort yet imbued with negative qualities such as isolation and restraint. In addition, as Pollock has suggested, women artists such as Carlyle were also constantly renegotiating the experience of their subject through the act of making the painting. In the act of creation the subject is constantly reflected back to the artist, and because of this reciprocity and change, meaning cannot be fixed.139 The practice of production and exhibiting was a social interaction between producer, materials, and audience and is central to the study of women artists. In her act of production, Carlyle was consciously expressing and critiquing her understanding of the experience of women living within the domestic sphere of home, husband, and children and within the narrow accepted definition of femininity. Throughout the length of her career and at a number of levels, including class, age, and activity, she consciously chose to create paintings that made women’s domestic experience visible. Women engaged in comfortable bourgeois, “ladylike” activities inhabit interior settings in Golden Rod and Grey and Gold (fig. 6.8); they receive women callers in The Guest,Venice (fig. 7.8). They read to and nurse children in A Book of Verse beneath the Bough and Mother and Child (fig. 6.7); they relax in reverie in peaceful garden settings in Summer (fig. 3.4). Carlyle’s exploration of women’s domestic experience extends to women engaged in household labour. Women are frequently shown as associated with gendered domestic tasks: cleaning, cooking, spinning, sewing, child care. These paintings not only carefully describe the woman, her activity, and its processes but also reveal Carlyle’s familiarity with the working woman’s lived reality. In her images of laundresses, women hang wash in Monday Morning and The Garden and scrub clothes on a washtub in The Joy of Living (1910, fig. 5.2). Women of all ages are present: old women in Spinning Woman (ca. 1896), Une dame hollandaise (fig. 3.2) and La vieille Victorine (fig. 3.3), young women and young mothers in The First Pie (ca. 1900) and Mother and Child. A woman gazes out of the doorway of her kitchen, pausing from her sweeping in High Noon (ca. 1915, fig. 6.11).140 The titles of unlocated paintings such as Sketch, Darning Stockings (ca. 1897), Peeling Potatoes

Acclaim, 1903– 1911 163

fig. 6.11 High Noon, Florence Carlyle, ca. 1916. Painted in the artist’s home in Crowborough, Sussex, the painting appeared in the artist’s memorial exhibition in Toronto, 1925. [plate 19]

(ca. 1898), and The Little Housewife (ca. 1903) suggest other aspects of women’s labour-intensive work. Although Carlyle and her sisters always participated in household work, the family employed at least one servant. Portraits of female domestics such as the young maid, Ethel, the model in The Joy of Living and The First Pie, were not uncommon subjects for women artists. Their presence in paintings rendered women’s labour visible and imbued it with dignity, yet class differences, visual codes, and signs of the servant were always evident. In The Joy of Living the woman’s reddened skin, untidy hair, sturdy, uncorseted figure, wrinkled apron and rolled-up sleeves actively codify her as working class

164 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

and a servant. (Interestingly, in paintings such as The Garden, for which Carlyle’s sister Maud is said to have modelled, the subject with her plain clothes and simple hairstyle still “reads” as a working-class woman.) While one might argue that such dress only reflected practicality, it might also be seen as Carlyle, the middle-class artist, adhering to conventions regarding the depiction of women engaged in domestic labour.141 She apparently saw nothing remarkable in the fact that she herself worked to earn her living while she continued to write class differences onto her depictions of women.

 Canadian critics attending the rca annual exhibition in Montreal the following December continued the search for indications of a “Canadian school of painting.” 142 Landscapes inspired by the Canadian wilderness included Cullen’s several paintings of the Newfoundland coast and Gagnon’s Impressionist influenced landscapes of Quebec’s Laurentians.143 While Carlyle had exhibited some landscapes early in her career, she remained committed to figural painting. She sent Mother and Child (1910, fig. 6.7), which had failed to find a buyer at the spring osa exhibition, to the rca show. Newton MacTavish conspicuously ignored the painting and wrote that “nothing new of interest” by Carlyle was in the exhibition, while praising Muntz’s A Daffodil as a “triumph.” 144 That winter Carlyle briefly diverged from her figural paintings of women to complete a portrait of her father (fig. 1.2). This restrained portrait showing William Carlyle in profile view reading a book depicts him as a contained, elderly, dignified man, and reflects the few facts that we have about him as an educator and middle-class pillar of the community. A restricted palette of white, grey, and black echoes the printed word on the book. The painting shares certain formal characteristics with work by Whistler in its subtle colour gradations; the carefully constructed use of a rectangle within the painting frames the figure and calls attention to the relationship between the small internal framed painting, and the rectangular shape of the canvas support. One of Carlyle’s few known paintings featuring a man as subject, Portrait of My Father was first shown in 1911 at the osa exhibition. “Place of honour for a lady!” announced the Montreal Star’s review of the 1911 aam Association of Montreal spring exhibition in March. Although dating from three years previously, Pippa Passes (1908, fig. 6.5) was praised for its choice of subject matter.145 Carlyle’s reintegration back into the Canadian art world, her acceptance as one of the leading Canadian women artists

Acclaim, 1903– 1911 165

fig. 6.12 Photograph of the artist and her family at William Carlyle’s home in Wimbledon, England, in June 1911. Left to right: the artist’s mother, Emily Carlyle; niece, Kathleen; sister-in-law, Allie; nephew Arthur; Florence Carlyle.

and a top-ranked figural painter, was affirmed. The popular appeal of her figure paintings and the critics’ admiration for her portraits ensured her standing among her peers. By the spring of 1911 the “peculiar graces of style” that one critic identified in Carlyle’s painting drew the viewing public and made her work “always one of the most pleasing features” of Canadian exhibitions.146

166 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

Yet, while she enjoyed continued recognition, the beginnings of a change in the critical reception of her work may be detected. One Montreal critic pointed out flaws with her rendering of the figure of Pippa: it was awkwardly “superimposed [on] the landscape,” wrote the reviewer; the artist’s style of painting was “too finished (fig. 6.5).” 147 A Lily of Florence (ca. 1907, fig. 6.4) was deemed “not entirely successful” by another critic at the osa exhibition later in 1911, “lacking life and interest.” 148 At this time of Carlyle’s continued popularity, we begin to see a trend toward a diminishing quantity of critical attention paid to her work. In addition, the critics’ support for her work, once high, seems to have begun to fall. Whether this is the result of her years of neglect of the Canadian art community or reflects changing tastes in the popularity of figure painting remains uncertain. Later that spring Carlyle and her mother left Canada on a trip to England to visit with William, her brother, now a professor at the Imperial College of Science in London. Carlyle’s father remained at home due to a heart condition that made travel abroad difficult. After an uneventful passage Carlyle and her mother were reunited with William, his wife, Allie, and their two children at their comfortable home in Wimbledon (fig. 6.12). Among the family friends and neighbours that Carlyle met during the spring and early summer months was a tall, attractive woman, Judith Hastings. The two immediately struck up a close friendship. In late June the family received word that William Carlyle Sr. had suddenly been taken ill after Sunday dinner. Medical treatment was unsuccessful, and he had died at home in Woodstock on 25 June. Grief stricken, Carlyle and her mother returned to Canada by the fastest means possible.149

7 Losses and Gains 1911–1914 

The death of William Carlyle put into question the living arrangements of the household. There was some question as to whether or not Emily Carlyle would continue living alone in the family home. Formerly a force for numerous charitable activities, in recent years she had been hampered by failing eyesight and led a retired life. Alternatives for her were few. Both of Carlyle’s sisters were married and either lived at some distance or had young families to care for. Her brothers worked as engineers in England or in countries remote from Canada such as Russia and Argentina.1 Reluctant to have her mother leave the security of the family home, Carlyle resolved to make Woodstock her career base, at least temporarily. Given that the last year had been spent in turning her energies away from the United States toward Canada and increasing her exposure in Canadian exhibition venues, a commitment to take responsibility for her ageing mother seemed in accordance with her professional plans (fig. 7.1). However, it is likely that she was well aware of the pitfalls that could spell disaster for a woman’s career. Not least among these pitfalls was family duty.

fig. 7.1 Photograph of Emily and Florence Carlyle on verandah at Englewood in Woodstock, summer of 1912.

Losses and Gains, 1911– 1914 169

 Shadow and Sunlight: 2 Weighing Professional Lives

and Marriage It is one of the ironies of nineteenth-century sexual difference that, having avoided the institution of matrimony to pursue her artistic career, Carlyle, now forty-seven years old as the oldest daughter and an unmarried woman, was compelled by convention and her own sense of loyalty to assume responsibility for her ailing mother, who had been her most ardent supporter.3 Women artists of her generation were often torn between marriage and a career. Not only did they believe that marriage would jeopardize their independence and freedom to work at their art practice, but they likely shared the belief of other women professionals of the era who thought that working full time at a career would inhibit their ability to be a good mother. “It’s such a hard life for a woman,” Laura Muntz warned her niece who aspired to become a sculptor, “I wanted you to marry and have children … and you can’t do both – don’t try to do both.” 4 Clara Peel (1862–1938), the younger sister of Paul and Mildred Peel, planned a career as a sculptor. Yet in 1889, twelve months after in an interview in a Toronto newspaper declaring her intention to study art in Paris, she married Reuben Booth Belden.5 She had two children in this marriage, and although she socialized with the art community in Toronto, she never fulfilled her desire of a professional career. Carlyle’s cousin, Cecile B. Davis (1866–1935) from Uxbridge, Ontario, who studied art alongside Carlyle in their teen years, married in her early twenties and never progressed as an artist.6 Sarah Baldwin Holden, a friend from Carlyle’s years in Paris who won a gold medal for Canada at the Chicago World’s Fair in 1893, resigned from the rca in 1907 four years after her marriage and was not heard of again in Canadian art circles.7 Canadian women artists of Carlyle’s generation sometimes married other artists, yet they often fared little better in their careers. Whether by convention, or design, their achievements were usually overshadowed by those of their husbands.8 Following art studies at the New York Art Students’ League and in Paris, and having been appointed an associate of the rca, Mary A. Bell (1864–1951) married British painter Charles Eastlake in 1893. After her marriage, she resigned from her membership with the rca and abandoned her teaching career at Montreal’s Victoria School of Art.9 Elizabeth Annie Beach (1866–1928) travelled from her home in Ottawa to study art at the Toronto Art School under painter Farquhar McGillivray Knowles (1859–1932), marrying him in 1890. She was elected an associate of the rca

170 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

in 1908 and continued to paint and exhibit, but her professional practice was subordinate to that of her husband.10 The couple worked together very much as a team, completing joint projects and holding joint exhibitions of their work. Critics tended to point out the humour in Elizabeth Beach Knowles’s depictions of “barnyard subjects” while providing a more serious consideration of her husband’s work.11 Several of Carlyle’s close friends who married at an older age were able to establish a tactical understanding with their husbands that their art practice would not take a secondary place to home, husband, and children. In 1909, at the age of fifty-one, Gertrude Spurr married fellow Canadian artist William Malcolm Cutts. In 1907, also aged fifty-one, Mildred Peel married the former premier of Ontario, George Ross. In 1915, at the age of fifty-five, Laura Muntz married her deceased sister’s husband, Charles W.B. Lyall. She closed her Montreal studio and assumed the care of her sister’s eleven children and the running of the household in Toronto. Her art production inevitably suffered with her “domestic duties.” 12 Elizabeth Mulley has contrasted Muntz’s “single-minded” pursuit of a professional career with her “all but abandoned” professional practice post 1915. Although she returned to the art world in the mid-1920s and achieved a measure of success with portrait commissions, she was never to revive her earlier popularity and critical acclaim.13 Yet each of these women artists had established an independent identity and artistic career before marrying.14 Carlyle had chosen to remain unmarried, a “spinster,” in the terminology of the time, to pursue her art. As Deborah Cherry points out in her study of women artists, many professional women in the late nineteenth century consciously chose to remain unmarried; “spinsterhood [and] celibacy were positive identities for middle-class women.” 15 Sydney Tully chose to remain single, enjoying the freedom to study in Paris and England, and with William Chase at the Shinnicock Hills Summer School of Art near Southampton.16 By the 1880s spinsterhood was not only invested with a strong moral force but was advocated as the means of choice through which women could participate in the public world. Feminist discourse of the era proposed spinsterhood as a high form of womanhood, and a journal of the time proclaimed, “The higher a woman’s nature is, the more likely it is that she will prefer rather to forgo marriage altogether, than surrender herself to a union that would sink her below her own ideal.” 17 So it was that on returning to Woodstock, Carlyle reopened her studio in the red barn and sent word to New York to have a number of her paintings in storage shipped to her in Canada. The remaining summer and autumn

Losses and Gains, 1911– 1914 171

fig. 7.2 Photograph of Florence Carlyle on the front lawn of Englewood, ca. 1912.

months found her taking on more responsibility for the running of the household, shopping, chores, and expenses (fig. 7.2). She received clients from time to time in her rustic studio, sharing her work space with the chickens that came in through the barn door left ajar for ventilation. Windows let in rain as well as sun, and as the winter closed in, the “small stove alternately scorched itself into a livid red, or went dead black.”18 Although Carlyle’s finances were such that she could afford to pay for help in running the house, the cook had an “irritating way of interrupting a delicate bit of work by announcing that there were no potatoes for dinner or that she couldn’t wash without soap.” 19 At the request of the principal of Woodstock College, she and her mother accepted a student from London, Frank Carson, as a boarder. Carson recalled that Carlyle made him feel “part of the family.” 20 The press in Toronto and nearby London had welcomed her home to Canada after what they described as her “lengthy sojourn in New York,” yet one writer speculated, “will [she] miss the atmosphere of art and love of art in which she has been?”21 In December 1911 an article focusing on her life and work appeared in the special Christmas feature section of the London Echo. It was illustrated by photographs of her paintings that were the property of prominent London citizens. These included Mother and Child (1910, fig. 6.7), renamed Mother Love by its owner Lew Graves, the son of her London dealer.22 The price Carlyle paid for her years of neglect of the Canadian art community – her failure to promote herself consistently at home exhibitions or

172 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

to cultivate sales opportunities and dealers in Canada – was in part her ranking in this article as a “close second” to Laura Muntz.23 Muntz was much in demand for her portraits, particularly for those of children, with “more commission work than she could do.” 24 Her painting The Daffodil was purchased in 1910 for the National Gallery collection. An article on Muntz in the Canadian Magazine by its editor, Newton MacTavish, appeared in September 1911.25 At this time, just prior to her marriage in 1915, Muntz was ranked as the best woman painter in Canada by a anonymous “leading” male colleague. Sadly, Sydney Strickland Tully, one of the best Canadian portraitists, had died the previous July at the age of fifty-one. An active participant in the Canadian art community since the 1880s, she was admired as a painter and a teacher. She was honoured by a memorial exhibition of her work held in Toronto’s Art Metropole Galleries in December that same year.26

 Early in 1912, Judith Hastings, Carlyle’s friend whom she had met in Wimbledon the previous summer, arrived in Woodstock for an extended visit. Carlyle seized upon the opportunity of an enthusiastic new model for her paintings and immediately began several pictures. Spring Song (1912, fig. 7.3), which shows Hastings seated before the family piano with late-winter snow visible through the window, is one of the paintings that occupied them during these months. The Threshold (1912, fig. 7.4), in which the subject is conventionally arrayed as a bride, was the cause of much hilarity. Hastings found it impossible to pose with a straight face and “during the painting, every once in a while [the two women] would shriek with laughter, literally rolling on the floor. Judith would say, ‘Now I will be good. I will go at it. I will take it hard’; and [they] would both sober [up]. Oh, it was all very funny,” Carlyle explained to a friend.27 A new generation of Canadian women artists was now emerging, and Carlyle’s generation was providing role models for them. Several of these younger women had begun their art training at the aam school, which had now moved to Sherbrooke Street West. Emily Coonan and Mabel May visited France, Belgium, and Holland together in 1912–13; both women’s paintings were praised for their vivid colour in the 1912 aam spring exhibition.28 Eighteen year old Prudence Heward (1896–1947) received the aam scholarship for the Senior Elementary Class in May 1912. Sarah Robertson, also at the aam school, exhibited with its spring exhibition for the first time in 1912.29 The young widow Mary Riter Hamilton (1893–1954), living in

Losses and Gains, 1911– 1914 173

fig. 7.3 Spring Song, Florence Carlyle, 1912. Painted at the family home in Woodstock with Judith Hastings as model, Spring Song was donated by the artist to the Patriotic Fund Exhibition and purchased by a Montreal resident from that exhibition in 1915. The present location of this painting remains unknown. Reproduced from the Canadian Magazine (March 1915).

Winnipeg, had her first solo Canadian exhibition in 1911 to critical success. Three of her paintings were bought by the Duchess of Connaught, and Hamilton’s reputation for evocative landscape paintings continued to grow.30 March 1912 saw the beginning of the spring exhibition season in Canada with Carlyle sending one of her last paintings of Helene Youmans, Girl with a Bowl (1909, fig. 6.6), to the osa exhibit in Toronto. Her other submission was A Good Listener, described as depicting a woman seated in a studio. This continued her exploration of the theme of the studio as the centre of the

174 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

fig. 7.4 The Threshold, Florence Carlyle, 1912. Painted at Englewood, winter 1912, with Judith Hastings as model, the painting was purchased from the artist at the osa exhibition in 1913 by the provincial government for the Ontario Art Collection. [plate 20]

woman artist’s professional and personal life, last seen in her 1903 painting The Studio (fig. 5.4).31 Among the over eight hundred viewers attending the 1912 aam spring exhibition was Eric Brown, named curator of the National Gallery of Canada the previous year. On view were A.Y. Jackson’s Impressionist paintings dating from his time in Normandy with fellow artist Albert Robinson. Jackson’s work produced during this trip began to show the influence of Post-Impressionism. Tom Thomson had made his first trip to sketch and

Losses and Gains, 1911– 1914 175

paint in Algonquin Park.32 The following year (1913) Post-Impressionist works with their brighter palette exhibited by Jackson and others “shocked” some viewers.33 While there was little hint as yet of the nationalist wilderness imagery that would emerge by the end of the decade, the attractions of rugged northland landscape were becoming evident. Continuing to work within older traditions of portraiture and figural conventions, Carlyle sent one painting to the aam exhibition. The critics’ lack of comment may be explained by the fact that the canvas arrived too late to be included in the catalogue.34 Later that spring Florence E. Deacon, a journalist with Toronto Globe, came to Woodstock to interview Carlyle for a series of articles she was writing on “Representative Canadian Women” (fig. 7.6). Carlyle welcomed Deacon and, following the interview and a tour of her studio and work, invited her to dinner. Deacon wrote that though the artist’s name and work were known, of “Florence Carlyle herself little has been written. The reason is … she has not permitted it.” 35 Carlyle clearly viewed public interest in her work and private life with caution. Helene Youmans observed that she had a “steadfast purpose. [She] believed in herself [but was] little concerned about being personally acclaimed, without any of the vanity that would seem permissible in view of the recognition she had already earned.” 36 However, by 1912 Carlyle may have seen women art journalists as a useful means to heighten her Canadian public exposure. Articles by women focusing on Canadian women artists had begun to appear in Canadian newspapers and periodicals around the turn of the century. Some focused on one woman artist, providing substantial biographical treatment, while others grouped together several women. In 1898 the subjects of these articles included Mary Hiester Reid and three relative newcomers, Laura Muntz, Sydney Strickland Tully, and Carlyle.37 In 1911 and 1912 Carlyle and Muntz, by then enjoying great popularity, were the subjects of separate articles in Toronto publications.38 A Saturday Night article by Estelle Kerr in 1913 highlighted Carlyle, Muntz, and Hiester Reid, now established women artists, as well as emerging women artists including painter Gertrude Des Clayes and etcher Dorothy Stevens.39 Everywoman’s World, exploring the topic “Women and Art in Canada,” included discussion of Carlyle, Muntz, Gertrude Spurr, Hiester Reid, and the late Sydney Strickland Tully. This 1914 article made mention of Elizabeth McGillivray Knowles, and many of the new generation of painters and printmakers, including

176 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

Gertrude Des Clayes, Harriet Ford, Clara Hagarty, Mary Riter Hamilton, Estelle Kerr, Mabel May, Henrietta Shore, Dorothy Stevens, and Mary Wrinch.40 Each of these articles helped redress the gender imbalance in the literature of art. While committed to a steady output of work, Carlyle wished to show Judith Hastings something of Canada once the fine weather had arrived. A conversation with family friend John D. Patterson offered up a possibility for an affordable summer excursion. Patterson was the vice-president of the Alpine Club of Canada, a climbing group that accepted women as members and allowed them full participation. He invited the two women to join the annual camp of the Alpine Club to be held that year in the Vermilion Pass in the Rocky Mountains west of Banff.41 Thrilled with the prospect of painting the scenery and doing some climbing, the women accepted. The train journey would take them across the wilderness of northern Ontario, over the prairies to the mountains. Carlyle’s sister Lillian came to stay with their mother for the summer and brought her seven year old daughter with her.42 The journey west in June included a ten-hour stopover in Winnipeg, spent with relations of Emily Carlyle’s sister, Sophia Youmans. “The grandeur of the great wide streets” and Winnipeg’s beautiful parks made a lasting impression on Hastings.43 On their arrival at the Alpine Club’s remote mountain camp (fig. 7.5), Carlyle spent much of her time painting the scenery, since her lack of training and “strength did not permit her to become an expert climber.” Hastings, who had previous climbing experience, was more active. However, Carlyle “proved herself a good sport, and her charming personality won her enduring friends.” 44 Women climbers were cautioned that “no lady who wears skirts or bloomers will be allowed to take a place on a climbing rope, as such garments are a distinct source of danger to the party … The costume suggested is the same as that worn by men – knickerbockers, puttees or gaiters, sweater and knockabout hat.”45 One photograph (fig. 7.5) taken at the camp shows Carlyle and Hastings standing with an unidentified male friend, likely John Patterson. The two women wear the prescribed costume of knickerbockers – loose-fitting breeches gathered at the knee – and appear ready to set out on a trek.46 Carlyle’s participation as a climber and artist in the mountain wilderness in 1912 negates recent claims that Canadian women artists did not engage in painting alpine landscapes, except perhaps from the lawn of their hotel.47 The Canadian Alpine Club camp was situated in a remote mountain

Losses and Gains, 1911– 1914 177

fig. 7.5 Photograph of Florence Carlyle and Judith Hastings at the Alpine Club, Vermillion Pass, 1912. The man at right is possibly John Patterson.

location accessed only by train, by pack horse, or on foot. A contemporary writer noted, “Courage … [is] an attribute of the Alpine Club. Fortitude is another. Picture many women in one small tent, with few blankets … though abundance of spruce twigs are supplied beneath them – who must rise at 4 or 5 o’clock in the damp, cold atmosphere of an altitude of over 6,000 feet, with all the washing appliances outside the tent … boots and clothes … stiff and sodden from daily ascents and tramps lasting 10 or 12 hours. This all spells discomfort and calls for endurance.” 48 Carlyle and Hastings participated in organized treks that ranged from “an afternoon tramp” to a “two day jaunt,” with all climbers carrying their own supplies. Carlyle recorded one of these excursions on 17 June in a small panel painting entitled Lake Louise, Spring.49 This lake, and the province of Alberta itself, were named after Carlyle’s early patron, Princess Louise Caroline Alberta, now the Duchess of Argyle. At the close of camp in August the two women stayed on in the area for several more weeks so that Carlyle could continue to paint.50 Their adventure is reminiscent of that of writer Sara Jeanette Duncan who, with fellow journalist Lily Lewis, took the train across the Prairies and climbed glaciers in the Rockies.51

178 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

Returning to Woodstock, Carlyle found that her mother’s health had deteriorated. She was now blind and had suffered some paralysis, which left her unable to walk.52 Lillian postponed returning home in order to help care for their mother. Hastings returned to England in late August. Shortly after, her portrait entitled Spring Song (fig. 7.3) was exhibited at the cne Art Department and offered for sale at the price of $350. While juggling domestic demands, in the autumn of 1912 Carlyle managed to advance her professional goals. She sent a request to the council of the Royal Canadian Academy to be reinstated as an associate, a position she had let lapse while working in the United States. She also informed the council that she wished to send several pictures to the upcoming rca exhibition to be held in Ottawa’s new art gallery, the Victoria Memorial Museum, and requested that the rca pay the freight charges on her pictures, as was the custom. She was notified that the council would consider her request when it met in Ottawa on the day after the exhibition opened on 29 November, but to go ahead and send her pictures for the opening.53 This refocusing of her professional efforts toward Canadian art associations in 1912 was assisted by her active pursuit of publicity. Following her successful contact with Florence Deacon and the Toronto Globe the previous spring (fig. 7.6), Carlyle contacted a writer whom she was acquainted with, Blanch B. Hume. In early November she telephoned Hume, an old friend and a Woodstock resident. “I am sending away some pictures tomorrow,” Carlyle told her. “Would you like to come and see them before they go? Come right out to the barn [the studio]; you will find me there.” 54 The paintings she was packing up were three works bound for the rca exhibition in Ottawa. Hume’s written account of the interview provides us with a glimpse of Carlyle’s relationship to her art production. Hume described the work environment in the red barn: the walls lined with pictures; a work table, several easels, and many paintings leaning in stacks and lined up on the floor leaving little standing room. This was a space in which Carlyle constructed her identity as an artist and represented herself to clients and journalists as a professional artist. Her studio was not a salon, a venue for hosting fashionable “at home” social events, or a showcase for a bohemian lifestyle.55 Clearly she distanced herself from the idea of the artist as a fashionable social hostess. Florence Deacon had been impressed by Carlyle’s professionalism and only remarked on her friendliness in passing: “The first impression one …felt [was] the personality of the fair-haired [painter], her ambition is all for art itself. The feeling of the shortness of time … crowds and urges

Losses and Gains, 1911– 1914 179

fig. 7.6 Photograph of Florence Carlyle, in “Representative Women: Miss Florence Carlyle,” Florence E. Deacon.

her to constant, alert endeavour; [her] object has been to progress, to reach the heart of things.56 Hume’s article included more conversation with Carlyle during the tour of the studio: “Some of these pictures have been in storage in New York. See how dusty they get.” The artist brushed off her fingers with a grimace. “While [Carlyle] was speaking a grey kitten scratched persistently at the glass covering a lovely painting … Spring Song. ‘She does that by the half hour, she was so fond of Judith Hastings, the model for the picture,’” Carlyle explained (fig. 7.3). She showed Hume The Critic, one of the paintings she was sending to Ottawa, of a child seated on a chair before a huge

180 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

framed painting. “My baby,” [Carlyle] laughed. “I’d like to hug her. My little niece was the model for that. She wasn’t still a minute. See that little foot? I scarcely breathed till I got it.” 57 They moved on to another painting, and the artist gestured: “That little woman standing over the table making a lemonpie – well, I had to sit in the sink to paint that, so congested was the arrangement.” Asked about a street scene, she gave an explanation: “The central figure was a young girl with startled eyes and a look, half of fear, and half of wonder. The glitter and glare from a nearby window shone full on her and on the face and figure of a man who stood beside her, and on whose arm hers rested timidly while a car and chauffeur waited beside them. ‘Conscience,’ perhaps I shall call it that, or ‘The Still Small Voice.’ It is only begun. I want her eyes to have a certain expression; I wonder if I can get it? So far, it seems to me her face expresses only petulancy. She has a heart and soul though, that girl, I am sure of it.” 58 This interview reveals that Carlyle had not lost her love of the narrative element of figure painting; in late 1912 she was working on a painting that dealt with the elements of city life, romance, and the dangers that men and riches held for young women. In Conscience/The Still Small Voice, as in The Studio (1903, fig. 5.4), Badinage (1903, fig. 5.3), and Miss Mischief (1905, fig. 5.6), she was exploring aspects of contemporary women’s experience in modern scenes, with possible hints of intrigue or impropriety. The paintings with their titles are like individual chapters in a book; the viewer must imagine what went on before and after. Carlyle also imbues many of her paintings with aspects of her own personal morality, as suggested by her discussion of the figure of the young woman in Conscience/The Still Small Voice and by the titles she was proposing for this work. Her ability to interpret the experience of contemporary women and, in the words of one critic of the time, her “vast and intimate knowledge of feminine character,” continued to inspire and inform her work.59 In late November 1912, the rca reinstated her with the proviso that she pay her arrears of dues. Her decision to align herself once again with Canada’s premier art society was rewarded, and her paintings at the exhibition in Ottawa received praise from the critics.60 At the same meeting of the rca council that saw Carlyle reinstated, arrangements were approved for a collection of pictures selected by the Academy to be sent to the opening exhibition of the new Winnipeg Museum of Fine Arts. Carlyle’s work would be represented. The opening in December was a key cultural event of 1912.61

Losses and Gains, 1911– 1914 181

The new gallery was Winnipeg’s only year-round venue for loan exhibitions and hosted rca exhibitions and its own events including Western Canadian Artists’ annual exhibitions. Since the Winnipeg Industrial Bureau was paying all expenses for the 1912 opening, it offered a low-cost opportunity for artists in the East to gain exposure in the West. Recent immigration and homesteading policies were making Winnipeg one of the fastest-growing cities in Canada, the commercial centre of the Canadian prairie provinces. Carlyle chose to send several of her larger paintings, including The Threshold (1912, fig. 7.4) and Spring Song (1912, fig. 7.3), which, priced at $350 dollars, had not sold at the autumn cne.62 However, neither painting found a buyer. It was a dark Christmas for Carlyle: on 19 December, three days after the exhibition opened, her mother died at her home in Woodstock.63 Carlyle had been warned that due to the paralysis and stroke, her mother could not expect to live long, but the death came as a great blow. The two women had been firm allies. Emily Carlyle was the subject for many of her daughter’s paintings (fig. 1.1). Titles of other paintings, such as Reading to Mother (1898), Mumsie (n.d.), The Mother (1905), and Portrait Group (1916), showing a mother embracing her little girl, and Son and Heir (1914), depicting a mother and baby, suggest that Carlyle well understood the bond between mothers and children. In the days following the funeral there was much discussion and communication between Carlyle and her siblings as to what would happen to Englewood, their beloved family home since the 1880s. Carlyle had adopted Woodstock as her home base to care for her mother, but now she decided that her professional practice, and indeed her personal happiness, might now be better served elsewhere. Englewood was sold early in 1913. On the advice of her brother Ernest, who was working as an engineer in Argentina, she invested some of her savings and share of the house sale in Argentine railways. When she wrote to inform Judith Hastings of her mother’s death. Hastings replied at once to urge her to come to England for a visit. Although with little time to paint, caught up as she was in packing and moving from the family home and planning a trip to Europe, Carlyle still retained her new commitment to regularly exhibit work. In 1913 the spirit of change and innovation in art was much in evidence. Canadian painter David Milne exhibited with the Armory Show of 1913 in New York.64 In Toronto a group of dynamic young Canadian painters organ-

182 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

ized the “Little Pictures by Canadian Artists” exhibition that spring. This alternative exhibit, held in the Toronto Public Library, featured the work of Lawren Harris, A.Y. Jackson, and Tom Thomson.65 The majority of Carlyle’s paintings sent to the aam and osa exhibitions in March and April of 1913 were not new works but canvases that had appeared the previous autumn. To the osa exhibit she sent her one new painting, Music (ca. 1912), in which a woman, possibly Judith Hastings, leans thoughtfully over a piano.66 Fergus Kyle, an art critic and illustrator and cartoonist for the Toronto Globe, drew attention to the “evidence of splendid technique” in The Threshold (fig. 7.4) and praised Carlyle’s ability to create an “atmosphere of human interest which made them pictures, not mere studies.” 67 The painting was purchased directly from the exhibit by the Ontario Minister of Education’s Special Committee for the Provincial Government collection.68 Critics who had followed Carlyle’s career closely might have noted echoes between The Threshold and her earlier, well-known painting Before Her First Communion (ca. 1903). The similarities of a veiled female figure shown in the moments before committing herself to a sacrament suggest that in The Threshold Carlyle was reworking an earlier idea.69 The 1903 painting (fig. 4.4) exhibits a looser handling and a bright sunlit palette, with cool greens enlivened with touches of white. There is a subtle sense of movement and playfulness as the girl holds the veil in one hand and turns to one side, setting the floor-length fabric swaying. Little of this luminosity or animation is evident in The Threshold; the woman is focused inwardly on her thoughts, her head bowed, her body still. Within Carlyle’s modified Impressionism there are paintings such as Summer, Golden Rod, and The Garden, in which the influence of Impressionism is greater. Other of her paintings such as The Tiff and The Threshold indicate some fluidity in her painting style, frequently oscillating between an Impressionist treatment and a more restrained academic Impressionism. An anecdote in a Toronto social column of the time offers a glimpse into how some of the public reacted to The Threshold. One Toronto gossip columnist toured the 1913 osa exhibition with the unabashed intent of eavesdropping on the public’s comments. “The best scrap of conversation overheard at the gallery,” wrote the columnist, “took place between a young couple in front of Miss Carlyle’s picture, The Threshold. [The bride] is standing in pensive thought, apparently struggling with many conflicting emotions.” The columnist then proceeded to repeat the couple’s conversation:

Losses and Gains, 1911– 1914 183

“It is very fine,” remarked the young man, following the general lead of the critical comment. “Yes,” replied the girl, “It calls something to my mind that I read the other day.” “What was that?” inquired her companion. “This writer said that all auburn-haired girls get married,” said the young woman, “now, come to think of it, did you ever know a redheaded old maid?” 70 Carlyle’s popularity with the critics also seemed to hold; in the opinion of one male artist colleague in 1913, Laura Muntz and Florence Carlyle (a “close second”) were ranked as the best women artists in the country.71 In March 1913 at the aam exhibition the critics turned with some relief from their abhorrence of the effects of Post-Impressionism on emerging artists to the work of established painters such as Carlyle. They contrasted her “refined” Spring Song (fig. 7.3) with the “raw” paintings by A.Y. Jackson and others deemed adherents of the “Post-Impressionist craze.” But while admired by the critics, Spring Song again failed to find a buyer.72 One Toronto critic wrote that Carlyle’s “[successful blending of] human interest with a dexterity and perfection of technique … is the envy of the younger artists.” Artists specifically identified as admiring her work at this time were painter/etcher Dorothy Stevens (1888–1966), Arthur Lismer (1885– 1969), and Estelle Kerr.73 The official opening and inaugural exhibition of the Arts Club of Montreal was held that spring at the Victoria Street clubhouse and included work by established and emerging Canadian artists. The Arts Club of Montreal had as its aim to provide a meeting place for men of various professions interested in “art, music, literature and kindred arts.” 74 The membership included some of the county’s best known architects, journalists, musicians, and artists such as A.Y. Jackson and Maurice Cullen. Musician Harold Eustace Key, Helene Youmans’s husband, was also a member.75 The newspaper accounts of the “free and easy Bohemian gathering” describe a stylish and well attended opening.76 Carlyle’s painting Contemplation, loaned for the occasion by its owner the Montreal architect Edward Maxwell (1868–1923), was hung alongside work by William Brymner, president of the rca, Homer Watson, Laura Muntz, Marc-Aurele Suzor-Cote, and Cullen. Jackson was made a life member when he donated his painting The Fountain Assisi to the club’s permanent art collection.77 Although women artists were not listed as among the club’s founding members, in addition to Carlyle and Muntz, paintings by

184 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

emerging women artists such as Mabel May, Emily Coonan, and Berthe and Gertrude Des Clayes were well represented in the inaugural loan exhibition. This occasion of the opening of a new Canadian art society in 1913 marks a pivotal point of contact in Canadian art between an older generation that had fought to establish a place for Canadian art in the nation’s consciousness of the late nineteenth-century, and a new generation of artists. This emerging generation would bring forward new ideas and be part of expansions and transformations in the Canadian art world in the years following World War I.78 In the spring or early summer of 1913, following the sale and vacating of Englewood, Carlyle left Canada on a long-awaited trip to travel in Italy with Judith Hastings. Much of their time abroad appears to have been spent in Venice. The city’s streets, canals and interiors provided Carlyle with inspiration to create many paintings, including Afternoon,Venice (1913, fig. 7.7) and a painting of two women talking before a window overlooking a canal, The Guest, Venice (1913, fig. 7.8) At Hastings’s urging, Carlyle decided to remain for a time in England after the holiday. They planned to share the small cottage in Sussex that Hastings had rented for herself after returning to England from her trip to Canada the previous summer. While Hastings had formerly shared her elderly parents’ comfortable home in Wimbledon, following her transatlantic adventure, she had apparently been seized by the idea of living on her own.79 The two friends visited with Hastings’s parents in Wimbledon and made jaunts to their rural hideaway south of London. Yew Tree Cottage (fig. 7.9) was located on the outskirts of the Sussex village of Crowborough on the South Downs, approximately thirty miles from London.80 The house had been built as one of the workmen’s homes on a large estate, and was accessed by a narrow lane named Sweet Haws Road. Surrounded by roses and flowering shrubs, the house was the very picture of an idyllic English country cottage. Carlyle arranged some of her more portable personal possessions in the interior (fig. 7.10), including accessories of brass and copper that she had shipped to her from Canada, mementos of her family home.81 Back in Canada her professional reputation continued to have strong momentum. In June 1913 an article in Saturday Night by Estelle Kerr discussed pragmatic aspects of earning a living as a woman artist. Kerr specifically praised Carlyle’s ability to balance success in commercial art ventures with her position as one of Canada’s leading women artists. Perhaps with her own art practice in mind, Kerr clearly admired Carlyle’s balancing of these

Losses and Gains, 1911– 1914 185

fig. 7.7 Afternoon, Venice, Florence Carlyle, 1913. [plate 21]

often incompatible elements, holding Carlyle up as a successful exemplar of the independence and equality with male colleagues that younger Canadian women artists might aim toward.82 In August, just as Carlyle was settling into life in her Sussex cottage, she, Ernest Lawson, and Horatio Walker were the three Canadian artists whom the cne Art Department catalogue “welcomed home” to Canada after their success in the United States.83 While no doubt she appreciated such attention, Carlyle’s plans to return to live in Ontario are unknown. She continued to pay attention to Canadian exhibitions and sales opportunities with a shipment of six paintings to the rca exhibit in Montreal scheduled to open in November 1913.84 Her interpretation of the Venetian canals and architecture in Afternoon, Venice (fig. 7.7) prompted Canada’s National Gallery to purchase the painting for the permanent collection for a modest $175.85 This choice complemented the gallery’s earlier purchase of her Grey and Gold (1910, fig. 6.8). The trustees’ choice of a landscape instead of one of her more widely known figural paintings of women is illuminated by a review of the exhibition by Professor Paul T. Lafleur of McGill University in 1913. Lafleur wrote that Carlyle’s “interpretations of Venetian light and shadow are … admirable in craftsmanship and warmth of quality … It is no mere knack which succeeds in the handling of such striking light and colour in Afternoon,Venice;

fig. 7.8 The Guest, Venice, Florence Carlyle, 1913. “The most beautiful of her offerings is The Guest, in which the grace of the picture of two young women is heightened by a charming vista seen through an open window,” wrote Hector Charlesworth (“osa Annual Exhibition,” Saturday Night, 21 March 1914). [plate 22]

Losses and Gains, 1911– 1914 187

fig. 7.9 Yew Tree Cottage, Crowborough, Sussex, ca. 1919.

among the most noteworthy paintings of this year.” 86 This was significant praise indeed, given that the exhibition included work by such noted artists as Homer Watson and Lawren Harris.87 The National Gallery made several other important purchases of work from this rca exhibition, including A. Suzor-Cote’s Youth and Sunlight.88 Gertrude Spurr and Laura Muntz also had paintings purchased by the trustees that year, again attesting to the strength of the paintings and the esteem in which these women artists were held by their contemporaries.89

fig. 7.10 Sitting room, Yew Tree Cottage, ca. 1914, with table set for afternoon tea.

Losses and Gains, 1911– 1914 189

Now established with Hastings in their cottage in Crowborough, Carlyle began work on several paintings. She continued her practice of using friends and family as models with a portrait of Kathleen Carlyle, the young daughter of her brother William.90 Early in 1914 she agreed to let the rca send three of her paintings that had failed to sell in the Academy exhibition just ended, along with the Afternoon, Venice, on to be exhibited in the Winnipeg Industrial Bureau Exhibition.91 In March her painting The Guest, Venice (1913, fig. 7.8) was shown at the osa exhibition, eliciting the praise of the well-known Hector Charlesworth who ranked her as “foremost among [artists]” at the exhibit.92 In The Guest, Venice, Carlyle employed the heightened colours and light effects of Impressionism. Yet Charlesworth admired what he saw as the painting’s more traditional Academic Impressionism elements that, he wrote “always command respect,” such as the “broad yet meticulous brushwork, felicity in composition, richness of colour and excellent drawing.” 93 Clearly, while critics in 1913 did not see Carlyle as among the country’s most innovative artists, she continued to be seen as an important contributor to Canadian art. The Guest, Venice reveals her love of physical freedom and travel and points to the important role supportive female friendships played in her life. In particular it attests to her close, supportive relationship with Judith Hastings. Hastings provided camaraderie, acted as travelling partner, and remained her close companion for many years.94 The Guest,Venice captures an image of two women’s spaces and communication. Hastings may have modelled for one of the figures, host or guest. Intimacy and animated conversation is suggested by their proximity and conjoined gazes; the lines of table and window frame highlight their enjoyment of each other’s company. The gesture of the seated woman’s arm appears to enclose their circle of conversation, excluding the viewer.  New Influences and Departures The years just prior to 1914 were transitional ones for Canadian art. At exhibitions a melange of stylistic influences ranged from the Academism of George Reid to the Academic Impressionism of Carlyle to the compelling figural paintings of Laura Muntz and Mary Bell Eastlake. The shimmering Impressionism of Helen McNicoll contrasted with the gritty urban scenes of Lawren Harris, reminiscent of the realism of New York’s Ash Can School, and with the bold landscapes of J.E.H. MacDonald.95

190 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

Critical attention to the many landscape paintings in the osa exhibition focused on work by relative newcomers, not all well received. Hector Charlesworth lamented the “harshness of tonal treatment” and “absence of poetic appeal” in the work of Harris and MacDonald, both of whose paintings were deemed “more startling, than genuinely interpretive of nature.” 96 The two men, who would become founding members of the Group of Seven, were moving away stylistically from Impressionism and Tonalism, which they felt could not convey the boldness of Canada’s rugged wilderness.97 In June 1914 Carlyle was one of the artists discussed in the comprehensive article on “Women and Art in Canada.” 98 Although living in England, she was still viewed as a Canadian artist firmly entrenched in the nation’s exhibition scene, now simply “spending time in Europe,” a not uncommon practice among her contemporaries. The 1914 article was illustrated with a photograph of The Red Gown (ca. 1912), showing Hastings as model seated in a chair facing the viewer. Just visible in the background is Carlyle’s earlier painting of Helene Youmans, Girl with a Bowl (1909, fig. 6.6). The increasing popularity of articles on Canadian women artists, many written by women journalists, continued in June 1914 with Estelle Kerr’s “Women Sculptors in Toronto.” The first of the three was Paris-trained Winnifred Kingsford (1875–1947), granddaughter of the engineer and writer William Kingsford (1819–98), and the daughter of Rupert Kingsford, a magistrate; her socially prominent family was listed in the 1903–04 edition of The Society Blue Book of Toronto. She had shown work in the first exhibition of the newly formed Society of Arts and Crafts of Canada in 1904. Kingsford had trained in Paris for five years, returning to Toronto in 1913 to set up her studio on Adelaide Street. Here she executed sculptures and a production specifically designed for a commercial context, including pottery lamp bases, inkwells, and vases.99 The other two women sculptors discussed in Kerr’s article were the American-born sculptors Frances Loring (1887–1968) and Florence Wyle (1881–1968).100 The public interest and attention accorded women artists in such articles was a positive factor in their recognition as professionals. However, a closer look at their context reveals a complexity of social strictures in operation. While beginning in the 1890s Canadian newspapers had increasingly hired women journalists, they generally worked on the social, entertainment, and women’s pages, and seldom contributed hard news stories for the front sections. Women’s pages had emerged in the late nineteenth century in the bid to capture an increased family audience. Female reporters

Losses and Gains, 1911– 1914 191

included Sarah Jeanette Duncan, and Kathleen “Kit” Coleman who edited the women’s page of the Toronto Mail in the 1890s; Coleman’s Saturday “Woman’s Kingdom” column was widely read.101 Its popularity boosted the paper’s circulation by one third.102 While the system enabled women toward professionalism by affording limited recognition, at the same time it restricted their access to more valued areas of the newspaper. Women journalists’ articles on women artists were largely restricted to the women’s pages. Marjory MacMurchy and Florence Deacon focused on Mary Hiester Reid and Florence Carlyle in separate articles in the 1910 and 1912 “Representative Women” series for the Globe. At some point an essay by Carlyle describing her experiences as an art student in Paris in the 1890s appeared in Coleman’s “Woman’s Kingdom” column, and Margaret Bell wrote on “Women and Art in Canada” for Everywoman’s World in 1914.103  The Artist’s Life in England Two portraits by Carlyle, one of her niece Kathleen and the other of Hastings, were accepted for exhibition in the Royal Academy of Arts Summer Exhibition in London in 1914.104 However, residency in England now began to have consequences for Carlyle’s life. The beginning of World War I in the late summer marked the start of a period of more than four years that would have great impact on Canadian and British society and initiate immense changes in the lives and rights of women in both countries. Canadian artists were not immune from the enthusiasm for the war, nor were they to be unaffected in their personal or professional lives. That autumn a series of articles in Maclean’s magazine discussed the careers of prominent contemporary Canadian women working in cultural professions; these included Carlyle and authors Lucy Maud Montgomery, Nellie McClung, and others, celebrating the marks that these “fair daughters of the Dominion” had made in the fields of the arts. Carlyle’s career was presented as an inspiration to the next generation: “The story of her climb into an enviable position in the artistic world should inspire any who may be prone to lay down their tools and grow discouraged.” The article was illustrated with photos of the artist and of “her artistic home in England” (fig. 7.10).105 Carlyle’s career was kept before the Canadian public eye by her inclusion in an influential book series published in 1914, Canada and Its Provinces.

192 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

One volume included an essay on Canadian art in which E.F.B. Johnston discussed Carlyle and her work. He wrote: “Florence Carlyle is a brilliant and facile painter. Her figures depend to a considerable extent upon the fine massing of rich colour, and frequently the value of line in long sweeping curvature is better illustrated in her work than in that of any other Canadian artist. One always finds in her pictures combined decorative and pictorial elements, and while they may not appeal to the critics as evincing any great subtlety or power to paint from the subjective point of view, it is quite beyond question that her art shows talent of a high order.”106 Johnston had no doubt personally viewed paintings such as Golden Rod (1901, fig. 4.3), praised at the Pan-American Exposition; The Tiff (1902, fig. ii), at that time in the Provincial Government art collection; and Grey and Gold (1910, fig. 6.8), in the National Gallery collection.  Playing Their Part: Artists and the War Effort While visiting Grange Cottage, the home of Judith Hastings’s parents in Wimbledon, Carlyle had been asked to donate a painting to the Canadian Patriotic Fund Exhibition to help support the wives and families of Canadian soldiers serving overseas. Soon after the outbreak of war, a group of Canadian artists wishing to be of assistance had offered pictures to the Fund suggesting these could be sold for the benefit of the organization. While appreciating the generosity of the offer, the organization declined, feeling they were not in a position to dispose of the pictures. After consultations, Canadian art societies including the osa, rca, and the Canadian Art Club were confirmed in their desire “to do something for the Cause” and devised a way that they might act in union to realize the patriotic aspirations of Canadian artists.107 It was decided that the rca would collect the works of art already offered and invite gifts from other Canadian artists.108 A travelling exhibition was planned that would tour across Canada, stopping one week in each of Toronto, Winnipeg, Halifax, Saint John, Quebec, Montreal, Ottawa, London, and Hamilton. On 30 December 1914 the first stop in the cross-country tour of the Patriotic Fund Exhibitions opened in Toronto in the art galleries of the public library on College Street with eighty pictures and two pieces of sculpture. Opinion held that the donors, who represented virtually every Canadian artist of some standing, had sent their best work. The collection included Maurice Cullen’s The Winter Harvest, Homer Watson’s The Woodman’s Home,

Losses and Gains, 1911– 1914 193

and Lawren Harris’s The Corner Store. Carlyle sent Spring Song (fig. 7.3), which depicts Hastings playing the piano, with snowdrifts visible through the window. It had been painted in Canada during Hastings’s visit to Woodstock in 1912. The palette for the interior scene employs strongly contrasting tones of black and yellow.109 “Everything she does is so splendid,” Helen Ball, the journalist for the Toronto News, overheard an artist say as she stood admiring Carlyle’s painting.110 The rules for sales of the works stipulated that during each stop in the exhibition schedule the public could fill in and sign a card with their bid, and place the card in a special box. At the end of the tour, the highest bid would receive the picture. The rca was to cover the costs of transportation and insurance, and thus all funds from sales, entrance fees, the teas dispensed at the exhibitions by women’s groups such as the iode, and profits from sales of catalogues and the popular poster by J.E.H. MacDonald advertising the exhibition would go to the Patriotic Fund.111 Carlyle’s Spring Song, although receiving steady bids throughout the tour, was sold for a modest $80. Homer Watson’s The Woodman’s Home went for $210, A.Y. Jackson’s In the North Country for $110, and Cullen’s The Winter Harvest (to a Montreal address) for $200. Frederick Horseman Varley’s painting The Hillside sold for only $30.112 Successful bidders represented a broad spectrum of the Canadian arts and business community and included James Mavor and Newton MacTavish – who paid one of the highest bids of the exhibition, $240, for James Wilson Morrice’s Dieppe. Artists who purchased works by their colleagues included William Brymner, E. Wyly Grier, and painter Marion Long, who paid $50 for Tom Thomson’s In Algonquin Park. The recently founded Arts Club of Montreal invested in work by H.R.H. Princess Patricia of Connaught. A women’s club, the Saint John Art Club in New Brunswick, bought Helen McNicoll’s painting The Farm Yard (ca. 1908) for $91.113 David McGill of Montreal held successful bids for six paintings, and the eminent art collector Sir William Van Horne acquired two paintings, one of them by Laura Muntz.114 The efforts of the Patriotic Fund Exhibitions and the artists who made the tour possible exceeded all possible predictions and had many far-reaching influences. A donation of over $10,000 was given to the Patriotic Fund at the close of the exhibitions.115 The broader importance of these exhibitions to Canadian art were more difficult to measure. Caught up in the widespread patriotic feeling engendered by the war, individual artists and art societies were, in a sense, working to justify their existence to themselves

194 a life apart from convention, 1899 – 1914

and the Canadian public. Canadian art institutions and artists felt that they were contributing to the war effort in a concrete way. This sentiment was echoed by the Duke of Connaught, governor general of Canada from 1911 to 1916, quoted in an Ottawa newspaper in 1915 praising Canadian artists for “playing their part in the great patriotic work in the country.” 116 Much of the success of the exhibitions may be attributed to the copious press coverage and to patriotic fervour. The many reviews of the show urged the public to attend and to pay their twenty-five cent entrance fee. A Montreal reviewer urged readers, “No one … should miss seeing this exhibition, they [will] be helping a good cause.” 117 The Patriotic Fund exhibitions did in fact, expose the work of established and emerging Canadian artists to thousands of people in larger cities, and brought Canadian art to the smaller centres such as London and Hamilton. In addition their strong representation in the collection guaranteed important national exposure for Canadian women artists. Taken in all, the Patriotic Fund Exhibitions of 1914–15 appear to have stimulated a sense of a national spirit in Canadian art. This extraordinary example of Canadian artists thinking and acting as a organized group to effect change in a time of national crisis was unprecedented. Florence Carlyle’s role in this event was minimal, limited to her own personal donation of one painting. However, her enthusiasm for the war effort was to lead her away from her professional artistic activities into the battle to win the war on the domestic front.

part four

Out of the Mainstream

1915–1923

This page intentionally left blank

8 Resolutions 1915–1923 

By 1915 the war had begun to create difficulties for artists in Canada. With the outbreak of hostilities in Europe and the furious Canadian war effort at home, economies had become obligatory. In September 1915 Canadian art, which had enjoyed minimal pre-war encouragement from local patronage, was increasingly viewed as a luxury and was receiving “even scantier support than formerly,” in the words of Canadian photographer-critic Harold Mortimer-Lamb.1 Canadian artists were finding it difficult to sell their work to keep “the wolf from the door.” 2 The Canadian public was not expecting outstanding art production since, as one critic wrote, “in times like these, when the minds of men and women are disturbed and souls are stirred to their depths, it would perhaps be too much to expect.” 3 In England, Carlyle found that the advent of war “put an end to selling pictures” and that paints and other art supplies, increasingly scarce, were suddenly priced beyond her reach. Instead of buying expensive canvas, she took to scraping and reusing her old paintings.4 Canadian artists wished to “do their bit” for the war effort. Many had contributed work to the 1914 Patriotic Fund Exhibition. A few worked in warrelated art jobs in Canada. Toronto artists painted murals at the Canadian National Exhibition advertising Victory Loans, and in 1915 some designed jigsaw toys in war motifs.5 Increasing, men and women artists were either

198 out of the mainstream, 1915 – 1923

enlisting for active service or volunteering to serve on the home front. Among those volunteering for active service was A.Y. Jackson, who enlisted as a private with the 60th Infantry Battalion, Canadian Expeditionary Force, in June 1915. He embarked for England and subsequently for the Western Front in November. Also in 1915 the young painter Randolph S. Hewton (1888–1960) was serving in Europe with the Second Canadian Contingent.6 Captain Ernest G. Fosbery (1874–1960) served and was wounded at the Front. Lawren Harris enlisted and served as a musketry instructor at Camp Borden.7 Canadian women artists also gave up their careers temporarily and devoted years to “war work.” 8 Artist and journalist Estelle Kerr served in France as an ambulance driver. Painter Clara Sophia Hagarty, elected an associate of the rca in 1903, was engaged in hospital work overseas. The Canadian Handicrafts Guild’s former president, Alice Peck, worked in a private hospital in England, and then at home in Montreal in city hospitals, she directed occupational work such as weaving for returned soldiers.9 Carlyle also felt compelled to volunteer for hospital work, although with misgivings about her physical strength. She wrote home to her family, “I [am] mad to help.” Caught up in the war fervour, by the summer of 1915 she and Judith Hastings had volunteered as nurse aids at one of Queen Mary’s Convalescent Auxiliary Hospitals, Roehampton House, in Abbeywood, Woolwich, in the nearby county of Kent.10 Formerly a stately home, it was converted early in the war into a place of convalescence for soldiers and sailors who had lost limbs in the war (fig. 8.1). The two women’s lack of nursing training meant they were given the most menial and arduous tasks. Carlyle, although enthusiastic, found the work tiring and on one occasion had to be escorted home in a near state of collapse (fig. 8.2). Hastings, despite having lived a life free from the need or desire to earn a living, proved a strong, reliable worker, quick to learn, and soon entertained ideas of training further in the nursing profession.11 Since the beginning of the war Carlyle had depended on her youngest brother, Russell, fondly known to her as “Buster,” and on his wife, Blanche, both avid correspondents, to abate her growing feeling of isolation from Canada and her family. Continuing to paint in spare moments, she had sent a canvas to Canada that spring, and using several older works already in Canada, managed to exhibit three paintings with the March 1915 aam exhibition. Her lowering of the price for her painting April to $100 from $250 when it was previously shown signals that, like many of her colleagues, she was having difficulty in making sales.12

Resolutions, 1915 – 1923 199

fig. 8.1 Matron, nurses, and staff of Roehampton House Convalescent Auxiliary Hospital, 1915. Florence Carlyle and Judith Hastings are in the middle row, second and third from the left.

The violence of the war was brought home to England in May 1915 with the first Zeppelin attacks by the Germans on London. However, amid the new threats, the Royal Academy of Arts Summer Exhibition proceeded as usual and included Carlyle’s new painting Portrait of a Friend.13 On 27 June 1915 Helen McNicoll died in Swanage, Dorset, from complications of diabetes.14 Her sun-filled Impressionist paintings of women and girls in landscape settings had been compared to similar subjects by Carlyle. In the same year Laura Muntz married Charles W.B. Lyall, her brother-inlaw, following the death of her younger sister, and henceforth devoted much of her energy to her many young nieces and nephews.15 Carlyle once again met up with Helene Youmans in October. Youmans was staying in London with the family of her husband, Harold Eustace Key. Harold had joined up and was presently stationed in England. Carlyle and Hastings had taken a small flat in London and were renting out their Crowborough cottage for the winter. Part of their London flat had been adapted into a studio and, between periods of nursing, Carlyle painted.

200 out of the mainstream, 1915 – 1923 fig. 8.2 Florence Carlyle in her nursing uniform, ca. 1915.

She and Youmans now delighted in exploring London together, much as they had enjoyed the sights of New York seven years before. They picked up their friendship “as if there had never been a break in the happy times we had together,” Youmans recalled. “We roamed about London; rode in what [Bird] called ‘upstairs’ on the buses; window shopped … and spent many hours in the art galleries. Most of all she loved to go to Saint Paul’s Cathedral where she would wander up and down the aisles or stand beneath the

Resolutions, 1915 – 1923 201

dome and gaze about her. I had the feeling that she was far away … I could almost believe the shades of some of the painters she regarded with such reverence, John Millais, Holman Hunt, Sir Joshua Reynolds, buried in the crypt, may have touched her in passing, so transformed she appeared to be.” 16 The two cousins spent much of the winter of 1915–16 together and in late spring travelled with Hastings down to the cottage in Sussex. The trio was struck by the contrast of the tranquil beauty of Crowborough to life in London with its threats of raids. Youmans’s memoir again gives us insight into Carlyle’s personal and domestic arrangements. She refers to Carlyle as Bird, the name her close friends and family called her. Youmans observed that Hastings had a “down-to-earth practical way” and kept “an eye on general management” of the house. “Nothing was allowed to interfere with Bird’s painting at any time.” During the weeks at the cottage, the little group tried to pretend the war “wasn’t there.” 17 They hiked along “untrodden country lanes running wild with roses; and along narrow cobblestone paths leading nowhere. We carried our lunch and ate under the cool green canopy of an old tree.” Carlyle sketched along the way and later painted small landscapes that sold readily. All her earnings from this source she faithfully contributed to the Red Cross throughout the war years. She painted portraits of both women on old canvases, and the following summer exhibited three paintings at the Royal Academy exhibition. High Noon (ca. 1916) was likely painted at the Sussex cottage. The contemplative pose of the figure, pausing in the performance of her domestic work, seems to express the felt sense of peace Carlyle experienced at the cottage. This painting of a woman in her homely kitchen doorway is one of the first images of Carlyle’s English home rendered by the artist. By November 1916 she and Hastings had gone back to their nursing at Queen Mary’s Hospital, and Youmans, braving the increasing air raids, returned to her in-laws in London.18 Before leaving Sussex, Carlyle had sent two still-life paintings of flowers to the rca exhibition in Montreal. Critics pointed out her departure from her more usual figure subjects.19 “Figure studies are less numerous than ever,” observed Estelle Kerr, adding that in general there seemed to be a shift toward landscape painting as the “chief concern” of the “Canadian school of art.” In her review of the 1916 osa exhibition Kerr wrote enthusiastically about J.E.H. Macdonald’s Tangled Garden and Thomson’s landscape paintings, on view at the same time at Toronto’s Heliconian Club.20 In December 1916 a proposal was made by the executive of the rca to hold another exhibition in aid of the Patriotic Fund. After deliberation, it was

202 out of the mainstream, 1915 – 1923

decided that instead of holding a special exhibition and sale of work as in 1914, the academy would donate the proceeds from their annual exhibition to the fund and invest in War Loan Bonds.21 In England during the winter of 1916, Carlyle, Hastings, and Youmans volunteered in a war depot near Crowborough, assembling medical supplies in preparation for shipment to base hospitals across the channel in France. Working with meticulous care for hours on end, they rolled thousands of yards of bandages, packed “light puff pads for swabs, patting into the required shape stacks of pneumonia jackets, [and] fitted slings.” When word came from the hospital in France where the supplies were to be sent that a big “push” was anticipated, all worked overtime to send as many shipments as possible.22 At the end of their shifts the three women walked back to the cottage exhausted. Youmans wrote of how they were awakened at dawn each day by “what sounded like the roll of distant thunder. It seemed to surge toward us, then retreat, over and over. The muffled booming of guns across the channel in France grew closer and clearer every passing day.”23 The war had intruded on the Sussex countryside. In London, long-range airplanes began their first bomb attacks in 1917. Even with long hours of volunteer work, guns across the channel, and the threat of bombing raids, Carlyle found time to paint. In March 1917 she sent a painting entitled Portrait Group to Canada to the osa exhibition in Toronto. A decrease in the popularity of her work is indicated by Canadian critic Hector Charlesworth’s reception of Portrait Group, a painting of a woman embracing a young girl in tones of “silvery grey”– Charlesworth in his Saturday Night review described it as “suggestive of a magazine cover.” 24 Soon after Carlyle sent off this painting, Lady Henry Grosvenor opened several ymca canteens in Abbeywood, a village next door to Woolwich, the site of a large munitions arsenal.25 Carlyle, Hastings, and Youmans responded to the urgent plea for volunteers to work full time in the canteens serving meals to munitions workers. The three women felt that their less demanding positions readying medical supplies at the war depot would be filled by others; as they were in a position to volunteer full time and were free to take rooms in Abbeywood, they were compelled to commit to the new project. Less than twenty-four hours later they presented themselves at the canteen in the “grim, cheerless munitions town,” in Youmans’s words. Given blue linen smock uniforms, they were introduced to the routine work in the huge canteen. Their tasks consisted of setting long tables, serving breakfast, clearing up, and repeating the task for the noon meal and tea. The can-

Resolutions, 1915 – 1923 203

teens served a total of 20,000 meals every day, most for the heavy midday meal. Volunteers received no pay and paid for their own board and lodging at the hostel.26 They also had to clean and scrub down the length of the long tables in pairs, one on each side. Initially dismayed at the prospect, Carlyle later told her friends that her resentment at having to clean soon turned to shame when she found that she was “plunging her hands into the same pail of suds with … a woman of high rank and title.” 27 Youmans described the munitions workers emerging from the factory and surging across the canteens. Unkempt and covered in yellow dust, men and women of all ages and every class laboured in the factory danger zone “where the high explosives were handled. They were forbidden to have anything on their persons in the way of metal, such as buttons, hairpins, or jewellery of any sort. Shoes, because of the nails in the soles and the tiny metal tips on the shoe laces, had to be left in lockers; cloth slippers being provided.” 28 A keen observer of the human figure, Carlyle found inspiration for her art in the munitions workers. Transfixed by the mass swarming into the building, she told Youmans, “What a picture for an artist, an artist with a fifty foot canvas and tubs of paint.” Despite all precautions, small explosions in the factory rocked the cruets on the canteen tables from time to time. Volunteer workers were also briefed on what to do in the event of the very real threat of an air raid. Touring the Woolwich arsenal one day, Carlyle’s admiration for the munitions workers increased as she saw the conditions under which they worked: “a systematized hell,” she described it in a letter home.29 After three months Youmans and Carlyle felt that the physically demanding job was too much for them. Although willing, they were too tired at the beginning of each day to carry on. With little discussion the three women handed in their withdrawal papers and returned to the cottage in late spring 1917. Arriving just as the sun set, Youmans observed her cousin’s joy at returning to the tranquillity of the country: “Bird ran up the cobbled path to the front door that [Hastings] was struggling to open, the lock, so rarely used, having become rusted in our absence. We were home! Bird ran around the house like a happy child replacing and arranging. [The next day] her easel was in place again; palette and brushes ready for use.” 30 Receiving word that her husband had been given orders to go to France, Youmans returned to London and her in-laws. Hastings began training at the Crowborough Hospital to become a nurse with the Voluntary Aid Detachment, and Carlyle enjoyed a much-needed rest at the cottage. Little is known of paintings she produced during this period; however, The Hour of Call to

204 out of the mainstream, 1915 – 1923

Service (ca. 1917), which she exhibited at the War and Peace Exhibition in London, depicted a Red Cross nurse in uniform.31 During the summer of 1917 panic set in among the civilian population in London as some two hundred civilians were killed and many more injured from bomb attacks. The grim horrors of war were brought home to Canadians in June 1917 by the exhibition of official war photographs in Toronto.32 War subjects were much in evidence at the cne art show in August with F.M. Bell-Smith’s Camp Borden (The Tattoo), E. Wyly Grier’s portrait of a young Canadian fallen in battle, and George Reid’s painting, 1917, depicting women at work in a Red Cross sewing room.33 Carlyle exhibited two paintings at the 1917 cne including Daughter, which had failed to sell at London’s Royal Academy the previous year but appears to have found a Canadian buyer now, selling at $150. Her interest in her career in Canada seems to have been dissipating.34 The price she was paying for not promoting herself at home was to find herself eclipsed by younger Canadian artists. Although one Canadian critic wrote that she was “welcomed again [for her] charming story picture,” her once-secure position as one of Canada’s leading women artists was on the wane. “Her brush seemed to lack its old-time boldness,” one critic wrote. The “more vigorous and authoritative period of her career” was seen as having dated to the years prior to 1914 and her move to England.35 Although now married and with numerous stepchildren to care for, Laura Muntz managed to maintain her art practice, albeit with greatly decreased production. In 1917 she enjoyed continued recognition for her portraits and paintings of children.36 In 1917 painter-etcher Mary Wrinch (1877–1969), a close friend of Mary Hiester Reid and George Reid, was elected to associate status with the rca. Also at the cne art exhibit that year a group of five sketches by the late Tom Thomson attracted a “melancholy” interest. Thomson had died mysteriously in July on a canoe trip in Algonquin Park. After recuperating physically from her stint in the munitions canteen, Carlyle wished to return to war work. Youmans felt her cousin was not physically strong enough and worried that she would overdo her strength.37 Carlyle acted on an idea she had of opening the cottage up as a rural “rest home” for nurses. “We had a run of worn out war workers at the cottage,” she wrote to her brother in Canada, “we mended them up, one after another, and sent them back to work rejoicing.” 38 Hastings continued her nursing training and, in October, having passed her exams, joined a Voluntary Aid Detachment as a full-time vad at the new hospital at Crowborough. That autumn Carlyle received a letter from her sister Maud telling her the family believed she should return to Canada; the two of them could live

Resolutions, 1915 – 1923 205

together. Longing to visit her family and old haunts in Canada, Carlyle wrote to her brother Russell that “war and its sad stories make my dear ones all the dearer to me! The minute war is over I am coming [home].” However, fearing the change from her comfortable, affordable life with Hastings, she was cautious about making a commitment to Maud. She confided her misgivings to Russell: “It costs me so little to live [here],” she wrote, “to leave it, cross the seas to – what? [I am] not strong enough to work, and with no home, take rooms with Maud and live expensively on nothing! It is ‘dropping the substance for the shadow.’” 39 For the time being, she stayed on in Sussex. “I expect you hear about the raids. We can hear the London ones here at the cottage,” she wrote home in October 1917.40 Frightened away from spending the winter in London by the danger of air raids, Carlyle and Hastings were still in Crowborough. Carlyle had begun writing a book the previous year and recently had made efforts to have it read by a publisher. After receiving several rejection letters, one in which a publisher praised the manuscript as beautifully written yet declined to accept it, she wrote to a friend, “The publishers are afraid to experiment [with an unknown writer] under war difficulties, where paper is precious. I am thinking of trying America.”41 The rejection of her book, however, recalled other disappointments, which she revealed in a letter to her “dear little sister,” her sister-in-law Blanche. “Funnily enough, I suppose because I was the homely one, I have always wished to justify my life on earth to my brothers and sisters. But this has not been done yet – no dear – the immortal picture is still unpainted and my book still unpublished!”42  The Hour of Call to Service : 43 The Canadian War

Memorials Fund At a time when regret and depression seem to have been threatening her, early in 1918 Carlyle was commissioned by the Canadian War Memorials Fund (cwmf) committee to paint a portrait of Lady Julia Drummond of the Canadian Red Cross. The cwmf had grown out of the Canadian War Records Office that had been established in 1916, thanks largely to the efforts of Sir Max Aitken, later Lord Beaverbrook, a wealthy expatriate Canadian and member of the British House of Commons. While initially collecting materials such as photographs, maps, and diaries, Aitken realized that in order to fully document Canada’s participation in the war, the Canadian War Records Office would also have to commission artists. Thus, a Canadian war art scheme was established as a war charity fund on 17 November 1916.

206 out of the mainstream, 1915 – 1923

Notable Canadian artists commissioned for the overseas program included A.Y. Jackson, James Kerr-Lawson (1864–1939), and David Milne. Many male Canadian war artists received temporary commissions in the Canadian Armed Forces and a salary in exchange for their total output, or were provided with facilities in exchange for the cwmf’s right to purchase their work.44 Canadian women were not recruited as official war artists. They were, however, commissioned to record “home front” work and, as in Carlyle’s case, to record the contributions of women engaged in war work and to do portraits. Women artists in the overseas program were given neither rank nor salary but were paid on the completion of a specific work. Only two Canadian women artists, Carlyle and Caroline Armington (1875–1939), were chosen to participate in this program.45 In contrast to the male war artists, who had a significantly broader range of subject matter available, women artists’ choice was restricted to that which cwmf officials deemed appropriate and in keeping with societal conventions. Carlyle was commissioned for “portraits only,” and while Caroline Armington was commissioned to make an etching of the Canadian General Hospital at St Cloud in France, this was as close as any Canadian woman artist was allowed to get to the front lines.46 In mid-December 1917 Carlyle’s name had not appeared on an early list of artists sent by Lord Beaverbrook to Sir Edmund Walker requesting further suggestions of Canadian artists. At this time the cwmf had begun to extend the scope of its work to include portraits of famous soldiers and persons of importance. It is likely that Carlyle’s name was proposed soon after this date, perhaps by Sir Edmund Walker himself, to participate in the portrait commissions. By January 1918 she had been offered the commission and agreed to be paid the sum of $375 upon completion of the portrait. Her selection as a war artist likely hinged on her reputation in Canada as a skilled portrait painter renowned especially for her paintings of women. The assigned portrait of Lady Drummond was one of a group of cwmf commissioned portraits of Canadians holding key positions. The group also included Sir George Perley, Sir Edward Kemp, Sir Robert Borden, recipients of the Victoria Cross, and selected generals and admirals.47 Grace Julia Drummond was a Canadian and the widow of Sir George Drummond, former president of the Bank of Montreal. She was known for more than her fabulous art collection, which included works by Van Dyck, Corot, and Velasquez. The Canadian press described her as the “much-loved leader [of the] front rank of women war workers in Canada.” 48 During the 1890s, working alongside Lady Aberdeen to found the National Council of

Resolutions, 1915 – 1923 207

Women of Canada, she had proved herself a tough-minded and skilled bureaucrat with strong organizational powers. She served as the first president of the Montreal Local Council of Women and was an advocate of the vote for women; in 1914 she had announced her support of universal franchise, seeing in the extension of the vote to all Canadian women “a means to reform” the ills in Canadian society.49 At the time of Carlyle’s portrait commission, she was serving in London as the assistant commissioner of the Canadian Red Cross Society, and as president of the King George and Queen Mary Maple Leaf Club. One of Drummond’s most important roles was as head of the Information Department regarding Prisoners of War and the Missing. Under her direction someone from the Information Bureau visited every Canadian soldier hospitalized in England and supplied him with razor blades, books, newspapers, and food, all sent from Canada for this purpose. Parcels were sent bi-weekly to Canadian prisoners of war in Germany, and casualty index cards were kept up to date and reports sent home regularly to anxious families. Early in the war, in April 1915, Drummond’s only son, Captain Guy Drummond, had been killed in action on the first day of the Second Battle of Ypres. Despite this personal tragedy, she had carried on in her position with the Red Cross.50 Carlyle journeyed to London in early March to meet with Drummond and begin the portrait. Drummond had few quiet moments to sit for a portrait, with unceasing demands for her time, whether at her home near Westminster Abbey or at the Canadian Red Cross Society offices in Cockspur Street just off Trafalgar Square. A solution was reached: Carlyle would stay with her in her house for as long as was required to finish the portrait. She would then be able to paint whenever Drummond had a free moment. The arrangement pleased Carlyle, who relished the notion of combining her passion for war work and her skill as an artist. She collected her equipment and established herself in the Drummond home. The tone of her letters to her family reveal her restored spirits. “The pay is not much,” she wrote to Russell, “only four hundred dollars; it is the honour and glory of being chosen to paint any of these [portraits] for such a big cause.”51 Throughout the course of the painting of the portrait, Drummond did not have one uninterrupted half hour in which to pose. “I would not have thought anyone could be so much in demand,” Carlyle told Helene Youmans, “but the calls and interruptions were all important, and required her personal and immediate attention. I felt quite discouraged for a while.” Another difficulty

208 out of the mainstream, 1915 – 1923

arose in painting Drummond’s hands. “It was impossible for her to keep them still,” Carlyle said. “They moved constantly and she was not conscious of it.”52 Carlyle enjoyed living in the large house, which Drummond had rented furnished while she lived in the British capital. “[It is] a very ancient house … [Lady Drummond] lives most beautifully.” The pleasures of fine clothes and some luxuries made themselves felt in Carlyle’s life after an absence of many years. “I have been a great swell lately,” she wrote home, “dining at nine o’clock in full dress. [I] have two pretty ‘frocks,’ one blue chiffon, and one black and silver.” Although dining elegantly, she had passed along her food ration tickets for sugar, butter, and meat to the housekeeper when she had arrived to stay. At this time she had her hair “‘bobbed’ with a fringe” in the latest style. “Very becoming,” she wrote, “and so little trouble.” Lord Milner, who held a post in the War Cabinet, was introduced to Carlyle one day when he called in for tea at Lady Drummond’s. The artist showed him what she had been working on and later confided to her brother, “He complimented me on having painted a good portrait! He is a grand man!” 53 As she sat quietly painting, her model continued to work, dictating letters to a secretary and holding meetings. Carlyle could not help but overhear restricted information: “All the people one has come to know in the newspapers by name, come and go [here in the house] … people who are in the know, and who talk freely. I have learned a lot of what is going on behind the scenes about the war.” 54 She was shocked by what she heard about the war in Drummond’s office, information not known by the general public. In early April the cwmf’s art advisor Paul Konody, the Hungarian-born art historian and critic, came to see the almost-finished portrait (fig. 8.3). During his visit he explained to Carlyle that “more portraits of great Canadians are destined to be hung in the new parliament houses at Ottawa.” He was pleased with her work and promised her another commission.55 Following Konody visit’s, Carlyle went home to the Crowborough cottage for few days. Hastings was busy with her vad work in a surgical ward at Crowborough Hospital. Carlyle took advantage of the mild spring weather to dig the garden and sow vegetables. Proud of her small “victory garden,” she announced to a friend, “we shall live off our garden patch this year.” With the very real food shortages, garden produce was a necessity to supplement the diet of meagre rations. “We receive four pounds of bread a week. I am quite used to eating bread without butter and going without sugar in tea and fruit,” Carlyle wrote home. “As for meat, we have had none for nearly

Resolutions, 1915 – 1923 209

fig. 8.3 Portrait of Lady Drummond, Florence Carlyle, 1918. [plate 23]

three years, too expensive. Eggs have come down to a dollar a dozen so we have an egg a day.” 56 Her eyesight was also becoming a concern. In London she had visited an eye specialist because she was experiencing difficulty in focusing clearly. The specialist had given her a strong prescription for glasses. After her short break Carlyle returned to London to finish Lady Drummond’s portrait. She had painted her sitter in a black gown with a wrap of dark crimson (fig. 8.3). The impression is of a dignified woman wearing mourning in honour of her son and other casualties in the war. Her work for the Canadian Red Cross is suggested by the bowl of red poppies, a symbol

210 out of the mainstream, 1915 – 1923

of remembrance, in the left background. Her high professional status is confirmed by the medal of the Order of St John of Jerusalem that she wears, as prescribed by protocol, on a ribbon on her left breast. The order was awarded to nationals of the British Commonwealth who rendered conspicuous service to the ancient Order of St John of Jerusalem, of which the reigning British monarch was the sovereign head. Carlyle painted the insignia, a white enamelled Maltese cross with silver lions between the arms, in great detail, highlighting Drummond’s official status.57 The portrait suggests the presence of a woman of strength and determination, one engaged in work of high responsibility within an international public sphere. By mid-April Carlyle had finished the portrait to her satisfaction and sent it to the cwmf office. With little in the way of income, she was comforted by the prospect of another commission from the cwmf, as well as her pay for the Lady Drummond painting. Soon after arriving back in Crowborough she got word that Russell had sold one of her paintings in Canada to a distant cousin on the Youmans side. In April she received the cheque. “How simply splendid of you to have sold it for such a good price,” she wrote back to Russell, “in desperation I had marked it down to seventy-five. Do you really think the big one will go? I had hoped to get seven hundred dollars for it once. I ought not to let it go for less than four hundred even now. But I will be glad to get even less! [When I am paid for the portrait] it will be all Easy Street. Such a relief!” 58 That summer of 1918 she received two more cheques along with a letter from the Canadian artist Robert F. Gagen (1848–1926), then serving as secretary of the osa and on the council of the cne Department of Fine Arts. The cheques likely related to the sale of two paintings Carlyle had exhibited at the cne in 1917, the figure painting entitled Daughter (ca. 1916) and a still life, Brass and Nasturtiums (ca. 1917).59 Thanking Gagen in a letter dated 20 June, she added, “I am hard at work and will be forwarding work to Canada to all exhibitions, I hope.”60 Despite her eyesight problems, her intention was to continue her art production and to try to re-establish her participation in Canadian venues. In July, Helene Youmans’s husband, Harold, was again en route to the front lines in France. When Youmans arrived in Crowborough in mid-July for a visit, Carlyle wrote home to Canada, evidently fearing the worst for Harold’s chances of surviving the war, that her cousin would stay with her “indefinitely.” She continued, “I am glad, we both feel it is a bit of ‘home’ to be with each other. When the worst comes I will try to do my part in caring

Resolutions, 1915 – 1923 211

for little Helene.” She occupied herself in writing and painting and with the responsibilities of marketing and “cottage keeping.” Hastings was gone for long hours with her vad work, walking home from her shifts to the cottage across Crowborough common. Carlyle appears to have felt satisfaction in looking after them all: “[We] are quite a family.” 61 Having made the acquaintance of the writer Hugh Walpole, Carlyle wrote to ask him if he would read the manuscript of short stories she had just completed, believed to have included a story about the munitions factory. Walpole was encouraging, suggested a publisher, and offered to send a letter of recommendation on her behalf. “You are a writer,” he wrote to Carlyle, “but whether you’re a novelist is not plain to me yet. From this book it is obvious that you are a painter translating nature into words, instead of paint.” 62 While pursuing dreams of someday having her writing published, Carlyle continued to paint. Worries about her sight may have influenced her choice of subject matter and increasingly now she worked on still life paintings of flowers. She appears to have gained confidence from the success of the Lady Drummond commission and again sought to exhibit work in her old venues in Canada, neglected in part due to the difficulties of war. In August she sent two paintings of roses to the cne art exhibition. The initials “arca” were still proudly displayed after her name, although she had failed to send any new work to the rca exhibitions in two years.63 Laura Muntz also exhibited two paintings at the 1918 cne exhibition. She would continue to paint for many years in her attic studio in her home on Bernard Avenue in Toronto; paintings of mothers and children continued to be her most common subject until her death at the age of seventy on 9 December 1930.64 A preview of the cwm art collection was given to Canadian readers by an article in Saturday Night magazine in October 1918. Carlyle’s portrait of Lady Drummond was discussed and illustrated alongside paintings by Maurice Cullen and A.Y. Jackson. “The major part of this great collection will be shown at a special Winter Exhibition at Burlington House [London, England] next January,” wrote the Toronto critic, “when the public will [see] what modern art can achieve when properly encouraged and supported.” 65 More specifically the writer might have said that the cwmf art collection represented just what Canadian art and artists could achieve when adequately encouraged and supported. On 11 November Carlyle and Hastings were making one of their infrequent trips to London and had arranged to meet Youmans at Trafalgar

212 out of the mainstream, 1915 – 1923

Square at eleven o’clock. As they emerged from Victoria Station, news of the Armistice began to circulate. Shop-girls came out onto the street as guns boomed across the city to announce the end of war. “London had gone gloriously mad,” Carlyle recorded, “almost everyone cried first; then all began shaking hands! London was a solid struggling block of laughing humanity, millions of flags, bells … hooters and delirious shouting. Judith and I clung to each other and shoved, until at last we reached Trafalgar Square.” There they met Youmans, joyful that her husband had survived to the end of the war. “After many hours we crushed our way round to Buckingham Palace and climbed the Victoria Monument with a million others, and saw their Majesties drive out among their people into the mad thunder of cheering.” 66 When the excitement died down, they returned to Sussex to rooms they had rented until much-needed repairs to the cottage could be completed.67 Youmans recorded how they dragged down the heavy blackout curtains: “How wonderful to look up into the sky and not dread the splendour of a moonlit night. We spent the night as most other people [did], wandering out into the street every little while to see the lights streaming from windows all around us, to mingle with the little groups of people. Yet all we seemed to say to each other consisted of ‘the war is over, the war is over.’” 68 Carlyle celebrated the end of the war with an exhibition of nine of her paintings in the Royal British Colonial Society of Artists’ War and Peace exhibition in London. Presented in conjunction with the Society of Australian Artists and including Australian war pictures, the exhibition was held at the Royal Academy of Arts in Burlington House. The Suffolk Street Galleries normally used by the Royal Society of British Artists and the Royal British Colonial Society of Artists had been taken over by the War Cabinet Committee for war purposes.69 As suggested by the exhibition’s title, the paintings represented aspects of peace and of the war just ended. Carlyle exhibited her painting of a Red Cross nurse, The Hour of Call to Service (ca. 1918), as well as several works focusing on peaceful domestic interior scenes such as The Song of the Kettle (ca. 1918).70 Other Canadian artists participating in the exhibition included Gyrth Russell, Cyril H. Barraud, and Kenneth Forbes, all official artists in the cwmf art program, and Frederic Marlett Bell-Smith (1846–1923) and Frederick A. Verner (1836–1928). Ten places down from one of Carlyle’s works was a painting by Princess Louise, Duchess of Argyll.71 It was an apt coincidence that in 1918 Carlyle and Princess Louise, the royal patron who played a role in launching Carlyle’s career thirty-five years earlier in 1883, should have

Resolutions, 1915 – 1923 213

their paintings hung side by side in an exhibition featuring artists from many corners of the British Empire.72 Soon after this event Carlyle found herself nursing her brother William, taken ill after the manufacturing plant he had been managing throughout the war had failed and closed. She met often with Youmans at this time and confided her worries about William’s broken health. To her great relief, by mid-December he had recovered enough to sail home to Canada and a rest.73 On the sunny morning of 4 January 1919 about two thousand people gathered in the galleries of the Royal Academy of Art at Burlington House in Piccadilly to see the Canadian War Memorials Exhibition. Carlyle was likely in the audience of the opening ceremonies, given her proximity and her pride in being a participating artist. Sir Edward Kemp, minister for the Overseas Military Forces of Canada, addressed the crowd at noon and introduced the Canadian prime minister, Sir Robert Borden. Borden thanked Lord Beaverbrook for his efforts in commissioning and creating a memorial to Canadian participation in the Great War.74 As spectators viewed some four hundred works of art, they were exposed to a vast array of painting subjects and styles. These ranged from Captain Louis Weirter’s The Battle of Courcelette, faithfully recreating one of the most famous battle victories for Canadian forces, to A.J. Munnings’s paintings of the Canadian Cavalry Brigade. Portraits were interspersed throughout the exhibition. Carlyle’s Lady Drummond hung between two paintings by Captain Frederick H. Varley (1881–1969). Each of Varley’s paintings depicted an aspect of human suffering during the war.75 One of these, Some Day the People Will Return, shows the ruins of a village where farm fields and cemetery alike are churned and poisoned. On the other side of Julia Drummond’s portrait hung Varley’s The Gas Chamber at Seaford, an oblique reference to the poisonous mustard gas attacks that left so many men’s lungs and eyes scarred for life. The subjects flanking Carlyle’s portrait of the assistant commissioner of the Canadian Red Cross were, of course, wholly appropriate. Their meaning was likely only too apparent to the viewer whose loved one lay in a Red Cross hospital bed or who lived, like the Belgian refugees, with shattered lives and possessions. The Crowborough cottage was part of an estate owned by an elderly lady who lived in a large house nearby. Possibly due to the owner’s financial difficulties and ill health following the war, Hastings and Carlyle were having trouble finding someone to make repairs to the cottage’s living room floor, which had fallen in. Fearing they would soon lose “the beloved cottage,”

214 out of the mainstream, 1915 – 1923

Hastings decided to look for a small flat to rent in London. In March 1919 they moved into their London apartment in a new building in South Kensington that boasted modern amenities of gas fires and electric lights.76 Carlyle was given her pick of what furniture was left in William’s house in Wimbledon, since the house had been sold and the remaining furniture was to be auctioned. She set about decorating their sunny rooms. The walls were painted white, accented with coral wallpaper. When the work was done, she and Hastings planned to rent out the flat for the summer months for $25 a week and live for “one last summer” at the cottage. Carlyle’s plan was astute since renting for only six months would have earned them $600, a small profit over and above the $560 annual rent they paid. Since Carlyle was furnishing the flat, Hastings agreed to pay the greater part of the rent. Carlyle still found herself short of funds when planning her long-awaited trip to Canada, however. She wrote to Russell, then living in Windsor, Ontario, working with the Public Works Department, “I have not got the money for a visit home – yet … hoping to make good this summer by selling pictures. I feel my best painting days are over on account of my eyes. I have trouble seeing detail. All the same I shall paint for a time yet!” 77 In June her portrait of Lady Drummond was shown in the American leg of the cwmf exhibition, at New York’s Anderson Galleries. The exhibit was advertised as the “most complete artistic record of any country’s share in the Great War.” 78 American critics applauded the plan for a memorial building in Ottawa specifically to display the artwork generated by the Canadian War Memorials program.79 Arriving in Canada, the exhibition opened in Toronto at the cne on 23 August. Hand-coloured print reproductions of a number of the paintings were made and sold to the public by the iode, the profits going toward the society’s own idea of a war memorial, its aim of “Patriotic Education.” In addition, each chapter of the women’s society contributed the funds necessary to donate a set of the cwmf art proofs to over three hundred schools across Canada to educate Canadian children about their county’s participation in the Great War.80 In October of 1919 the Canadian section, featuring works of art focusing on the home front, opened at the Art Gallery of Toronto, Grange Park.81 While enthusiasm had been high at the cne exhibit in August, attendance at this second showing was disappointing, with only two thousand people attending during the first two weeks.82 Yet later instalments of the cwmf artwork were said to have drawn an appreciative crowd and held one “group of officers in quiet contemplation.” The portraits of the Canadian men who

Resolutions, 1915 – 1923 215

received Victoria Cross medals “attracted particular attention,” as one Canadian reporter wrote, “many a lonely heart gazed into the eyes of lost ones in the collection of Canadian heroes.”83 Waning public interest in war art may be detected in the reviews of the last phase of the cwmf art shown in Montreal in September 1920. “For those who are still interested in the Great War,” one Montreal journalist wrote, “there is an exhibition of pictures in the galleries of the [aam].” 84 The collection’s importance lay in the fact that these paintings, drawings, and sculptures, many by Canadian artists, memorialized the Canadian war effort for future generations. Important also was the role the collection played in helping to establish the careers of rising Canadian artists and in gaining national public exposure for Canadian art. In Carlyle’s case, she was proud and grateful to have been chosen to play a role in documenting the activity of Canadians in the 1914–18 conflict. In the autumn of 1919 the owner of the Crowborough cottage offered to sell it to her long-term tenants. Delighted to be able to secure their country retreat, Hastings bought the cottage and surrounding land, including an orchard and stone building formerly used as a laundry. As a present to Carlyle, Hastings also paid to have the laundry fitted with a skylight and turned into a studio. They made further plans to convert the upstairs of the laundry into a sitting room, bedroom, and kitchen and move into it the following summer. They would continue to rent out the cottage and the flat in London, during winter and summer months respectively, and collect, as Carlyle put it, “a whacking rent.” Her sense of humour asserted itself in her description to Russell of their plans: “Finally, we will move into the coal house and let the studio! Then there’s the dog kennel … Honestly we are terribly excited about it. We have worked like cart horses all summer sawing down trees, digging up hedges, working just like men.” Her happiness was clouded only by continuing worries about her eyesight. “I hope to paint a little again,” she confided, “but I’m afraid I must face the fact that my painting days are over. Now and then I get little portraits to do, but it is no use, it is too much for me now.” 85 Youmans arrived in Crowborough in late fall to say goodbye. She and Harold were shortly to move back to Montreal. The cousins spent a few days together, and Carlyle finished a painting of Youmans begun two years before. As in the New York days she pinned Youmans into a “dress” she created using a length of faded green velvet, and seated her before the fire. When the painting was finished, Carlyle “seemed unusually pleased with what she had done,”

216 out of the mainstream, 1915 – 1923

Youmans later recalled. “Her rare gift of painting light and shadow was strongly evident. One could be almost sure the fire flared and sank and flared. The lights in the picture seemed to change … darken and brighten again.” 86 The last evening together, as the three women sat laughing and talking before the fire, Carlyle was in a reflective mood “recalling, as she always did at such times, her girlhood in the rambling old house in Woodstock.”87 While they were exchanging stories of their youth, Hastings asked Carlyle if she had ever thought of marrying. “I have always regarded marriage with deep reverence,” Carlyle said, “love such as that must make one feel complete … nothing can come between.” She asked the other two if they recalled the poem by Elizabeth Barrett Browning in Sonnets from the Portuguese: “How do I love thee? Let me count the ways.” She recited the sonnet in entirety from memory, giving emphasis to the closing lines: “I love thee with the breath, / Smiles, tears, of all my life! – and, if God choose, / I shall but love thee better after death.” 88 There was a silence when she finished. Then she said quietly, “That is the way I love my painting. There is no other way.” 89 Youmans and many of Carlyle’s friends had often wondered about her thoughts on marriage but sensed her reticence to discuss the topic. Her unequivocal answer that evening left no question that she, like many women artists of her generation, believed she had to make a choice between marriage and career. Youmans later recalled that Carlyle had many opportunities for marriage if she had so wished. At their first meeting in 1908, when Carlyle was forty-four years old, Youmans recalled, she “liked men [and] had many [male] friends … at parties of any kind where men were present she always received their flattering attention.” 90 Youmans understood her decision and respected her dedication to her painting. At the end of October, after Youmans’s departure, Carlyle and Hastings returned to London for the winter. Following their plans, they found a tenant for the cottage during the winter months. When her mother was taken ill after Christmas, Hastings spent much of the next six months in Wimbledon.91 Although Carlyle had misgivings about her ability to continue painting, she divided her time between her studio and work on a new book. At the Royal Academy Summer Exhibition in June 1920, she exhibited a still life entitled Fruit. To her delight the canvas sold on opening day, and she received a commission to paint another along the same lines.92 In July 1920 she was surprised and delighted by a visit from a Miss MacCord, an old friend from New York. Likely this was the American painter Mary Nicholena MacCord (1864–1955), who divided her time between her

Resolutions, 1915 – 1923 217

home in Bridgeport, Connecticut, and Manhattan.93 As soon as MacCord “struck England,” she tracked down Carlyle and proposed a tour of the countryside. The two women spent several weeks exploring rural England, and Carlyle returned to London in August in high spirits, “all rested and brown.” 94 That autumn she spent much time writing and painting at the cottage (fig. 8.4). Following her sale of a “corking good” painting at the previous Royal Academy Summer Exhibition, the curator of the Hull Art Gallery, in Humberside, England, invited her to exhibit five paintings. Carlyle worked on these canvases throughout the late summer and fall of 1920; by Christmas they were on exhibition in Hull.95 Both of Hastings’s parents were now in failing health and requiring around-the-clock care by a trained nurse. With her vad training, she spent much of the winter in Wimbledon assisting in their care. She implored Carlyle to join her to ease the frustration and boredom. Carlyle moved, with her painting supplies, for the duration of the winter.96 The following summer of 1921 she again exhibited a single canvas entitled Still Life at London’s Royal Academy Summer Exhibition. Experiencing difficulties in their role as landlords, she and Hastings decided to give up their London flat. As a replacement they rented a large attic flat in a friend’s house. With William’s furniture, they made it into a “jolly old place to run away to when things get too bad [in Wimbledon].” Although happy to help her friend out with the care of the elderly invalids, Carlyle found living at the Hastings’ home dull, and the old couple “stubborn and depressing.” The situation necessitated, in the words of the artist, a place in the city “in which to kick up one’s heels.” 97 One break in the tedium occurred in 1921 when Hastings’s father paid for a month-long trip to Paris for them. Overwhelmed with excitement at arriving in the French capital, Carlyle dragged her friend through the familiar streets. “One twilight,” she wrote to Russell, “we got to my old street and stole along on the opposite side to where I lived those wonderful, wonderful six years. It was there. Just the same and the French windows of the sitting room were wide open and lit, I saw in – the same white and gold walls and mirror, the blue lounge, the table – Can you think how I felt?” Another day they walked to locate the first atelier she had joined: “ Over the Seine, in the Latin Quarter, [we] found it [and] with heart thumping asked the caretakers if Monsieur Delecluse was still alive? ‘Yes, he was in the studio.’ I pulled myself together, went to his door and found sitting there my old master; the same and yet grown so old. I called him and he looked up and

218 out of the mainstream, 1915 – 1923

fig. 8.4 Florence Carlyle, ca. 1922, in the garden of Yew Tree Cottage, Crowborough, Sussex.

without an instant’s hesitation cried out, ‘Little Miss Carlyle!,’ his old name for me. There I was clinging to him; both of us crying. I learned for the first time how much they had all thought of me and my work. He said they still talked of how I worked, and my great progress in the short time. How I cried when he told me this.” 98 In the autumn of 1922, after an absence of nine years, Carlyle made her long-anticipated trip back to Canada. She was now fifty-eight. She likely

Resolutions, 1915 – 1923 219

spent time with Russell and Blanche at their new home in Winnipeg.99 Still in Canada in November of that year, she wrote to the rca to resign her associate status. Her worsening eyesight, combined with her failure to exhibit with the Academy in recent years, made it an expensive proposition to continue her membership. She appears to have had no plans to return to Canada to live permanently, or to resume her busy exhibition schedule of ten years previously. In her letter she wrote effusively that she had all the “best wishes in the world for the dear old rca.” At the council meeting on 17 November 1922, the Academy accepted her resignation “with regret.” 100 While staying with her sister Maud in Toronto, Carlyle took the opportunity to contact her Canadian dealers. She had previously sent some older paintings to her dealer, O.B. Graves, in London, Ontario, for him to exhibit and sell. In early December she wrote to ask Graves to make her an offer for the unsold works. She negotiated prices with her old business sense intact. Evidence of their close relationship in the past, she confided that to him that she was not well: “My health is such that my people are packing me off to England at once … you have always been a friend – please stand by me again. Make me an offer for the pictures – will you?” Graves wrote to ask what she wanted for the paintings, and requested that she sign a painting if he sent it to her in Toronto. Carlyle wrote back, leaving him with instructions for further sales of her older paintings: “As I am ill [I will in] all probability sail from New York next Thursday. Do you think I can have the cheque by then Mr. Graves?” 101 Carlyle returned to England, troubled with stomach problems. She continued to write, however, and finished a short story entitled “Mary’s Child.”102 In mid-February she underwent abdominal surgery in London, and a malignant tumour was diagnosed. The surgeons advised Hastings that very little could be done except perhaps some radiation –“x-ray treatment”– as a palliative measure. In keeping with contemporary notions of treating a dying patient, neither the surgeon nor anyone else told Carlyle the truth about her condition. Hastings wrote to Russell, “She is not to know one word of the nature of the trouble. She is to think everything is quite all right for just as long as possible.103 She took Carlyle down to their beloved cottage in Crowborough as soon as she was able to be discharged from hospital. Carlyle’s sister Maud was anxious to leave for England immediately, and William and Ernest paid her fare. After her arrival, Maud sat by her sister’s bedside through March and April, the two sharing many reminiscences of family life. Perhaps they recalled how Maud had modelled for many of her older sister’s paintings over twenty years before (fig. 4.2).104

220 out of the mainstream, 1915 – 1923

fig. 8.5 Still Life: My Studio Corner, Florence Carlyle, ca. 1921. Painted in Carlyle’s studio in the renovated stone laundry in Crowborough, with its colour and texture contrasts in glass, metal, and stone, this painting is an example of the artist’s return to still life near the end of her life. The black and white daguerreotypes of family and friends and the small sketch of a pieta sculpture suggest her thoughts at this time. [plate 24]

Carlyle died in her sleep on 2 May 1923 and was buried in the nearby cemetery in Crowborough. News of her death was cabled to family members in Canada. At this time William was living in Victoria; Ernest and Edward both lived in Ontario, Ernest in Sudbury; Lillian lived in Alpena, Michigan, and Russell in Winnipeg.105 Judith Hastings took Carlyle’s loss very hard and could not bring herself to sort out her belongings in the studio. The task fell on Maud. As she surveyed the interior of the stone building, once the laundry, its skylight casting harsh afternoon light and shadows, the treasured pieces (fig. 8.5)

Resolutions, 1915 – 1923 221

expressing her sister’s lifetime’s devotion to art lent her some comfort. Numerous unfinished canvases and stretchers spoke of her sister’s artistic production over forty years, dating from the autumn in 1883 when a royal princess purchased her painting. Carlyle’s easel resting on a travelling trunk brought to mind her journeys to Paris, across Europe, and to the Canadian Rockies. It recalled her life in New York and her participation with innovative commercial commissions, as well as some of the most exciting exhibitions in the United States and Canada. A faded green velvet curtain was a reminder of the artist’s eclectic love of fabric, brilliant colours and textures into which she would pin her models. Each item summoned up happy memories of her beloved Bird. Maud packed up many paintings and small personal possessions and sent them on to relatives in Canada.106 Within days the major Canadian newspapers had reported Florence Carlyle’s death in articles outlining her career and accomplishments. Isolated from the Canadian art world for a number of years, she had come to believe that her artistic career was at an end there long before her death. However, the tributes describing her as a “Canadian painter of the front rank” attest to the regard and affection in which she was still held by the public, critics, and her colleagues.107  A Social Departure: 108 Conclusion As Veronica Strong-Boag writes in her introduction to Rethinking Canada: The Promise of Women’s History, “Asking who we are and may become involves questioning who we were.” 109 Women’s participation as artists, writers, educators, critics, and diarists in the cultural history of Canada is key to creating a new historical narrative, one that includes the work and achievements of women. A goal of this study has been to address the erasure of Canadian women artists from the historical canon. We cannot understand, or pretend to know, a history of Canadian art if we ignore the participation and contributions of women. Any survey of art in Canada is incomplete unless it includes the contributions of Canadian women artists. Another major concern here has been to explore how one woman artist negotiated social conventions to shape a professional identity. Carlyle went one step further than many of her women colleagues. She engaged in the new age of the mass-circulation media and managed a range of resources to support her diverse professional practice. She exemplified a new approach to the independent and active organization and promotion of her own career. In

222 out of the mainstream, 1915 – 1923

her aspiration to lead a self-determined life as an independent single woman, she was a champion of a new ideal for women’s working and private lives. The characteristics of her life were those of the era’s New Woman. In a world governed by the conventions of patriarchy, she contributed to a new model of artistic professionalism in Canada. Her colleagues recognized her as an exemplar. Her innovative path through her work in commercial art dates from 1901, when the influential publication Women of Canada: Their Life and Work described her as a “well-known illustrator” in the section on “Distinguished Professional Women Artists.” 110 In an article “Canadian Women in the Arts” published in 1914, Madge Macbeth spoke of Carlyle as a model for women in the arts. Macbeth’s text placed Carlyle’s career in the context of other successful Canadian women in the arts, and specifically emphasized her work in illustration and commercial art in New York. She described Carlyle in glowing terms as someone “whose story should inspire any who may … grow discouraged.” 111 In the same year Margaret Bell’s article “Women and Art in Canada” again focused on Carlyle’s achieving professional recognition through commercial art commissions. Carlyle’s achievements in this area, Bell asserted, “revolutionized popular art.” 112 Further evidence of respect for Carlyle’s achievements is seen in an article by a representative of a younger generation of artists. Thirty-four year old Estelle Kerr had been a student of Laura Muntz and was herself working in the field of commercial art in 1913 as an illustrator and cartoonist when she wrote of Carlyle and Muntz in her column “The Artist” for Saturday Night. Kerr’s target audience was women, and the theme of her article was how women could work as professionals in the field of art and achieve financial independence. She linked Carlyle’s success directly to her commercial art activity and cited her career as evidence of women’s ability to achieve an “extremely remunerative” living as artists.113 While Kerr’s article ranks Carlyle as one of the best contemporary women painters on the continent, equally important is her view of Carlyle’s innovative professional practice as a model for an emerging generation of women. Whether in the image of a young middle-class woman in Golden Rod (1901, fig. 4.3) or a working woman in The Joy of Living (1910, fig. 5.2), Carlyle’s paintings explore the spaces and everyday lives of women in her time. Her intimate paintings of a primarily female world, offering up glimpses of women’s experience, delighted and engaged her viewers.114 Her own life as a single professional New Woman contrasts sharply with that of the women

Resolutions, 1915 – 1923 223

in her art. She dedicated her art almost entirely to representations of women in the domestic sphere, but her own self-directed life gave her a creatively critical distance from her personal background and women’s social condition. From the perspective of Canadian women’s history, a significant part of the value of Carlyle’s career as artist lies in her management of her professional practice. At a time when there was enormous pressure on women to conform to traditional social expectations, she showed that, instead of becoming a casualty of gender restrictions, a woman could act incisively and innovatively to succeed in her chosen career.

This page intentionally left blank

appendix  Short Biographies of Women Artists Mentioned in the Text

bradshaw, eva theresa b. London, Ont., 1873, d. London, Ont., 1938 Figure, portrait, and still life painter. Bradshaw studied with Florence Carlyle and briefly with Robert Henri. Exhibited with the osa, and with the rca in 1902. Her painting Plums was in the Canadian art section at the Wembley Exhibition (1924) in London. She worked as a teacher in London, Ont. Her student, Clare Bice, who later served as president of the rca, wrote the catalogue essay for an exhibition of her work at the ml in 1970. Her career is discussed briefly in Nancy Pool’s The Art of London, 1830–1980.

cawthra, ann mabel b. 1871, Lucerne, Switzerland, d. 1943, Port Credit, Ont. Painter, artist in the applied arts and crafts (enamel, metal work), interior designer. Cawthra studied at Charles Ashbee’s Guild of Handicraft in England. In 1902 she was the first president of the Society of Art and Crafts of Canada; she was a founding member of the Heliconian Club. She opened a Toronto franchise of the English furniture firm Thornton-Smith Co. and decorated theatres and churches. Her personal life is mentioned in Gwyn’s The Private Capital and in McLeod’s In Good Hands.

davis, cecile b. 1866, near Uxbridge, Ont., d. 1935 Painter. Tutored in private classes by her cousin Florence Carlyle. Davis married in 1890 and does not appear to have progressed thereafter in her professional career. Like Clara Peel (q.v.), Davis is an interesting example of a woman artist whose career aspirations were unfulfilled.

226 appendix

dignam, mary ella williams b. 1857, Port Burwell, Ont., d. 1938 Painter of figures and landscapes, arts journalist. Studied at the nyasl and in Paris. Founder and president of the waac, she exhibited with the osa and rca but was never elected an associate of the rca. She has received scholarly attention for her involvement with the waac and the Canadian Handicrafts Guild, as in McLeod’s master’s thesis, “Enterprising Women and the Early History of the Canadian Handicrafts Guild,” and In Good Hands.

eastlake, mary alexandra bell b. 1864, Douglas, Ont., d. 1951, Ottawa Painter of figures, landscapes, portraits; jewellery designer and producer. Studied at the aam School in Montreal, the nyasl, and the Académie Colarossi in Paris. She taught at the Victoria School of Art in Montreal in 1892. She first exhibited with the rca in 1892 and the following year was elected an associate. Shortly thereafter she married English painter Charles H. Eastlake, moved to England, and resigned from the rca. Especially admired for her paintings of children, she also designed and executed Arts and Crafts inspired jewellery, which she exhibited at the 1907 rca exhibition. She returned to Canada in 1939. She is included in Farr and Luckyj’s From Women’s Eyes.

farncomb, caroline b. b. 1859, Newcastle, Ont., d. 1951, London, Ont. Portrait, still life, and landscape painter. Studied in Paris at the Académie Julian. Her career was focused principally in London, Ont.: she exhibited in the Western Fair and was an active member of the Women’s Art Club of London. She also exhibited with the waac. She had contacts with Toronto artists and exhibited along with Gertrude E. Spurr and Clara S. Hagarty at the Thumb-Box Exhibition at W. Scott & Sons’ Galleries in 1908. She frequently exhibited in the cne and osa exhibitions between 1897 and 1910 and became a member of the osa in 1908. While she exhibited with the rca in 1900 and 1901, she was not elected an associate.

forbes, elizabeth adela armstrong (also called Elizabeth Stanhope Forbes) b. 1859, Kingston, Ont., d. 1912, Newlyn, Cornwall Figure painter, printmaker. Studied at the South Kensington School, the nyasl, and with Frank Duveneck and J. Frank Currier. Moving to Newlyn, Cornwall, she married the founder of the Newlyn School, Stanhope Forbes (1857–1947) in 1889. She spent most of her professional career in England and did not maintain many artistic links with Canada; thus she is often

Short Biographies of Mentioned Artists 227 thought of as a British artist. Deborah Cherry has described her painting School Is Out (1889) as an “exceptional … modern” painting. Her work in printmaking is discussed in Tovell’s A New Class of Art: The Artist’s Print in Canadian Art, 1877–1920, and she is included in Betsy Rezelman’s Ph.D. dissertation, “The Newlyn Artists and Their Place in Late-Victorian Art.”

ford, harriet mary b. 1859, Brockville, Ont., d. 1938, Bovingdon Green, Great Marlow, England Painter of landscapes and portraits, muralist, jewellery designer and maker, writer. Ford studied at the Ontario School of Art in Toronto, at the St John’s Wood Art School and the Royal Academy of Arts in London, England, and at the Académie Colarossi and with Luc Olivier Merson in Paris. Elected an associate of the rca in 1895, she had a diverse art production and career, and was an arts writer and lecturer and co-founder and editor of an art magazine in Toronto in the mid-1890s. She is the subject of a 2001 exhibition catalogue essay by Jennifer C. Watson.

hawley, wilhelmina douglas b. 1860, Perth Amboy, New York State, d. 1958, Holland Painter of portraits and child subjects. The American-born Hawley studied in New York at the Cooper Union Art School and nyasl. She was the first vicepresident of the nyasl. Studying in Paris at the Académie Julian and Académie Colarossi, she met Laura Muntz and shared living quarters. Hawley lived briefly in Toronto ca. 1898 and exhibited with the osa; in partnership with Muntz, she taught classes in their Yonge Street Arcade studio. Hawley married and moved to Holland in 1901. Her daughter, Georgina, was born in 1904. Hawley is discussed briefly in Elizabeth Mulley’s Ph.D. dissertation on Laura Muntz.

holden, sarah baldwin (later Hunter) b. Belleville, Ont., active 1886–1907 in Paris and Montreal Painter of figures and portraits. Studied at the aam School, Montreal, in New York at the nyasl, and in Paris at the Académie Julian at the same time as her friend Florence Carlyle. Holden was elected an associate of the rca in 1895 and was an active member of the waac, osa, and amm. She had a successful career in the 1890s, winning a gold medal at the 1893 Chicago World’s Fair. Her career ended after her marriage in the early 1900s, and she resigned from the rca in 1904. She is briefly discussed in Butlin’s master’s thesis, “Making a Living” and McLeod’s In Good Hands.

228 appendix

houghton, margaret (May) b. 1865, Montreal, d. ca. 1922 Painter of figures and landscapes. Houghton was a friend of Mary Bell Eastlake; they studied together in France from 1888 to 1891. Elected an associate of the rca in 1895, she resigned in 1902. She also exhibited with the amm and at the cne (1903) and was an active member of the waac, present at the first meeting convened in April 1894 to form a Montreal branch of the waac. Her career was centred in Montreal, where in 1897 she taught at the School of Art and Applied Design (formerly the Victoria School of Art). Her colleague Mary Phillips (q.v.) was principal. In 1903 she lived at 46 Cathcart Street, Montreal. She is mentioned in Allaire’s article on Canadians in Paris and McLeod’s study of the Canadian Craft Guild.

kerr, estelle muriel b. 1879, Toronto, d. 1971 Painter, illustrator, writer. Studied in New York at the nyasl from 1901 to ca. 1903, and in Paris. During World War I she drove an ambulance in France. She was well known as a painter of children, an art journalist, and a critic; she illustrated and wrote several books. Her career centred in Toronto where she shared a studio with Dorothy Stevens around 1913. She was one of the original members of the Graphic Arts Club and the Heliconian Club. Her role as an art critic is discussed by Tovell in A New Class of Art, and her illustration work is discussed in Sybille Pantazzi’s article in The Art and Pictorial Press in Canada.

kingsford, winnifred b. 1875, Toronto, d. 1947 Sculptor. Studied in Paris at the Académie de la Grand Chaumière. Kingsford’s production is represented in the collection of the ngc. She also designed and made domestic items such as lamp bases. A potentially important figure in Canadian art, she worked principally in Toronto and exhibited with the Society of Arts and Crafts of Canada and the osa (1915). Along with Frances Loring (q.v.) and Florence Wyle (q.v.), Kingsford worked on The Spirit of Canada for the gates of the cne. The best published source on Kingsford prior to the present study remains Estelle Kerr’s 1914 article “Women Sculptors in Toronto.” She is briefly mentioned in McLeod’s In Good Hands.

knowles, elizabeth annie beach mcgillivray b. 1866, Ottawa, d. 1928, Riverton, New Hampshire Painter of landscapes, miniatures, domestic birds, and animals. Studied at the Ontario School of Art in Toronto. Elected an associate of the rca in 1908,

Short Biographies of Mentioned Artists 229 Knowles became known as the “Rosa Bonheur of the barnyard” because of her many paintings of fowl. She received acclaim for her paintings The Dreamer and Nocturne (1908), the latter purchased by the ngc for its collection. Her home-studio at 350 Bloor Street West, Toronto, shared with her artist husband, was a centre for Toronto artists, musicians, and writers. A 1980 exhibition catalogue, Farquhar McGillivray Knowles, Elizabeth McGillivray Knowles: A Selection of Paintings, contains little discussion of her career or production. A substantial clipping file and photographs can be found in the ago archives.

loring, frances b. 1887, Wardner, Idaho, d. 1968, Newmarket, Ont. Sculptor. Studied at the Ecole de Beaux-Arts in Geneva, with Karl Guttner in Munich, at the Académie Colarossi in Paris, and at the Chicago Art Institute. Her practice centred in Toronto. Commissioned by the cwmf in 1918 to create a series of statuettes depicting Canada’s war effort on the home front, Loring executed a number of war memorial and public commissions; she served as founding member and vice-president of the Sculptors Society of Canada. Her studio, shared with her life partner Florence Wyle (q.v.), was an artistic centre in Toronto. In tandem with Wyle, Loring has been the subject of several exhibitions, catalogues, and biographies.

macdonnell, harriette j. b. ?, d. 1944 Painter of landscapes and flower studies. MacDonnell was co-principal (1892–1895) with Mary Phillips (q.v.) of the Victoria School of Art in Montreal, where design, ceramics, and woodcarving were taught. MacDonnell also taught drawing at the Trafalgar Institute, Montreal. She exhibited regularly with the aam, rca, and waac. In 1897 she lived at 91 Aylmer Street in Montreal. Little is known of her career or production. McLeod’s In Good Hands makes brief reference to MacDonnell’s teaching and activity with the waac.

mcnicoll, helen galloway b. 1879, Toronto, d. 1915, Swanage, England Painter of figures and landscapes. Studied at the aam (1899–1902), the Slade School of Art, London, and St Ives, Cornwall. Elected an associate of the rca in 1914, she is known for her Impressionist-influenced paintings of girls in landscape settings. Scholarly attention to McNicoll began in 1975 with Farr and Luckyj’s From Women’s Eyes and Joan Murray’s 1976 catalogue essay in Helen McNicoll, Oil Paintings. Julia Gualtieri’s master’s thesis, “The Woman as Artist and Subject,” compares her work with that of her colleagues Florence Carlyle

230 appendix (q.v.) and Laura Muntz (q.v.). Luckyj discusses her paintings in Helen McNicoll, A Canadian Impressionist, and Carol Lowrey’s Vision’s of Light and Air contributes a brief overview of her work.

moodie, susanna b. 1803, Bungay, Suffolk, England, d. 1885, Toronto Writer, artist. Began writing ca. 1837 for the Literary Garland; wrote and illustrated Roughing It in the Bush (1852). Moodie was the sister of Catharine Parr Traill (q.v.), grandmother of Henrietta Vickers (q.v.), and great-aunt of Sydney and Louise Tully (q.v.).

muntz, laura adeline b. 1860, Radford, Warwickshire, England, d. 1930, Toronto Painter of portraits and child subjects. Studied with William Forster in Hamilton, at the Ontario School of Art in Toronto, ca. 1888 at St John’s Wood School of Art in London, and at the Académie Colarossi in Paris, where she met her companion, Wilhelmina D. Hawley. She was elected an associate of the rca in 1895. In Toronto her studio in 1903 was in “Room r” in the Yonge Street Arcade; by 1907 she had moved her studio to 6 Beaver Hall Square in Montreal. After her marriage in 1915 she returned to live in Toronto and exhibited as Muntz Lyall. She is admired for her studies and portrait commissions of children. Elizabeth Mulley’s Ph.D. dissertation and article focus specifically on Muntz’s mother and child paintings.

patterson, edith lalande ravenshaw b. East Sheen, Surrey, England, active 1893–1922, d. ? Landscape painter, printmaker. Studied in Paris in the early 1890s where she was friends with Florence Carlyle. She married the Canadian portraitist Andrew Dickson Patterson (1854–1930) and moved to Toronto, exhibiting intermittently with the rca and aam. In 1914 she returned to live in England, leaving her husband in Canada. This period saw her adding the medium of printmaking to her production. She continued to exhibit in Canada under the surname Lalande.

peel, clara louise b. 1862, London, Ont., d. 1938 Sculptor. Sister of Paul Peel (1860–1891) and Mildred Peel (q.v.). Her career as an artist was short lived, and as far as is known she did not pursue her aspirations to study in France. After sharing the Toronto studio of her sister, Mildred, she appears to have laid aside plans to become a professional artist after her marriage in January 1889 to Reuben B. Belden of Belden Brothers,

Short Biographies of Mentioned Artists 231 publishers of Picturesque Canada. She is mentioned briefly in Baker’s Paul Peel: A Retrospective.

peel, mildred margaret b. 1856, London, Ont., d. 1922, California Sculptor; landscape and portrait painter. Studied at the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Art and in the mid-1880s lived in Paris with her brother, artist Paul Peel. In 1883 she had a studio in Winnipeg and in the late 1880s a studio in Toronto on Church Street. Peel exhibited with the osa and received several portrait commissions for the Provincial Educational Museum in Toronto. She was again commissioned ca. 1900 by the Ontario government. Her work is described by Bayer in The Ontario Collection, and her career activity is briefly discussed in Baker’s Paul Peel: A Retrospective.

phillips, mary martha (May) b. 1856, Montreal, d. 1937, Montreal Painter of landscapes and portraits. Studied at the aam School, Montreal, 1880–83, and in New York at the nyasl (1884–89), along with her friend Mary Bell Eastlake (q.v.). In 1892 Phillips served as co-principal with Harriet J. MacDonnell (q.v.) of the Victoria School of Art, Montreal, renamed the School of Art and Applied Design in 1895. After 1895 she was sole principal. She was active in the ncwc, co-founder and president of the waac Montreal branch, and co-founder of the Canadian Handicrafts Guild (1905). She exhibited with the osa, waac, aam, and rca (1892) and at the 1893 Columbian Exposition. In 1897 her address in Montreal was 2274 St Catherine Street. Her professional activity is discussed in McLeod’s In Good Hands.

reid, mary augusta hiester b. 1854, Reading, Pennsylvania, d. 1921, Toronto Flower, landscape, and miniatures painter, illustrator, muralist. Studied at the School of Design for Women, Philadelphia, at the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts, and briefly in Paris. Reid was elected an associate of the rca in 1893. Her career was based in Toronto after her marriage to artist George Reid; their home-studio was a centre for artistic life in the city. She exhibited with the osa, aam, Canadian Society of Applied Art, and rca and was a founding member of the Heliconian Club. She is included in Farr and Luckyj’s From Women’s Eyes. Marilyn McKay in A National Soul briefly discusses Reid’s mural work; Brian Foss and Janice Anderson’s excellent catalogue essays in Quiet Harmony examine the influences in her painting and aspects of her professional career.

232 appendix

schreiber, charlotte m.b. morrell b. 1834, Woodham, Essex, England, d. 1922, Paignton, Devon, England Landscape, figure, and animal painter; book illustrator. Studied in London with John Rogers Herbert and at Cary’s School of Art. She immigrated to Toronto in 1875. Elected an academician of the rca in 1880, she remained the only female academician until 1933. She exhibited with the Royal Academy (1855– 74), the aam, osa, and waac. She was a teacher and board member of the Ontario School of Art and Design. Ernest Thompson-Seton was her protégé. Emily P. Weaver’s 1917 article was published during her lifetime, while more recent scholarly writing on Schreiber includes a 1985 master’s thesis by Margaret Fallis; brief entries on her life and production appear in Farr and Luckyj’s From Women’s Eyes and Maria Tippett’s By a Lady.

spurr, gertrude eleanor b. 1858, Scarborough, England, d. 1941, Port Perry, Ont. Landscape and still life painter. Studied at the Scarborough School of Art, Lambeth School of Art in London, with George B. Bridgeman at his summer school in Vermont, and at the nyasl. From 1890 Spurr’s career centred on Toronto where her address in 1903 was 248 Gerrard Street East. She exhibited with the waac, osa, aam, and rca and was elected an associate of the rca in 1895. She was friends with Florence Carlyle. After marrying William Cutts in 1909, she exhibited as Spurr Cutts. Ritchie and Paget’s 1987 article reviews her career.

traill, catharine parr b. 1802, Rotherhithe (London), England, d. 1899, Lakefield, Ont. Writer, artist. Settling at Rice Lake in the Peterborough area of Ontario, in 1835 she published The Backwoods of Canada, followed by Canadian Wild Flowers (1868), and Studies of Plant Life in Canada (1885). She was the sister of Susanna Moodie (q.v.) and the historical writer Agnes Strickland (1796–1874), and the great-aunt of Henrietta Vickers (q.v.), Sydney Strickland Tully (q.v.), and Louise Tully (q.v.).

tully, louise beresford Active ca. 1890–1905 Artist working in applied arts and crafts, including woodcarving, leatherwork, and bookbinding. Studied handicrafts at the Kensington Art School, London (ca. 1891–95). She exhibited with the Society of Arts and Crafts of Canada, the osa, and waac, and at the Roberts’ Art Galleries in Toronto. Daughter of architect Kivas Tully, sister of Sydney Tully (q.v.), cousin of Henrietta Vickers (q.v), great-niece of Catharine Parr Traill and Susanna Moodie,

Short Biographies of Mentioned Artists 233 her career centred in Toronto where she maintained a teaching studio in the Yonge Street Arcade. She was commissioned ca. 1895 to design and carve several mantelpieces in a “gothic design.”

tully, sydney strickland b. 1860, Toronto, d. 1911, Toronto Painter of figures, portraits, interiors. Studied at the Ontario School of Art and Design where one of her teachers was Charlotte Schreiber (q.v.), at the Slade in London (1884–86), and at the Académie Julian and the Académie Colarossi in Paris. She was elected an associate of the rca in 1890 and exhibited with the Royal Academy, 91 Club, Society of Arts and Crafts of Canada, waac, rca, aam, and osa. She and her sister, Louise (q.v.) taught in their Toronto Yonge Street Arcade studio; both served on the committee of the Society of Arts and Crafts (1902). She was commissioned by the cpr for a series of portraits for the Empress and Royal Alexandra hotels. Her career is discussed briefly in Farr and Luckyj’s From Women’s Eyes.

vickers, henrietta moodie b. 1870, d. ? Still-life painter, sculptor. Studied at the Ontario School of Art and Design and privately with George A. Reid. She exhibited with the osa, Society of Arts and Crafts, and waac. Her studio in the Yonge Street Arcade ca. 1895 adjoined that of Mary Wrinch (q.v.). In December 1897 Vickers wore a “heirloom costume,” and a hair comb originally belonging to her grandmother, Susanna Moodie, to the Victorian Era Ball. Miller’s claim that Vickers lived in Tangiers after 1897 is supported by the title of her painting, Bedouin, exhibited at the osa in 1901. She may have returned to live in Canada, as she exhibited with the osa in 1898, the cne in 1903, and annually at the osa from 1900 to 1904. In 1902 she served on the Committee of the Society of Arts and Crafts in Toronto.

wrinch, mary evelyn b. 1877, Kirby-le-Soken, Essex, England, d. 1969, Toronto Landscape and miniatures painter, printmaker. Studied at the Ontario School of Art in Toronto, privately with George Reid, at the Grosvenor Life School in London, and at the nyasl in New York. She taught art at the Bishop Strachan School in Toronto. Because of her status as the second wife of George Reid, she never completely disappeared from visibility; see, for example, Muriel Miller’s January 1940 article. Scholarly interest in her was revived by Joan Murray’s interview with her in July 1969 and by Farr and Luckyj’s From Women’s Eyes. Both publications were part of the first wave of recovery of women artists inspired by the women’s movement in the 1960s and ’70s.

234 appendix Dickman’s publications examining Wrinch’s work in printmaking followed. The ago Archives has excellent holdings on her.

wyle, florence b. 1881, Trenton, Illinois, d. 1968, Newmarket, Ont. Sculptor and poet. Studied medicine at the University of Illinois for several years before studying sculpture at the Chicago Art Institute with Laredo Taft where she met Frances Loring (q.v.). After moving to Toronto in 1913 from Greenwich Village in New York, she became one of Canada’s leading early twentieth century sculptors. Wyle was a friend of filmmaker Robert Flaherty, who photographed her ca. 1919. She published a volume of poetry in 1959. Her career and production, usually considered in tandem with that of Frances Loring, has been the focus of a number of scholarly studies beginning in the 1970s.

notes 

abbreviations used in notes aam acwa ago arca cne cwm cwmf iode lac ml mmfa ncwc ngc nyasl ocad osa pao ra racar rca saa sacc tasl tie twlc waac wacl wag

Art Association of Montreal (superseded by Montreal Museum of Fine Arts) Archives of Canadian Women Artists (Carleton University, Ottawa) Art Gallery of Ontario (formerly Art Gallery of Toronto) Associate Royal Canadian Academy Canadian National Exhibition (formerly Toronto Industrial Exhibition) Canadian War Museum, Ottawa Canadian War Memorials Fund International Order of the Daughters of the Empire Library and Archives of Canada (formerly National Archives of Canada) Museum London, London, Ontario Montreal Museum of Fine Arts (formerly Art Association of Montreal) National Council of Women of Canada National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa New York Art Students’ League Ontario College of Art and Design Ontario Society of Artists Public Archives of Ontario Royal Academy, London, England Revue d’art canadienne/Canadian Art Review. Royal Canadian Academy Society of American Artists Society of Arts and Crafts of Canada Toronto Art Students League Toronto Industrial Exhibition Toronto Women’s Literary Club Women’s Art Association of Canada Women’s Art Club of London (Ontario) Woodstock Art Gallery, Woodstock, Ontario

236 notes to pages xv–xx introduction 1 Recent scholarship on this generation of women artists includes several exhibition catalogues, scholarly articles, a master’s thesis and a doctoral dissertation. Catalogues include Dorothy Farr and Natalie Luckyj’s groundbreaking 1975 exhibition catalogue, From Women’s Eyes; Luckyj’s Helen McNicoll: A Canadian Impressionist; Brian Foss and Janice Anderson’s Quiet Harmony: The Art of Mary Hiester Reid; and two catalogues and Jennifer Watson’s article on the artists Harriet Ford and E. May Martin. Ellen McLeod’s In Good Hands derives from her master’s thesis on this topic, while Julia Gualtieri’s thesis “The Woman as Artist and Subject in Canadian Painting” focuses on a comparison of the paintings of Carlyle, Laura Muntz, and McNicoll. Elizabeth Mully’s article on Muntz, “Madonna/Mother/Death and Child: Laura Muntz and the Representation of Maternity,” reproduces the findings of her dissertation, “Women and Children in Context: Laura Muntz and the Representation of Maternity,” which focuses analysis on the artist’s many mother and child paintings. 2 See Foss, Anderson, Luckyj, and Mulley above. 3 Carlyle’s work and contributions were included in the following publications prior to World War II: Newton MacTavish, The Fine Arts in Canada, 141; M.O. Hammond, Painting and Sculpture in Canada, 54; A.H. Robson, Canadian Landscape Painters, 161; Graham McInnes, A Short History of Canadian Art, 66. 4 Farr and Luckyj’s From Women’s Eyes includes a brief entry on Carlyle; another exhibition catalogue, Florence Carlyle: Against All Odds (2004) by Joan Murray, contains an essay giving a limited and general overview of the artist’s life and production. Master’s theses relating to Carlyle include Elisabeth Leiss McKellar’s “Out of Order: Florence Carlyle and the Challenge of Identity, 1864–1923” (1995), which examines Carlyle’s life choices with regard to partnership and marriage, and Julia Gualtieri’s “The Woman as Artist and Subject in Canadian Painting,” which compares the subject matter of Carlyle’s paintings to that of several of her women colleagues. 5 Butlin, “Making a Living: Florence Carlyle and the Negotiation of a Professional Artistic Identity.” 6 Farr and Luckyj’s exhibition catalogue From Women’s Eyes was followed by Luckyj’s study of one of Carlyle’s colleagues, Helen McNicoll: A Canadian Impressionist. See also Foss and Anderson, Gualtieri, and Mulley. 7 Gerson, “Anthologies and the Canon of Early Canadian Women Writers,” 56–7. 8 Luckyj, Helen McNicoll, 75. 9 Pollock, “Modernity and the Spaces of Femininity,” 50–89. 10 This artistic exodus was regarded as an important issue at the time. See Barrie Davies, At the Mermaid Inn, xv–xvii. 11 Doyle, “Research – Problems and Solutions – Canadian Women Writers and the American Literary Milieu of the 1890s,” 31.

preamble 1 Carlyle was living intermittently in Woodstock and London, Ont., and New York City at this time. She taught art classes in her studio in the Ontario Masonic Hall in London from

notes to pages 3–13 237 1902 to 1904, and thus it is possible that she attended the osa exhibition in Toronto in 1902. 2 “Fine Exhibit of Oil Paintings.” 3 In 1914 Johnston published a monograph on Canadian art. See E.F.B. Johnston, “Painting and Sculpture in Canada,” 593–640. 4 The following contemporary articles informed this section: Quiller, “Studio News,” 2; T. Square, “Notes on the osa Exhibition,” 7; “Ontario Society of Artists Held the Annual Opening,” 2; “Fine Exhibit of Oil Paintings”; “Artists and Friends Thronged Gallery”; “osa Exhibition: More Pictures and of Better Quality.”

chapter one 1 William Arthur (b. 1862); Florence Emily (1864–1923); Lillian; Maud (d. ca. 1936); Ernest Jerrold; Edwin S.; Russell A. (d. 1932). See Ernest J. Carlyle, “The Carlyle Tree,” ca. 1950, typescript, Artist Files, wag, Woodstock, Ont. 2 “Mrs. W. Carlyle, Passing of a Woman Who Had Not Lived in Vain,” Woodstock Daily Sentinel-Review, 12 December 1913; and “Memory of Florence Carlyle Honored by Art Association,” Woodstock Daily Sentinel-Review, 7 February 1936, Artist Files, wag; Florence Johnston, “Florence Carlyle, 1864–1923,” typescript, ca. 1984, Artist Files, wag, 4. See also F. Beatrice Taylor, “Her Own Country,” London Free Press, 7 July 1956, n.p. 3 “The Carlyle Tree,” Artist Files, wag. 4 Doyle, “Art Notes,” Saturday Night (19 October 1895): 9. 5 Mount Pleasant was located on part of Joseph Brant’s “Indian Lands.” See Johnston, Florence Carlyle, 3. 6 A.S. Garrett, “Old Windmill’s History,” editorial letter in the Globe and Mail, n.d., Artist Files, wag. 7 “Passing of William Carlyle.” 8 Oxford Historical Society pamphlet, “Florence Carlyle and the New Gallery,” Oxford through Time (February 1983): 2, Artist Files, wag; Poole, The Art of London, 1830–1980, 69. 9 Johnston, “Florence Carlyle,” 4. 10 William Kingston, Western Wanderings, or, A Pleasure Tour in the Canadas, vol. 2, 3–5, quoted in Johnston, McMaster University, the Toronto Years, vol. 1, no. 14. 11 Johnston, “Florence Carlyle,” 5. 12 “Memory of Florence Carlyle Honored,” (1936), n.p.; Kritzwiser, “At Home with Florence Carlyle”; Taylor, “Her Own Country”; Macbeth, “Canadian Women in the Arts,” 25. 13 Johnston, “Florence Carlyle,” 5; “Mrs. W. Carlyle, Passing of a Woman,” 1913. 14 “Miss Florence Carlyle,” The Gentlewoman. 15 Deacon, “Representative Women: Florence Carlyle.” 16 Bell, “Women and Art in Canada,” 7. 17 Osborne calendar title-leaf, Always Room for One More. 18 Deacon, “Representative Women.” See also “Miss Florence Carlyle,” Gentlewoman. 19 “Memory of Florence Carlyle Honored.”

238 notes to pages 13–18 20 Hume, “Florence Carlyle, a.r.c.a.,” n.p. See also Poole, Art of London, 69; “Centennial Art Exhibition Features City Native.” 21 Judson was born in Manchester, England, in 1842. His family moved to New York City where he studied art under his father, an artist and house painter. The family then settled in Thamesville, Ont., near London. He saw action with the Union Army in the American Civil War, after which he moved to London, Ont. (Poole, Art of London, 33). 22 Judson’s studio in London was in Spettigue Hall on the southwest corner of Dundas and Clarence Streets (Baker, Paul Peel, 12). 23 Judson likely taught in Woodstock between 1873 and 1878. From 1872 to 1873 he was living in New York City and returned to London in 1873 until July 1878 when he left for two years’ study in Paris (ibid., 12, 14). 24 Judson instructed Peel from 1875 to 1877 (ibid., 12). In 1890 Judson moved to Los Angeles where he became a professor and founder of the Faculty of Fine Art at the University of Southern California. See Florence N. Levy, American Art Annual, vol. 3, 228–9; Poole, Art of London, 36. 25 Nunn, Victorian Women Artists, 34. 26 Collins and Sandell, Women, Art, and Education, 49. 27 Johnston, McMaster University, vol. 1, 14; Rawlyk, Canadian Baptists, 33. 28 Rawlyk, Canadian Baptists, 31, 21. 29 Ibid., 21. In later years the Canadian Literary Institute, the Canadian Baptist College in Montreal, the Toronto Baptist College, and Moulton College of Toronto would come together to form the present-day McMaster University in Hamilton, Ont. (Johnston, McMaster, vol. 1, 32). 30 Ibid., 31. 31 “Memory of Florence Carlyle Honored.” 32 Taylor, Nineteenth Century Theories of Art, 275. 33 Poole, Art of London, 69. 34 Joe Boyle Repatriation Committee, “Who Was Joe Boyle?,” pamphlet, Woodstock, Ont., n.d., Artist Files, wag. 35 This house still stands today, although much changed, at 146 Wilson Street (“Memory of Florence Carlyle Honored”). 36 Deacon, “Representative Women.” 37 Helene Youmans Key, “Reminiscences,” unpublished typescript, ca. 1979, Artist Files, wag, 1. 38 Ibid., 7. 39 Ibid. 40 Ibid., 1. 41 Taylor, “Her Own Country.” 42 “Memory of Florence Carlyle Honored”; Carlyle Millard to Blanche Carlyle, 6 September 1946, Artist Files, wag. 43 Morgan, Canadian Men and Women of the Time (1898), 157. 44 Macbeth, “Canadian Women.” 45 Johnston, McMaster, vol. 1, 16.

notes to pages 20–3 239 chapter two 1 2 3 4 5

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

15 16

17 18 19

20 21

Key, “Reminiscences,” 1; see also description in Taylor, “Her Own Country.” Mrs Ellis, Family Monitor and Domestic Guide, quoted in Pollock, Mary Cassatt, 7. Cooper, Magnificent Entertainments, 39–65; Cowan, Canada’s Governors-General, 29. Fidelis [Agnes Machar], 665; quoted in Tippett, By a Lady, 30. Queen Victoria purchased works from many women artists including Elizabeth Southerden Thompson, Lady Butler (1846–1933), Emily Mary Osborn (b. 1834, fl. 1851– after 1909), Emma Gaggiotti Richards (1825–1912), Anna Mary Severn (Newton) (1832–1886), Henrietta Mary Ada Ward (1832–1924), and Alice Mary Havers (Morgan) (1850–1890). In 1879 she appointed Helen Angell (1847–1884) as Flower Painter in Ordinary. See Deborah Cherry, Painting Women, 103. Tippett, By a Lady, 12, 16. “Fine Art, the Exhibition of the Ontario Society of Artists,” 681; Weaver, “Pioneer Canadian Women 5: Mrs. Charlotte M. Schreiber, Painter,” 32–6. Key, “Reminiscences,” 23. Ibid., 27. “Miss Florence Carlyle,” The Gentlewoman. See advertisements for the Toronto Industrial Exhibition in the Toronto Globe, 12 September 1883. Attendance list, 1879–1993, cne Archives, Toronto. Advertisements for tie, Toronto Globe, 12 September 1883, 2. See also “Industrial Exhibition Programme,” 1883, cne Archives. Princess Louise was a patroness of several Canadian societies including the Ladies’ Educational Association, the Woman’s Protective Immigration Society, the Society of Decorative Art, and the Art Association, all located in Montreal. See Morgan, Types of Canadian Women, 1. Ford, “The Royal Canadian Academy of Arts,” 45. John Beverley Robinson served as lieutenant governor of Ontario from 1880 to 1887. Sir Oliver Mowat served as attorney general and then premier of Ontario from 1872 to 1896. See Bayer, The Ontario Collection, 373–4; “Canada’s Great Fair, Exhibition Formally Opened Yesterday,” 9. “Canada’s Great Fair Successful, as Have Been the Efforts.” “During the Princess’ Inspection.” “Canada’s Great Fair, Exhibition Formally Opened,” 4. An 1895 article in a London periodical notes that Carlyle and one of her sisters exhibited work in this exhibition but does not name the sister (“Miss Florence Carlyle,” The Gentlewoman). “Canada’s Great Fair.” The Gentlewoman, the English periodical that interviewed Carlyle in 1895, discussed the artist’s experience of the 1883 show. Two of the paintings entered in the exhibition by the Carlyle sisters are described in this article as “ebony panels, one decorated with roses, the other with white lilies.” The painting of white water-lilies on ebonized wood was by Florence, and the painting of roses was presumably by her sister. See also “H.R.H. Princess Louise and Canadian Artists,” unidentified newspaper clipping, September 1883, Artist Files, ml; Johnston, Florence Carlyle, 5.

240 notes to pages 24–7 22 “H.R.H. Princess Louise and Canadian Artists,” 7. See also the Mail’s “During the Princess’ Inspection.” 23 “Honor to Woodstock.” 24 “Canada’s Great Fair, Exhibition Formally,” 4. 25 Toronto Exhibition Prize List (1883), 64–7, cne Archives, Toronto. 26 For more on the life and career of Charlotte Mount Brock Schreiber, see Harper, Early Painters and Engravers in Canada, 281–2. See also Weaver, “Pioneer Canadian Women,” 32–5. 27 Cherry, in Painting Women, 25, is quoting from the British Art Journal (1868). 28 Ibid. 29 Macbeth, “Canadian Women,” 23–4. 30 “The Lookout,” clipping, Woodstock Sentinel-Review, Artist Files, wag. Hume worked as the editor of Rod and Gun in Canada. See Hume, “Florence Carlyle, arca.” 31 Cherry, Painting Women, 102–4. 32 “The Lookout.” This article describes the fortieth anniversary of the Saturday Reading Club in 1925. 33 Morgan, Canadian Men and Women, 157. 34 Gall, “Researcher Pieces Together Florence Carlyle Story”; see also Rothwell, “City to Honour Its Famous Artist.” 35 The Toronto City Directory for 1887, 360, lists James Carlyle, md, as living at 153 Gerrard East. 36 This was a considerable achievement for Canadian women since in Great Britain there were fewer choices for women leaving school. Although Cambridge, London, Oxford, and some other universities admitted women to examinations, they did not grant them degrees; for example, Oxford did not grant degrees to women until 1920. 37 Rembrandt, “Art and Artists,” Saturday Night 1 (3 December 1887): 10. 38 The Normal School was the institution for teacher training in the province and was part of the Education Department complex in St James Square in Toronto. This area was bounded by Gould, Victoria, Gerrard, and Church Streets. See Ontario College of Art, 100Years, 21n6; Art Gallery of Ontario, Art Gallery of Ontario: Selected Works, introduction. 39 “‘Objects of Taste’ Ryerson’s Collection,” chapt. 1 in Bayer, Ontario Collection; ago Selected Works, 13. 40 Bayer, Ontario Collection, 43. 41 Harper, Painting in Canada, 186. 42 The school was created around 1884 and offered sketching, modelling in clay, and antique classes to women. See “About Town,” Toronto Globe, 16 December 1887. 43 Ibid.; McLeod, In Good Hands, 37, 74. 44 There were four schools of art in Ontario during the 1880s, and each was represented at the Colonial and Indian Exhibition in London, England, in 1886. The schools were Toronto’s Ontario Society of Artists School of Art (renamed the Toronto Art School in 1886), the Ottawa Art School, the London School of Art, and the Kingston Art School. See Colonial and Indian Exhibition, Official Catalogue of the Canadian Section, 302–3; Murray, Ontario Society of Artists: 100 Years, 1872–1972, 5–10; Poole, Art of London, 30. 45 Bayer, The Ontario Collection, 48.

notes to pages 27–32 241 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55

56

57

58 59 60 61 62

63 64 65 66

67

68 69 70

Ontario College of Art, 100 Years: Evolution of the Ontario College of Art, 12. Colonial and Indian Exhibition, 302. “Florence Carlyle, arca,” Selkirk Weekly Record, 2 December 1926. “‘Objects of Taste’ Ryerson’s Collection,” 13. Bayer, Ontario Collection, 34, and “Photograph of a drawing class at the School of Art, using plaster casts acquired by Dr. Egerton Ryerson,” 48. Bayer, Ontario Collection, 31, 37. Harper, Early Painters, 207; Tippett, By a Lady, 205, n. 20. Advertisement in “Town Local,” Woodstock Daily Sentinel-Review, 14 January 1888. Collins and Sandell, Women, Art, and Education, 48. Laura Muntz taught in Hamilton, Ont., from about 1883 to 1887 and again in 1888 after returning from art studies in St John’s Wood, London, England. See Fallis, “Laura Muntz Lyall, arca, 1860–1930.” The studio was in the residence of William Scarff. Several of Carlyle’s former students were still living in 1936 and were present at a tribute to the artist. See “Memory of Florence Carlyle Honoured,” Woodstock Daily Sentinel-Review, 7 February 1936. Cecile Bernette Davis (1866–1935) studied with Carlyle during the 1880s; she married in 1890. Davis was the stepdaughter of Carlyle’s aunt, Sophia Youmans Davis (Martha Millard Dasselaar to author, 5 August 1998). Advertisement, E.N. Hunt artist supply store, 31 August 1888, London Free Press. Advertisement, “Portrait Studio-Art Classes,” London Advertiser, 20 October 1887. Rechnitzer, “Nations Acclaim London Artists.” William Milroy was active from 1887 to 1897. See “Artists,” London Advertiser (advertisement section), 20 October 1887; Harper, Early Painters, 166, 226. Paul Peel returned to his parents’ home on 9 July 1883. He left for France in December 1883, accompanied by his sister Mildred, who was continuing her art studies. See Baker, Paul Peel, 36, 38. Rechnitzer, “Nations.” Information based on interview of Marjorie Skeoch and Brenda Westob in Hilderley’s “Carlyle Painting Finds a New Home,” Woodstock Daily Sentinel-Review, 2 March 1992. Betterton, “How Do Women Look? The Female Nude in the Work of Suzanne Valadon,” 230. The couple married in November 1891. The painting has remained in Helen Spiers’s family and was eventually given to Helen’s sister, Margaret Morgan, passing through female descendants to the present-day collection of a niece. See Hilderley, “Carlyle Painting Finds a New Home,” Woodstock Sentinel-Review; Morgan, entry for “Carlyle, William Arthur,” in The Canadian Men and Women of the Time (1912), 200. Nunn, Victorian Women Artists, 56. Claxton was a figure painter and illustrator, Howitt a figure painter, and Severn (Newton) a portraitist (Cherry, Painting Women, 217, 218, 220). Harriet Hosmer in a letter of 1854, quoted by Carr, Harriet Hosmer (1913), and Nunn, Victorian Women Artists, 57, 67, and note 77. Quoted in a letter from her niece, Elizabeth Muntz, to Marie Douglas, 14 July 1964, in Fallis, “Laura Muntz.” See Tuele, Sophia Theresa Pemberton, 53.

242 notes to pages 32–5 71 72 73 74

75 76 77 78 79

80

81 82 83 84 85 86

87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94

Berry, Vistas of Promise, 56. “Art and Artists,” Saturday Night, 1 (4 February 1888): 3; Baker, Paul Peel, 161. Harper, Early Painters, 167; Sisler, Passionate Spirits, 44. McMann, Montreal Museum of Fine Arts, Formerly Art Association of Montreal, Spring Exhibitions, 297; McMann, The Royal Canadian Academy/Académie royale des arts du Canada: Exhibitions and Members, 319. Key, “Reminiscences,” 7. Johnston, Florence Carlyle, 5. Cherry, Painting Women, 26. Jenkins’ Art Gallery, A Memorial Exhibition of the Late Florence Carlyle, arca, 14; Trestain, “Art Study in Paris Hard Work, Wrote Florence Carlyle.” Her practice of boarding a student continued for many years until 1912 or 1913. At this time Frank Carson from London was asked by the principal of the college to board at the Carlyle home because of the crowded facilities in the college residence (Lilian Telfer to Florence Johnston, 24 February 1967, wag artist files). Will Carlyle Jr. had graduated with a bachelor of science degree in 1887 and continued his studies at McGill University, graduating with a master’s degree in 1891 or 1892. See Morgan, Canadian Men and Women (1898), 157; (1912), 200. Farr and Luckyj, From Women’s Eyes, 24, 28–9; Harper, Painting in Canada, 420–1; Harper, Early Painters, 160, 167; “Painters and the Public,” Toronto Mail and Empire. Grant, “Studio and Gallery,” Saturday Night (26 May 1900): n.p.; Harper, Early Painters, 203. Sydney Strickland Tully studied at the osa/Toronto Art School in the early 1880s and subsequently at the Slade (1884–86) and in Paris (1886–88). See Harper, Early Painters, 313. Farr and Luckyj, From Women’s Eyes, 24, 28–9; Harper, Painting in Canada, 420–1; Harper, Early Painters, 160, 167, 207; “Painters and the Public.” Luckyj, Helen McNicoll, 23–4. McLeod, In Good Hands, 26, 37; Tovell, A New Class of Art, 158n31; Farr and Luckyj, From Women’s Eyes, 24, 29; MacTavish, The Fine Arts, 42. See also Caroline Fox, Stanhope Forbes and the Newlyn School. McLeod, In Good Hands, 31, 90. See also Allaire, “Les Canadiens au salon officiel de Paris,” 146. “Cunard Line,” advertisement, London Advertiser, 2 December 1889. “Paul Peel at the Top,” London Advertiser, 4 June 1890. “London,” Toronto Mail, 16 July 1890. “London and Precincts,” London Advertiser, 13 June 1890. Johnston, “Florence Carlyle.” Baker, Paul Peel, 53–4. One source, written about 1984 by Florence Carlyle Johnston, Carlyle’s niece, states that Will “graduated …obtained an excellent position …he immediately decreed that Florence was to go to Paris,” and contributed the money in 1890 for her trip. While he undoubtedly contributed funding to the artist during her years abroad, it is doubtful that he financed her initial travel. William was short of funds until 1891 when he began working as a “special lecturer in mining” at McGill University. In the same year he married, and it was not until 1892 that he graduated with a master’s degree in education and was

notes to pages 35–41 243

95 96 97 98

99

100

appointed a professor of mining and engineering. See Johnston, “Florence Carlyle”; Morgan, Canadian Men and Women (1898), 157; (1912), 201. Macbeth, “Canadian Women,” 24. Johnston, “Florence Carlyle,” 5. Baker, Paul Peel, 54; “London and Environs,” London Advertiser, 1 November 1890. The party could have booked their tickets on the ship before they left London. An advertisement appearing in the London Advertiser for 1 November 1890 described the ship’s route and sailing dates and gave the ticket agent’s office location as 416 Richmond Street. See also Johnston, “Florence Carlyle,” 6. “Vagrant” means, in this case, to wander or to rove, without a settled home. The painting Vagrant Days, by Carlyle, location unknown, was exhibited at the memorial exhibition of her work in 1925 (Jenkins,’ Memorial Exhibition, no. 23). Cherry notes that from the 1850s onwards women commonly travelled or studied in Europe, often enjoying the companionship of women friends or kin and, in some cases, even travelled unchaperoned. By 1890, when Carlyle arrived in Europe, this latter independence was becoming more common (Cherry, Painting Women, 48–9).

chapter three 1 Phrase used in the Canadian journal Ladies’ Pictorial Weekly in June 1892 to describe painter Mary Bell Eastlake’s studies in Paris. See “Prominent Women,” 390. 2 “Paintings by a Canadian Artist.” 3 Holland, “Lady Art Students’ Life,” 226. 4 The American Girls’ Club was located at 4 rue de Chevreuse, in Paris, near the Luxembourg Gardens. See Dennison, “The American Girls,” 32–4; Aylward, “American Girls’ Art Club,” 598. 5 See, for example, Stapley, “Is Paris Wise for the American Girl?,” 16, 54; Ward, “Women Art Students in Paris,” 748; Sherwood, “American Girls in Europe,” 681–9. 6 Holland, “Lady Art Students’ Life,” 226. 7 Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, 1 December 1921, Artist Correspondence Files, wag. 8 Wein, “Parisian Training,” 41. 9 Anderson, “Gendered Spaces, 31–2; Wistow, Canadians in Paris, 4; Miller, George Reid, 52–5. 10 “Art and Artists, ” 4 February 1888, 3; Pool, Art of London, 66. 11 Wistow, Canadians in Paris, 4; Allaire, “Les Canadiens au salon,” 145–9. 12 “Canadian Artists in Paris,” 22. 13 The French term for an artist’s workshop or studio, atelier, acquired a new meaning in the nineteenth century when informal academies called ateliers libres became popular centres for art instruction. See Cherry, Painting Women, 63. 14 Wolff, “Invisible Flâneuse,” 40. 15 Ibid., 42. 16 Nieriker, Studying Art Abroad. 17 Deacon, “Representative Women,” 4. 18 “Miss Florence Carlyle,” Gentlewoman. 19 Deacon, “Representative Women,” 4.

244 notes to pages 42–6 20 Wein, “Parisian Training,” 42. 21 Fehrer, “New Light,” 212; Milner, Studios of Paris, 17. 22 Although Maria Tippett has claimed that by 1890 women had a wide range of classes in the atelier system to choose from, the reality was not as simple nor as positive (By a Lady, 45). 23 Cherry, Painting Women, 53–4. 24 Charlesworth, “Schools and Colleges,” n.p. 25 Allaire, “Canadiens au salon,” 146; Baker, Paul Peel, 46. 26 “Art and Artists,” 4 February 1888, 3; Poole, Art of London, 66. 27 Deacon, “Representative Women,” 4. 28 Milner, Studios of Paris, 12; Fehrer, “New Light,” 208. 29 See chapter 2 in Wissman’s Bouguereau, 19–100 30 Deacon, “Representative Women,” 4. 31 Ibid. 32 Ibid. 33 Ibid., 4; see also Falk, “European Teachers,” xxxiv. 34 Deacon, “Representative Women,” 4. 35 Falk, “European Teachers,” xxxiv. 36 Stranahan, History, 266; Deacon, “Representative Women,” 4. 37 In 1894 the Académie Delecluse was named as one of the favourite schools of American women studying art in Paris. See Dennison, “American Girls,” 33; Aylward, “American Girls’ Art Club,” 598; “Art Studies in Paris.” 38 Florence Johnston (niece of Florence Carlyle), interview with author, August 1993. See also Macbeth, “Canadian Women,” 24. 39 La jeunesse (1891) depicts two children feeding birds at a pool’s edge, illustrated in Baker, Paul Peel, 56 (fig. 19). 40 William E. Atkinson was studying with Bouguereau and B. Perrier around 1891. Williamson exhibited in the Salon in 1891 and studied in Paris until 1892. See Allaire, “Canadiens au salon,” 146; Wistow, Canadians in Paris, 48; Baker, Paul Peel, 45. 41 Allaire, “Canadiens au salon,” 146–7. 42 Hoeber, “Summer,” 74. 43 Baker, Paul Peel, 78. 44 Johnston, “Florence Carlyle,” 8. 45 Paysage, a rural scene or landscape. See Blackburn, “Pont-Aven,” 6. 46 Ibid. 47 Beaux, Background, 144–5. 48 Mathews, Mary Cassatt, 43. 49 Peel’s Adoration, Brittany (1885) and The Spinner (1881) reveal the painter’s often idealized and carefully posed version of life in the country. See Baker, Paul Peel, 31, and figs. 12 and 30. 50 Carlyle, “Student Life in Paris.” Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–82) was an American philosopher, essayist, and poet. 51 The painting has remained in the family, passing by succession from Helen M. Spier Carlyle to her sister, Margaret Morgan, and her descendants through the female line (Marjorie Skeoch to author, 6 August 1998).

notes to pages 46–50 245 52 Morgan, Canadian Men and Women (1898), 157, and (1912), 200. See also Johnston, “Florence Carlyle,” 6. 53 Peel sold After the Bath to the Hungarian government for eight thousand francs in February 1891 (Baker, Paul Peel, 56; “Miss Florence Carlyle,” Gentlewoman). 54 Baker, Paul Peel, 56. 55 Adler, “The Suburban,” 3. 56 McMann, Montreal Museum, 59. 57 Wistow, Canadians in Paris, 9. 58 Turner, Montreal Museum, introduction; Pepall, Building, 19; Meadowcroft, Painting Friends, 38. 59 “Art Association,” 3; “Spring Exhibition,” 5. 60 McMann, Montreal Museum, 59; “Art Association,” 3. 61 Falk, “European Teachers,” xxxiii. 62 Luckyj, Helen McNicoll, 77. 63 Fehrer, “New Light,” 208. 64 Teachers at the Académie Julian during the last quarter of the nineteenth century included Benjamin Constant (1845–1902), Louis-Henri Bouchard, Gustave Boulanger (1824–1888), Gabriel Ferrier (1847–1914), Francois Flameng (1856–1923), Jean-Paul Laurens (1838–1921), Francois Schommer, Edouard Toudouze, Charles Raoul Verlet (1857–1923), and Carlyle’s instructors Rodolphe Julian, William Adolphe Bouguereau, Jules Lefebvre, and Tony Robert-Fleury. See Fehrer, “New Light,” 208–9; Milner, Studios of Paris, 10; Falk, “European Teachers,” xxxiii; Allaire, “Canadians au Salon,” 147; “Spring Exhibition Opened,” 1. 65 Fehrer, “New Light,” 212. 66 Wein, “Parisian Training,” 42; Cherry, Painting Women, 63. 67 Alcott married M. Niericker and died of complications following childbirth. See Fehrer, “New Light,” 215n9; Niericker, Studying Art Abroad. 68 Wein, “Parisian Training,” 42. 69 Carlyle, “Student Life,” n.p. 70 Holland, “Lady Art Students,’” 226. 71 Carlyle, “Student Life,” n.p. 72 The atelier at 31 rue du Dragon was established as the principal atelier in 1890 (Fehrer, “New Light,” 208). 73 Carlyle, “Student Life,” n.p. 74 Milner, Studios of Paris, 12. 75 Bashkirtseff, Journal, 334–5; Wein, “Parisian Training,” 43. 76 It was not until 1893 that women studying at Britain’s Royal Academy were finally permitted to draw from the nude male model. See Annual Report of the Royal Academy, London, England, 1894, as quoted in Nochlin, Women Artists, 52. 77 Chilvers and Osborne, s.v., “academy figure.” 78 Bashkirtseff, Journal, 334–5. 79 Milner, Studios of Paris, 12 80 Carlyle, “Student Life,” n.p. 81 Albert Rhodes, “Views Abroad,” The Galaxy 16 (1873): 13, as quoted in Wein, “Parisian Training,” 42. Rhodes is quoting an anonymous American woman artist studying at Julian’s.

246 notes to pages 50–7 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93

94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113

114 115 116

117

Garb, Sisters of the Brush, 82. Beaux, Background with Figures, 124. Bashkirtseff, Journal, 343. Carlyle, “Student Life,” n.p. Nobili, “Academie Julian,” 748. Carlyle, “Student Life,” n.p. Bashkirtseff, Journal, 406–7. Morgan, Canadian Men and Women (1898), 156. Beaux, Background, 118. Bashkirtseff, Journal, 410, 412. Mathews, Mary Cassatt, 34. Gardner and Bouguereau announced their engagement in 1879 while Bouguereau was her teacher. They did not marry until after the death of Bouguereau’s mother in 1896. See Heller and Heller, North American Women, 201; Mathews, Mary Cassatt, 34. Baker, Paul Peel, 58. Deacon, “Representative Women,” 4. “Spring Exhibition Opened,” 1. Johnston, “Florence Carlyle,” 7. Deacon, “Representative Women,” 4. Forster, Studio Light, 30. “Spring Exhibition Opened,” 1. Fox, Art Student’s, 153–7. Johnston, “Florence Carlyle,” 9, quoting from Carlyle’s memoirs. Ibid. Milner, Studios of Paris, 46–9. Jean-Leon Gerome (1824–1904), French painter and sculptor. See Milner, Studios of Paris, 48. Allaire, “Canadiens au salon,” 145–8. Effigy, “About Town,” 15. Fowler, Embroidered Tent, 217; Cowan, Canada’s Governors-General, 22–3, 29. Cowan, Canada’s Governors-General, 29; Tippett, By a Lady, 21. Effigy, “About Town,” 15. “Spring Exhibition Opened,” 1; Effigy, “About Town,” 15. “Canada’s Grand,” 8. Falk, Who Was Who, xxxvi. Société des Artistes Français, Explication des ouvrages, 34. Une dame hollandaise was listed as number 340. The annual Salon was held at the Palais de l’Industrie until the building was destroyed in 1897; beginning in 1900 with the Universal Exposition the Salon was held at the new Grand Palais. Vernissage is from the French word vernisse, for varnish. See Bashkirtseff, Journal, 248; Milner, Studios of Paris, 52, 53. “Nos artistes à Paris, Mlle. F. Carlyle,” n.p. See Falk, National Academy of Design, 119. Little is known of Carlyle’s painting Notre bon camarade other than it depicted a woman and was exhibited in New York City at the National Academy of Design Art Exhibition in 1906. It remains unlocated. “Spring Exhibition Opened,” 1.

notes to pages 57–60 247 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125

126 127

128 129 130 131 132

133 134 135 136 137 138

Sisler, Passionate Spirits, 44; Harper, Early Painters, 160, 167. Harper, Early Painters, 81. Stacey, “Sensations,” 59–60; Foss and Anderson, Quiet Harmony, 74. Redford, “Art,” 130; World’s Columbian Exposition 1893 Catalogue, 81–4. Johnston, “Florence Carlyle,” 9. Baker, Paul Peel, 28. Johnston, “Florence Carlyle,” 9. Johnston is quoting from a manuscript by Florence Carlyle in a private collection. “Gamp” is a colloquial word referring to a large, untidy umbrella. There is contradictory evidence concerning the model for the painting La vieille Victorine. One article published in Canada refers to the painting as Mère Adele and as “depicting the model who posed for Millet’s Angelus.” See “Art,” 6 March 1897, 9. Carlyle may also have painted her host, Mère Adele, since an article written in 1898 refers to the model by a different name but notes “one of …[Carlyle’s] studies is a head of Mère Marier, who was the model that posed for Millet in his world-famed “Angelus.” See “Painters and the Public,” 14. The most reliable source is taken from Carlyle’s memoirs and follows in the main text. Likely this story was confused when the painting was exhibited in Canada and instead of Carlyle’s model being described as Victorine, the friend of Millet’s model, accounts simplified the story and listed her as the more famous model of Millet (Johnston, “Florence Carlyle,” 9). “Woodstock Artist,” 8. Portrait and La vieille Victorine were listed as numbers 373 and 374 respectively. Carlyle’s teachers were listed as Robert-Fleury, Lefebvre, and Bouguereau. See Société des Artistes Français, Catalogue illustre, n.p.; Morgan Canadian Men and Women, (1898), 156–7. Fabre, “Nos artistes à Paris, M F. Carlyle,” n.p. Falk, Who Was Who, xxxiv; Fabre, “Nos artistes à Paris, M F. Carlyle,” n.p. Leon Bonnat (1838–1922) was a French painter who worked mostly in portraiture after 1870. “Miss Florence Carlyle,” Gentlewoman; “Painters and the Public,” 14. Falk, Who Was Who, 526; “Memorial Exhibition Catalogue, Julius Rolshoven.” Rolshoven taught life classes in Paris between 1890 and 1895. Anna Mary Howitt’s novella Sisters in Art, serialized in 1852 in the Illustrated Exhibitor and Magazine of Art, tells the story of three women artists who live together as “beloved sisters in friendship and art” and open an art academy for women. See Cherry, Painting Women, 48, 233. Dinah Muloch Craik, “A Paris Atelier,” Good Words (1886), 313, as quoted in Cherry, Painting Women, 49. Holland, “Lady Art Students,” 226–7. Kerr, “The Artist,” 29. Ibid, 29. Carlyle, “Student Life,” n.p. “Difference,” as feminist art historian Griselda Pollock observes, signifies division between men and women that “resulted in a hierarchy in which those placed within the social category of the female gender, or assigned the psycho-linguistic position as feminine, are negatively valued relative to the masculine or ‘men’” (Pollock, Differencing the Canon, 29).

248 notes to pages 61–3 139 Cherry, Painting Women, 102. 140 Smith-Rosenberg, “The Female World of Love and Ritual: Relations between Women in Nineteenth-Century America,” 53. 141 Duncan was born in Brantford, Ont., and was the first woman to work full time for the Toronto Globe. She went on to work for other newspapers and periodicals in Canada and the Washington Post in the United States before publishing her first work of fiction, A Social Departure (1890). 142 Deborah Cherry, Beyond the Frame, 82. 143 Ibid., 82–3. 144 In February 1867 Cassatt and Haldeman travelled to Courances near the Fontainebleau Forest. In April they stayed in Ecouen, studying with resident artists in the artists’ colony there (Mathews, Mary Cassatt, 43–6). 145 Ibid, 58–9. 146 Ibid. 147 Cherry, Beyond the Frame, 10–11. 148 Mathews, Mary Cassatt, 18. 149 Mary Hiester Reid’s father died a few months after she was born, and her mother died while the artist was a “young girl.” She studied in Philadelphia at the School of Design for Women and then from 1883 to 1885 at the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts. See McMurchy, “Representative Women: Mrs. G.A. Reid, n.p.; C.W. Jefferys, “The Art of Mary Hiester Reid,” 21, 23. 150 Luckyj, Helen McNicoll, 19. 151 Grant, “Studio and Gallery,” 25 March 1899, 9. 152 Mulley, “Women and Children,” 87–90. 153 Allaire, “Les Canadiens au salon,” 146; McLeod, In Good Hands, 31; Harper, Early Painters, 164. Returning to Montreal in 1892, Houghton obtained a teaching position at the revamped Victoria School of Art where Mary Phillips and Harriette J. MacDonnell were co-principals. 154 McLeod writes that Holden attended the first meeting in April 1894 of twenty-one women working to form the Montreal branch of the Women’s Art Association of Canada (In Good Hands, 90). 155 Bell later married Charles Eastlake and exhibited under the name of Eastlake. See “Prominent Women, No. 13, Miss Bell,” 390; Art Association of Montreal, Catalogue, Mrs. Eastlake. 156 Luckyj, Helen McNicoll, 42. 157 Mrs Dean-Drummond (1862–1949) is mentioned in a letter from Vivian Cowan (née Tully), Sydney Tully’s niece, to Margaret Fallis, ca. 1985 (Fallis, “Sydney Strickland Tully,” n. 28). 158 Grant, “Studio,” 23 June 1900, 9. 159 Falk, National Academy of Design, 119, 371. 160 Sisler, Passionate Spirits, 44; Harper, Early Painters, 160, 167. As previously mentioned, in 1893 Holden won a gold medal at the Chicago World’s Fair. 161 Allaire, “Canadiens au salon,” 148; McLeod, In Good Hands, 90; Harper, Early Painters, 167; Dignam, “Art,” 223. Holden may have travelled between Paris and Montreal several times between 1890 and 1895. In April 1894 she was in Montreal, and in spring 1895 she exhibited a painting at the Salon and was resident in Paris.

notes to pages 63–7 249 162 Levy, American Art Annual, 1900–1901, 53. See also “Social and Personal,” 3; “Year’s Harvest,” 32. 163 Tovell, New Class of Art, 43–4, 68; see also “Royal Canadian Academy Purchases.” In her study of the history of the artist’s print in Canadian art, Tovell observes that women readily found acceptance and recognition in the printmaking movement and that “ladyetchers” encountered fewer obstacles than women artists engaged in painting and sculpture. Ravenshaw exhibited as Ravenshaw Patterson after her marriage. Andrew Dickson Patterson came from a prominent Toronto family. His father was Justice Christopher Patterson of the Supreme Court of Canada. 164 Cherry, Beyond the Frame, 10. 165 Information given to author in interview with Florence Johnston, niece of Florence Carlyle, August 1993, Woodstock, Ont. 166 Falk, “European Teachers,” xxxiii. 167 Kerr, “The Artist,” 29; see also Farr and Luckyj, From Women’s Eyes, 28. 168 Grant, “Studio and Gallery,” 26 May 1900; Mulley, “Women and Children,” 89. Hawley continued teaching intermittently at the Colarossi, where Muntz visited her in the summer of 1900. 169 Higonnet, Berthe Morisot’s Images, 64–5. These gardens were a socially suitable outdoor setting for middle- and upper-class women to walk. Higonnet has observed that the Bois was a favourite place for French painter Berthe Morisot to go with her daughter to relax and stroll or to paint. 170 Carlyle, “Student Life.” 171 It was exhibited as number 24. See McMann, Montreal Museum, 59. 172 For a list of those attending the opening night, see “Spring Exhibition Opened,” 1. See also Morgan, Canadian Men and Women (1898), 157; (1912), 200. 173 “The Spring Exhibition Opened,” 1. 174 rca Exhibition Catalogue 1895, 8, ngc Library. 175 “Miss Florence Carlyle,” Morgan, Canadian Men and Women (1898), 156–7. 176 Victorine was exhibited in March and April 1895 at the aam, Montreal, and the rca, Toronto, respectively, and in March and May 1897 was exhibited as Mère Adele in the waac exhibitions in Toronto and Saint John, New Brunswick, respectively. (McMann, Montreal Museum 59; rca Exhibition Catalogue 1895, 8; waac Exhibition Catalogue 1897.) 177 McLeod, In Good Hands, 90. 178 “Royal Canadian Academy,” 9. 179 Sarah Baldwin Holden (later Hunter) was an associate of the rca from 1895 to 1904, and Harriet Mary Ford was an associate from 1895 to 1899. See rca Minute Books, 1895, mg28, i 26, vol. 17, 96–7, lac; “Art Notes,” 4 May 1895, 9; Sisler, Passionate Spirits, 279–89. 180 American figure painter Cecelia Beaux refers to Lhermitte in her autobiography Background with Figures, 125. See also Morgan, Canadian Men and Women (1898), 157; Shackelford, Monet, Renoir, 142, 197. 181 Morgan, Canadian Men and Women (1898), 157; Johnston, “Florence Carlyle,” 9. 182 Charlesworth, “Schools and Colleges.” 183 Florence Carlyle Johnston, in interview with the author, Woodstock, Ont., August 1993. 184 Luckyj, Helen McNicoll, 77n26; Tippett, By a Lady, 45.

250 notes to pages 67–72 185 Whistler moved to Chelsea in 1863. His painting of Thomas Carlyle was bought by the Corporation of Glasgow in 1891 for one thousand guineas. See Tedeschi, Songs on Stone, 128; Chilvers and Osborne, Oxford, 535. 186 Graves, Royal Academy, 395. 187 Harper, Early Painters, 313; see also “Painters and the Public,” 14. 188 “Painters and the Public,” 14. 189 “Memorial Exhibition, Julius Rolshoven”; see also Falk, Who Was Who, 526. 190 “Julius Rolshoven, Portraits, 76 Fulham Road, London,” entry in Levy, American Art Annual 1898, 294. 191 The sketches and portrait are in the collection of Carlyle’s Home Museum but are not on display. See MacCausland, “Florence Carlyle.” 192 “Miss Florence Carlyle,” Gentlewoman. 193 “Gentlewoman,” n.p. The nineteenth-century term “spinster,” meaning an unmarried woman, gradually acquired a pejorative meaning and is now seen as obsolescent. 194 “Miss Florence Carlyle, painter, of Carlyle Studios, King’s Road, Chelsea,” exhibited Outpatients, no. 745, in the 1896 Royal Academy Summer Exhibition (Graves, Royal Academy, 395). 195 “Miss Florence Carlyle,” Gentlewoman.

chapter four 1 Brass and Copper is the title of a painting Carlyle exhibited (no. 953) in the 1916 Royal Academy of Arts, Summer Exhibition in London, England (Royal Academy, Royal Academy Exhibitors, 268). 2 Grandma Moses, quoted in “How Do I Paint,” New York Times, 11 May 1947. 3 Lillian, next in age to her sister Florence, married A.A.W. Hastings. See E.J. Carlyle, “The Carlyle Tree,” typescript, artist files, wag; see also, Woodstock City Directory, (1899), 13, lac. 4 “Florence Carlyle, Artist,” Christmas Echo. 5 For more on the ncwc, see, Griffiths, Splendid Vision. 6 “Women and Art: The Conference.”; See also, McLeod, In Good Hands, 92. 7 Downie, Passionate Pen, 221. 8 “Women and Art: The Conference.” 9 Kerr, “The Artist,” 29. 10 Cherry, Beyond the Frame, 10–11. 11 Grant, “Studio and Gallery” (10 December 1898): 15. 12 Butlin, chapter 5, “The Studio Space,” in “Matrix of the Arts,” 170–5. 13 Cherry, Beyond the Frame, 10. 14 Letter from Vivian Tully Cowan, Tully’s niece, to Margaret Fallis, 24 June 1985, in Fallis, “Tully,” note 4. 15 MacDonald, “Strickland Family,” 6. 16 Julia Smith, quoted in a letter of 1849 in Cherry, Beyond the Frame, 12. 17 Hall, White, Male and Middle Class, 172–202. 18 Cherry, Beyond the Frame, 14.

notes to pages 72–7 251 19 Hume, “Florence Carlyle,” 10. The author of the article, Carlyle’s friend and an editor of Rod and Gun in Canada, was recalling a visit to Englewood that she made at Carlyle’s invitation. 20 rca Exhibition Catalogue (1897), 2, ngc Archives. Sketch, Darning Stockings, exhibited in the rca exhibition of March 1897 as number 35, remains unlocated. 21 An Interesting Chapter (ca. 1896), later renamed Dreams, and Reminiscences, is described in Doyle, “Studio and Gallery” (22 May 1897): 19. 22 Higonnet, Berthe Morisot’s Images, 73–4. 23 Another later member of the Saturday Reading Club was Byrne Hope Sanders, who became editor of Chatelaine. See Bannerman, Leading Ladies, 232; Hume, “Florence Carlyle,” 10; Morgan, Canadian Men and Women (1898), 696, 983. 24 The Saturday Reading Club existed in Woodstock for more than forty years and, on the occasion of its anniversary ca. 1925, announced that it had “outlived every man’s club formed in the 40 years of its existence” and would soon finally gain a clubhouse (“The Lookout,” n.p.). 25 Carlyle’s painting, The Footpath (no. 22) was exhibited at the artist’s memorial exhibition in 1925 (Jenkins,’ Memorial, 6). 26 Cherry, Painting Women, 96. 27 Merritt, “Letter,” 463–9. 28 Cherry, Painting Women, 96, 102. 29 Angelica Kauffmann and Mary Moser were members of the ra in 1768. In 1922 Annie Robinson Swynnerton was elected an associate, and in 1936 Laura Knight was elected an academician. See Cherry, Painting Women, 65, 236n1; Casteras, Images of Victorian Womanhood, 103. 30 Levy, American Art Annual, 1898, 123. 31 Minutes of General Assembly, Montreal, 8 April 1899, the Amendment to the Constitution of 1897 in regard to Clause 9, Section 10, rca Minute Books 1899, mb28, i 126, vol. 17, 120, lac. 32 Dignam exhibited paintings with the rca in 1892 and 1895. See Sisler, Passionate Spirits, 279–89. 33 Founded in 1909 with a total of fifty-nine members, the Heliconian Club would offer a meeting place for professional women working in music, art, and literary processionals, giving “women in the arts and letters an opportunity to meet socially and intellectually” (Toronto Heliconian Club, Meeting Place). While Carlyle is not known to have been a member, several of her friends and colleagues were, including Laura Muntz, Mary Hiester Reid, Mary Wrinch, and Elizabeth McGillivray Knowles (Heliconian Club Papers; “Heliconian Club,” 25 January 1914). 34 McLeod, In Good Hands, 38. 35 “Art Association,” May 1896; see also, Thompson, “Worthy Place.” 36 “Exhibit,” 27 April 1897. 37 Mavor lectured on 20 January, 1897, and Reverend Father Ryan lectured the following week. See Doyle, “Art” (23 January 1897): 9. 38 Deeks, Historical Sketch, 2–3. 39 Berry, Vistas, 32.

252 notes to pages 77–84 40 Heliconian Club Papers; Heliconian Club, 25 January 1914. 41 Higonnet, Berthe Morisot’s Images, 81. 42 Gwen John to Mrs. Sampson, 1911. See Langdale, Gwen John, 12; see also Thomas, Portraits of Women, 235–6. 43 “Florence Carlyle, Artist,” Christmas Echo. 44 Other Paris-trained Canadian painters whose work was also influenced by Impressionism included Maurice Cullen, Henri Beau, and William Blair Bruce (Lacroix, “Surprise of Today,” 41–53). 45 The tradition retained a following among Canadian artists such as George A. Reid, who reverted to “decorative academic naturalism” after briefly working in a looser Impressionist-influenced style in the 1890s (s.v. “academy,” Chilvers and Osborne, Dictionary; Stacey, “Sensations,” 55–72). 46 Phrase taken from 4 April 1891 article on Canadian-born artist Elizabeth Adela (Armstrong) Stanhope Forbes (1859–1912), “Art and Artists,” 11. 47 The first Union Station was opened about 1893. 48 “Art,” March 1897; see also, “Women Artists’ Work,” March 1897; and, Doyle, “Art,” (6 March 1897): 9. 49 Holden was slightly more established than Carlyle in her bid toward an identity as an artist in Canada. In April 1894, during a visit back to Canada, she had been present in Montreal along with twenty other women when it was decided to form a branch of the waac there. Her career was furthered by her consistent presence at Canadian exhibitions including the rca where she had first exhibited in 1887 and with whom she gained associate status in 1895 (McLeod, In Good Hands, 90; Harper, Early Painters, 167). 50 “Impressions –Woman’s Art Exhibit,” 1. The turn-of-the-century New Woman has been characterized by historian Lucy Bland as an upper or middle-class woman who rejected the conventions of femininity and who wished to live and work on free and equal terms with men (Bland, “Marriage Laid Bare,” 121–46). The term was known by 1897 since it is said to have been invented by Sarah Grand, a feminist novelist who first used the phrase in an article published in 1894 (Bland, “Married Woman,” 143). 51 rca exhibitions were central to an artist’s contact with the professional world of dealers and clients. The hope of financial gain was generally not uppermost in artists’ minds when they submitted work to the annual Academy exhibitions, since sales were minimal. Carlyle and her colleagues were motivated by the prestige of participating in an exhibition known to have the highest standards and a broader base than any other Canadian venue. For a discussion of the history of the rca, see Sisler, Passionate Spirits, chapt. 1 and p. 43. 52 Minutes of the rca General Assembly, 10 March 1897, mg28, i 126, vol. 17, rca Minute Book (Transcripts), lac. 53 Sisler, Passionate Spirits, 279–89. 54 Mary Ella Dignam was nominated to the rca a total of three times, but, she was never elected to membership in the Academy. See McLeod, In Good Hands, 38. 55 Doyle, “Art,” (20 March 1897): 15. 56 For more on the women active in the waac, see MacLeod, In Good Hands. 57 Toronto Industrial Exhibition, Fine Arts Department, catalogue, 1897, 2; Doyle, “Studio and Gallery,” (22 May 1897): 19; “The Spring Exhibition,” (2 April 1897): 5.

notes to pages 84–90 253 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74

75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83

84

85 86 87 88 89 90

“Painters and the Public,” 13–15. National Council of Women, Women of Canada, 217. “Woman’s Art Club, Exhibition ‘y.’” Ibid. Cameron, “China Painting.” Cherry, Painting Women, 83. Cameron, “Beauties.” Ibid. “What Our Women Can Do,” 6. See also Crawford, “Beauties of Nature.” Graves became Carlyle’s life-long dealer and friend. See Florence Carlyle to O.B. Graves (December 1922), Carlyle Correspondence File, ml. Lucius O’Brien to Robert Harris (1879), as quoted in Sisler, Passionate Spirits, 23. Reid, Concise History, 96. Dignam, “Loan Portrait Exhibition”; advertisements, Saturday Night (12 March 1898): 9. Harper, Painting in Canada, 298. Garb, Sisters of the Brush, ix. Dignam, “The Loan Portrait Exhibition”; Harper, Early Painters, 205; Leonard, Woman’s Who’s Who, 351. See, for example, “Artists” section in classified advertisements which listed four portrait artists including William L. Judson, William Milroy, F.M. Bell-Smith, and John Powell Hunt (London Advertiser, 20 October 1887). “Woman’s Art Club, Exhibition at ‘y,’” 17 March 1897; and Poole, Art of London, 70. Lacroix, “Surprise of Today,” 41. “Lecture on Impressionism,” 4. Ibid. Lacroix, “Surprise of Today,” 41–3. Bayer, Ontario Collection, 42–3, 48; and Murray, Ontario Society of Artists, 5. Ontario Society of Artists, 75th Exhibition, 9; see also Murray, Ontario Society of Artists, 6. Weaver, “Pioneer Canadian Women, V, Schreiber, 32–6; Harper, Early Painters, 281. Toronto’s art dealers in 1898 were the Art Metropole, 131 Yonge St., the E. Harris Company, Artists’ Materials, 44 King, Matthews, Gilder and Picture Dealer, 95 Yonge, and Roberts’ Art Gallery, 79 King (Levy, American Art Annual 1898, 535). The osa exhibitions were mounted by the society at the Provincial Art Gallery from 1897 until 1912. See Art Gallery of Ontario, introduction to Art Gallery of Ontario: Selected. Bayer, Ontario Collection, 49; see also Art Gallery of Ontario, introduction to Art Gallery of Ontario: Selected, 13. Ontario Society of Artists Annual Exhibition Catalogue, 1897; Harper, Painting in Canada, 405; Reid, Concise History, 83, 144. Doyle, “Studio and Gallery” (22 May 1897): 19. Ibid. Lowrey, “Into Line with Progress,” 36. Charlesworth’s use of the term “modern” to describe Carlyle’s painting style in the late 1890s is significant in that, as Laurier Lacroix points out, in Canada before 1915 “mod-

254 notes to pages 90–5

91 92 93

94 95 96

97 98 99 100 101

102 103 104

105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115

ern” painting was synonymous with the word “Impressionistm.” See Lacroix, “Surprise of Today,” 42; and, Charlesworth, “Pictures by Florence Carlyle.” Cherry, Painting Women, 72. Hale, “Art of Homer Watson,” 138. While it is rare to find information on Carlyle’s sales, it may be inferred from a study of exhibition prices and known whereabouts of certain works which paintings may have sold at exhibition. For example, The Approach of Dusk, offered for sale at $50 at the 1897 waac exhibition, may have sold, since it does not recur again and did not travel on the remainder of the tour. Similarly, Monday Morning, offered at $30 at the 1898 osa exhibition, is untraceable after this date. “Who Was Joe Boyle?” pamphlet, Joe Boyle Repatriation Committee, Woodstock. Curatorial File, Joe Boyle’s Dog, wag. “Painted China,” 6. Ibid. As a mark of their appreciation the waac ceramic artists decorated a dinner set with historical scenes and flora and fauna of Canada and presented it to the Countess of Aberdeen when she departed from Canada in November 1898. The set was displayed in the great hall of Haddo House in Aberdeenshire, Scotland (Deeks, Historical Sketch, 4–5). Cooper, Magnificent Entertainments, 97–129. Ishbel Aberdeen, in preface of Mavor’s Victorian Era Ball, 1. “Great Vice-Regal Ball,” 8, 9. Tovell, New Class of Art, 43; Cooper, Magnificent Entertainments, 103–4, 116–17. In 1902 Cawthra became the first president of the newly formed Society of Arts and Crafts of Canada. For more on Cawthra, see McLeod, In Good Hands, 107, 129; Gwyn, Private Capital, 346–8; and, “Society of Arts and Crafts, Announcement of First Exhibition,” Society of Arts and Crafts of Canada fonds, pao. Mavor, Victorian Era Ball, 3. Cooper, Magnificent Entertainments, 105, 116–19. Mavor, Victorian Era Ball, 47, 54; see also Morgan, Canadian Men and Women (1912), 78–9; and Cooper, Magnificent Entertainments, 120–2. The London Hunt Club included representatives of the Gartshore and Gibbons families, including George Gibbons, a club founder, and the statesman and manufacturer Adam Beck, later a force in the development and supply of electrical power to Ontario. Morgan, Canadian Men and Women (1912), 200. Royal Canadian Academy of Arts Catalogue 1898, 8, lac. F. McGillivray Knowles married Elizabeth Beach in 1890 (MacDonald, Dictionary of Canadian Artists, vol. 3, 660). “On Dit,” 4 March 1898, 7. Miller, George Reid, 67. Grant, “Royal Canadian Academy Exhibition,” 9. Laura Muntz’s painting The Gleaner (see Toronto Mail and Empire, 12 March 1898) was drawn by pupils of the Central Ontario School of Art. Grant, “Royal Canadian Academy Exhibition,” 9. “Review of the Art Exhibition,” 7. Patterson, “Academy Exhibition,” 514; emphasis mine. “The Art Display.” Mavor, Notes on Appreciation, 13, 14.

notes to pages 96–104 255 116 In ibid., 18, 28, Mavor explains that the article was written partly in response to requests from artists for a record of the exhibition and that some of the artists made pen and ink drawings “to serve as memoranda for purposes of illustration.” Other drawings were lent by the Globe. 117 Murray, Ontario Society of Artists, 5. 118 Forster, “Art and Artists in Ontario,” 252. 119 Ford, “Royal Canadian Academy of Arts,” 47. 120 The Yonge Street Arcade contained a commercial art dealer, the Art Metropole, as well as many artists’ studios. King Street West had the Roberts’ and Sons Art Galleries and J.W.L. Forster’s portrait studio. See Grant, “Studio and Gallery” (10 December 1898): 15. 121 National Council of Women, Women of Canada, vii. See also McLeod, In Good Hands. 122 Carlyle exhibited Sketch of the Artist, at the annual exhibition of the Society of American Artists (no. 23) in New York City in March 1904 (Society of American Artists 26th Annual Exhibition, 25). 123 “Painters and the Public,” 13–15; Deacon, “Representative Women: Florence Carlyle,” 4; Kerr, “The Artist,” 29; Bell, “Women and Art,” 7; Macbeth, “Canadian Women,” 25. 124 “Painters and the Public,” 13–15. 125 Grant, “Studio and Gallery” (16 December 1899); Grant, “Studio and Gallery” (26 May 1900); and MacTavish, “Laura Muntz,” 419–26; Miller, George Reid, 67. 126 Tully, artist information form, Artist’s Clipping File, ngc Archives; Reid, “Biographical Note,” 3–5; Art Gallery of Ontario, Art Gallery of Ontario: Canadian Collection, 468; Harper, Early Painters, 313. 127 Leonard, Woman’s Who’s Who, 351; see also Hare, “Close-Ups, Clara Hagarty,” n.p. 128 The illustration is signed with Reid’s monogram, mhr, in the lower left corner (Toronto Globe, 18 April 1895, women’s edition, section 2, cover and p. 6). 129 Deacon, “Representative Women.”

chapter five 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11

Dell, Love in Greenwich Village, 13–16; Cheney, Millay, 4, 30, 36. Cheney, Millay, 30. Dell, Love in Greenwich Village, 25. Wein, “Parisian Training,” 43. Rubinstein, American Women Artists, 164. Farnsworth, “Artists’ Colony in Macdougal Alley,” 57–69. Loring and Wyle lived at 6 Macdougal Alley between the fall of 1909 and late 1912, when they moved to Toronto (Boyanoski, Loring and Wyle, 8–10). Rechnitzer, “Nations Acclaim,” 1. Morgan, Canadian Men and Women (1912), 200. Fairbairn worked in Toronto and in 1901 had headed the art department of several journals and published reviews of exhibitions and articles on contemporary Canadian art. See Fairbairn, “Decade of Canadian Art,” 159; National Council of Women, Women of Canada, 225. Kerr, “The Artist,” 29.

256 notes to pages 105–10 12 Silcox, Painting Place, 23; “Works by Mr. and Mrs. Knowles,” 3; MacDonald, Dictionary of Canadian Artists 3, 660–1. 13 Rechnitzer interviewed artist J.P. Hunt for material in the article (“Nations Acclaim,” 1). 14 See Key, “Reminiscences.” In an interview with the author in 1993, the artist’s niece, Florence Carlyle Johnston, revealed that Helene Youmans Key (d. 1981) lived with Johnson around 1979 and wrote the manuscript at this time. 15 Ibid. 16 The exhibition ran from 3 to 15 April, with a gala dance held on the 21st (invitation, Printed Ephemera, from the Metropolitan Toronto Library, Baldwin Room, cihm, microfiche series, 38719). See Dignam, “Loan Portrait Exhibition; Deeks, Historical Sketch of the Women’s Art Association of Canada; “Chit, Chat,” 5. 17 Levy, “Private Galleries of Toronto,” 137–8; Tovell, A New Class of Art, 111–12. 18 Women’s Art Association, Loan Portrait Exhibition. 19 Tovell, New Class of Art, 111. 20 Mavor, “Prof. Mavor,” 9. 21 The date of The Garden (1899), now known as The Garden at Englewood, is erroneously given by Carol Lowrey as ca. 1913. Lowrey’s argument that Carlyle abandons her more restrained academic style seen in The Tiff (1902) for the looser, more brilliant palette later in her career is not accurate. The Garden predates The Tiff, and it is clear from the artist’s oeuvre that Carlyle’s particular brand of Academic Impressionism tends to fluctuate on a continuum between, for example, the loose Impressionist-influenced Summer (1903), another treatment of a figure in a garden setting (fig. 3.4), and a more “academic” style as seen in The Tiff (1902). This fluctuation is evident throughout her career and is not a linear development from Realism and the academic treatment toward Impressionism as is suggested by Lowrey (“Into Line with Progress,” 36). 22 Fairbairn, “A Decade of Canadian Art,” 160. 23 Lowrey, Visions of Light, 142. 24 osa Catalogue 1900, 1, pao. 25 Grant, “Royal Canadian Academy of Arts,” 9. 26 An annotated copy of the rca catalogue in the collection of the National Gallery in Ottawa contentiously lists handwritten prices beside each work, with the exception of loans and commissioned portraits not for sale such as number 20, Portrait by Florence Carlyle (rca Catalogue, 1900, ngc Library, 10). 27 “Fine Show of Pictures,” 15. 28 “Florence Carlyle, arca,” n.p. 29 Reid’s Family Prayer (1891) is reproduced in MacTavish’s The Fine Arts in Canada. 30 Key, “Reminiscences,” 5. 31 Ibid., 11. 32 This painting’s location is unknown. See Fitzgibbon, “Driftwood,” 13 April 1901. 33 Carlyle’s election as a member of the osa was announced in the review by Jean Grant (“Ontario Society Exhibition,” 9). The waac’s founder and president, Mary Ella Dignam, continued to be an energetic force for the advancement of women in the profession of art. In 1898 she founded the Women’s International Art Club, and in 1900 she was working to increase women artists’ representation on the executive of the Department of Art at the tie.

notes to pages 110–13 257 34 35 36 37

38

39

40 41

42 43 44 45 46 47

48

49

50 51 52 53

Pepall, “Architect and Muralist,” 44–7. McLeod, In Good Hands, 36–41. Pepall, “Architect and Muralist,” 44–7. In 1909 Gertrude E. Spurr married the Canadian painter William Malcolm Cutts (1857– 1943) and thereafter signed her canvases Gertrude Spurr Cutts. See Grant, “Ontario Society Exhibition” (17 March 1900): 9; Harper, Early Painters, 81. Minhinnick was elected to this position on the executive committee in October 1895 when the Woman’s Art Club of London was known as the “London Branch” of the Woman’s Art Association of Canada. See “Art Association,” London Free Press, 17 October 1895. Spurr, Carlyle, and Minhinnick were accompanied by a Miss Lamuel. See Grant, “Studio and Gallery,” 23 June 1900, 9; Gertrude E. Spurr-Cutts, quoted in “Florence Carlyle, arca.” For another reference to Minhinnick accompanying them, see Carlyle Millard (a Carlyle family relation) to Mrs Blanche Carlyle, 6 September 1946, Florence Carlyle Correspondence File, wag. The Cape Cod School of Art operated for thirty years. See Bryant, Genteel Bohemian, 160. Paintings produced by Gertrude Spurr that summer may have included works such as Mending Nets, Cape Cod, and Firs, Cape Cod Harbour, which were exhibited in the spring 1901 exhibition of the aam. See McMann (Montreal Museum, 90). See also “Florence Carlyle, arca.” The arrangement began in 1879. See Levy, American Art Annual, 1898, 1: 132; Murray, Ontario Society of Artists, 8; Patterson, “Exhibition Habit,” 290–8. Gagen, “Industrial Exhibitions, 1878–1915,” 92. Levy, American Art Annual, 1898, 132. “Great Fair Formally Opened,” 1. Anderson, “Gendered Spaces,” 40, 47; cne Department of Fine Arts, 1907 and 1908 exhibition catalogues, 3, cne Archives. Mary E. Wrinch served on the executive council in 1908, 1909, and 1910, Sidney Strickland Tully in 1909, and Mrs J.E. Elliott in 1911. See cne Department of Fine Arts, exhibition catalogues for the years 1907 to 1913, cne Archives. Gagen, “Industrial Exhibitions” 92. Work by non-Canadian artists was frequently integrated with that by Canadians and not confined to a separate section. See, for example, cne Department of Fine Arts Exhibition, catalogue for 1907, 5–7, cne Archives. Thompson’s work was exhibited at the cne in 1908. Canadian women artists exhibiting in the first decade of the century included Caroline Farncomb, Beatrice Hagarty, Clara S. Hagarty, Carrie L. Hillyard, Marie H. Holmested, Marion N. Hooker, E. May Martin, Marion E. Mattice, Mary H. Reid, Gertrude E. Spurr, Ida N. Stanley, Mabel M. Stoodley, Sydney S. Tully, and Mary E. Wrinch (cne Department of Fine Arts, exhibition catalogues for years 1900–10), cne Archives. Fitzgibbon, “Driftwood,” 20 April 1901, 19. Carlyle exhibited a painting, The Story Teller, at the aam exhibition in March/April 1914. The painting remains unlocated. Grant, “Studio and Gallery,” 2 June 1900, 9. Levy, American Art Annual, 1900–1901, 93; Holmes, “Royal Canadian Academy,” 11.

258 notes to pages 113–18 54 “Royal Canadian Academy of Arts,” 12. 55 Fitzgibbon, “Driftwood,” 13 April 1901, 19. 56 Grier’s sketch appeared in the Book of the Victorian Era Ball (Cooper, Magnificent Entertainments, 109–10). Cooper is quoting from contemporary newspaper accounts of the Victorian Era Ball. See Saturday Night, 1 January 1898; Toronto Mail and Empire, 29 December 1897. 57 Fitzgibbon seems to have taken her pen name “Lally Bernard” from the surnames of her parents, R.B. Bernard and Agnes E. Lally (McLeod, In Good Hands, 96, 99, 111). 58 Grace before Bread does not appear to have been exhibited in any major forum after this date and is presently unlocated. It is possible that the painting was purchased at the rca exhibition and thus was not available for Buffalo. Alternatively, Golden Rod may have been the first choice of Carlyle and/or the rca. 59 Higonnet, Berthe Morisot’s, 147–50. 60 Illustration of “The Canadian Building,” Toronto Globe and Mail; advertisement for Heintzman pianos, “Canada Building,” 11. 61 Levy, American Art annual, 1900–1901, 86–9. 62 Kay, “Paintings at the Pan-American,” 13. 63 Freedom and independence were defining characteristics of the New Woman. She was frequently middle class, opposed the conventions of femininity, and wished to live and work on equal terms to men. She was economically self-supporting and travelled and socialized unchaperoned. See Cherry, Painting Women, 75–6; Drysdale, “Women to PanAmerican,” 9. 64 Levy, American Art Annual, 1900–1901, 93. 65 Coxe, “Canada’s Art Exhibit.” 66 Ibid. 67 de Kay, “Paintings at the Pan-American,” 13. 68 Hale, “Art of Homer Watson,” 141. 69 In Group 1, Paintings, etc., four gold, five silver, and five bronze medals were awarded. Twelve honourable mentions were also awarded in this category. In Group 2, Sculpture, one silver medal was awarded to Walter S. Alward (“Art Awards at Buffalo,” 7; Coxe, “Canada’s Art Exhibit”). 70 Information from Frank Carson of London, Ont., who boarded with the Carlyle family ca. 1912–13, as quoted in Lillian Telfer to Florence Johnston, 24 February 1967, Florence Carlyle, Artist Files, wag Archives. 71 Cherry, Painting Women, 146–50. 72 Davidoff, “Class and Gender,” 87–141. 73 Dawkins, “Diaries and Photographs,” 154–87. 74 Shackelford, Monet, Renoir,” 197. 75 Florence Carlyle Johnston, niece of the artist (daughter of the artist’s brother, Russell Carlyle), interview with the author, Woodstock, Ont., August 1993. 76 “Fine Exhibit of Oil Paintings,” 28 February 1902, 5. 77 “Ontario Society of Artists Held the Annual Opening,” 2. 78 “Great Exhibition Now in Full Swing,” 1 September 1903, 22. 79 T. Square [pseud.], “Notes on the osa Exhibition,” 7. 80 “Great Exhibition Now in Full Swing,” 1 September 1903, 22.

notes to pages 118–23 259 81 82 83 84 85

86 87 88

89 90

91 92 93

94

95 96 97 98 99 100

101 102

103 104

T. Square [pseud.], “Notes on the osa Exhibition,” 9. “Studio News,” 15 March 1902, 9. London City Directory, 1903, 1904, 185; “Florence Carlyle,” Christmas Echo, n.p. MacTavish, Ars Longa, 106–7. Farncomb’s name first appears in the prize lists in 1879, and she subsequently won prizes for historical, landscape, and still life painting in the Fine Arts Department of London’s Western Fair (“Prize List, 1896,” 1; Poole, Art of London, 68). “Women’s Art Club,” unidentified London, Ont., newspaper, ca. March 1897, clipping file, waac Archives, Toronto. Toronto Industrial Exhibition, Fine Arts Department, exhibition catalogue, 1897, 3, 10. For discussion of the concept of matronage see Cherry, Painting Women, 102. The term referred to women working as guardians and guides to one another to sustain women artists through friendship and to assist in shaping the next generation of women. This information was taken from an interview with Albert E. Templar, who knew both Carlyle and Bradshaw (Poole, Art of London, 71). Bradshaw was never elected an associate of the rca. See Sisler, Passionate Spirits, 280; “Artist information” form, Eva Theresa Bradshaw, undated, artist file, ngc; Poole, Art of London, 72; rca Annual Exhibition catalogues, 1902 to 1904. Bice served as president from 1967–70 (Clare Bice, “Exhibit of Paintings by the Late Eva Bradshaw,” unidentified London clipping, ca. March 1941, artist files, ngc). Toronto Industrial Exhibition Fine Arts Department, catalogue, 1902, 6. This is the title of a painting by Carlyle, produced by the artist ca. 1907 for the Osborne Calendar Company’s series of art reproductions (calendar reproduction in collection of the wag). The Osborne Company advertised their annual artist’s competitions in the American Art Annual and major American exhibition catalogues such as the Society of American Artists Exhibition Catalogue for 1903. Hills, Turn-of-the-Century America, 89. Silcox, Painting Place, 23–4. Lowrey, Visions of Light and Air, 143. Armstrong, “Representative American Women Illustrators” (May–August 1900); “Women in the Golden Age of Illustration” in Rubinstein, American Women Artists, 158–63. Kerr, “The Artist,” 29. The advantages of a career for Canadian women writers in the related field of advertising writing were discussed in an article appearing in the same year. See Canadienne, “Advertising Profession for Women,” 29; Kerr, “The Artist,” 29. Macbeth, “Canadian Women,” 23–5. Journalist Madge Macbeth may have interviewed Carlyle for her 1914 Maclean’s article. In early 1903 the Osborne Company was located at 277 Broadway, but on 1 May 1903 moved to 31 Union Square West (advertisement in The Society of American Artists Exhibition Catalogue, 1903, ngc Library; Macbeth, “Canadian Women,” 24). “Social and Personal,” Saturday Night (14 March 1903): 3. The newspaper gave the number of women artists as 36 out of a total of 86 artists, which indicates that 42 per cent of the artists exhibiting were women (“Year’s Harvest of Art,” 32).

260 notes to pages 123–9 105 “Fine Show of Pictures,” 15; “Social and Personal,” Saturday Night (14 March 1903): 3. 106 “Social and Personal” (14 March 1903): 3. 107 As Deborah Cherry has observed, visual signs could be invested by different spectators with a variety of meanings (Painting Women, 149). 108 “Social and Personal” (14 March 1903): 3; “Fine Show of Pictures,” 15; “Year’s Harvest of Art,” 32. 109 The paintings Before Her First Communion and The Studio sold for $25 each, The Little Housewife for $15 (“Art Exhibition, Connoisseurs Select Some of the Best,” unidentified clipping, rca clipping scrapbook, mg28, i 126, vol. 15, p. 27, lac). 110 In this she was continuing the tradition set by other wives of governor generals of Canada, as with the example of Princess Louise twenty years previously. See “Art Exhibition: Connoisseurs Select,” rca clipping scrapbook, mg28, i 126, vol. 15, p. 27, lac; “rca Pictures on View at Ottawa,” Saturday Night (25 April 1903): 4. 111 Pollock, Differencing the Canon, 138–42, 249. 112 Portrait of Marie Hubbard (1874), fig. 59, Higonnet, Berthe Morisot’s Images, 160–1. 113 Catalogue of the Works of Canadian Artists Which Will Be on View in the Art Gallery, 23 Phillips Square, from June 15th to September 15th, 1903, c n910 m7a6 1903, lac. 114 Macbeth, “Canadian Women,” 24; Osborne Company, The Girl with the Laughing Eyes, calendar title leaf. 115 The old art gallery at the tie/cne was used to exhibit applied arts including commercial printing. See “Great Exhibition Now in Full Swing,” 1 September 1903, 7. 116 Grandmother’s Gown was first exhibited at the osa in March 1903 (no. 26) and offered for sale at $75. The painting presently remains unlocated. See osa Exhibition Catalogue (1903), 6. 117 Osborne Company, Always Room for One More; Marian MacCausland to author, 22 November 1993. 118 Rechnitzer, “Nations Acclaim,” 1. 119 Osborne Company, “The Third Annual Artists’ Competition,” advertisement in Levy, American Art Annual, 1905–1906, 5: 117; frontispiece for an illustration of Curran’s painting At the Piano. 120 American Colortype Company, “Fac-simile Reproductions of Works of Art,” advertisement in Levy, American Art Annual, 1905–1906, 117. 121 Italics in original. Osborne Company, Osborne Art Calendars in Miniature, n.p. 122 Ibid. 123 “Calendars,” 17 December 1904, 903. 124 Vivian Cowan (née Tully), Sydney Tully’s niece, to Margaret Fallis, June 1985, cited in M. Fallis, “Sydney Strickland Tully,” 44. 125 The Empress Hotel, a Canadian Pacific Railway hotel, opened in January 1908 (Artist information form, Artist’s Clipping File, ngc Archives, ngc; Reid, Sydney Strickland Tully, 3–5). 126 Challener’s decorative panels and preliminary sketches for the ceilings of various cabins of the R.&O. steamer Montreal, the ceiling of McConkey’s Restaurant, and a panel for the proscenium arch of the Russell Opera House, Ottawa, were exhibited at tie art exhibitions between 1900 and 1904 (tie Fine Arts Department, catalogues for 1900, 4; 1901, 11; 1902, 6; 1904, 9).

notes to pages 130–5 261 127 Harper, Painting in Canada, 266; tie Exhibition catalogue, 1901, 11, and 1902, 6; Silcox, Painting Place, 23–5; Lowrey, Visions of Light and Air, 143. 128 Armstrong, “Representative Illustrators: Child Interpreters,” 417; Armstrong, “Representative Illustrators: Decorative,” 524.

chapter six 1 Description of Florence Carlyle’s painting The Girl with the Laughing Eyes (ca. 1905) from title-leaf of Osborne Company calendar, ca. 1905, wag Artist Files. 2 Address given in the Society of American Artists 26th Annual Exhibition Catalogue (1904), 70, Watson Library, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. 3 Muntz is listed as living at this address during 1904. Carlyle’s address in 1904 is also given as 67 West 23rd Street, in the exhibition catalogue of the Society of American Artists 26th Annual Exhibition, 70, Watson Library, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. See also Falk, Art Institute of Chicago, 638. 4 Hare, “Close-Ups: Laura Muntz Lyall.” 5 Review of osa exhibition in Toronto News clipping ca. 1903, quoted in “Florence Carlyle, arca,” 2 December 1926, n.p. 6 Carlyle’s painting The Picture Book was exhibited by the artist in the autumn of 1903 at the tie (no. 24), where it was offered for sale for $50. The work remains unlocated (Dominion of Canada Industrial Exhibition, Art Department catalogue, 1903, 4). 7 New York City Directory, 1900 to 1908. 8 Osborne Company, Annual Catalogue [of Art Calendars], 36–7. 9 Ibid.; Osborne Company, Calendars in Miniature. 10 Osborne Company, Calendars in Miniature. 11 Ibid.; italics in original. 12 Key, “Reminiscences,” 8; Florence Johnston to the author, 15 May 1994. 13 Armstrong, “Representative American, Child Interpreters,” 418. 14 Deborah Cherry notes a similar situation in Britain as regards gendered differences in the subject matter of commissioned commercial artwork (See, Cherry, Painting Women, 101). 15 Osborne Company, Calendars in Miniature. 16 Osborne Company, Annual Catalogue [of Art Calendars], 36– 7. 17 Kerr, “The Artist,” 29. 18 Bell, “Women and Art in Canada,” 7. 19 Key, “Reminiscences,” 8. 20 Palette [pseud.], “The Ontario Society of Artists’ Exhibition,” Saturday Night (27 February 1904): 6. The rca commonly held its annual spring exhibitions in March or April; thus the date of the 1904 show was not earlier than usual. Palette [pseud.], “The Ontario Society of Artists’ Exhibition,” Saturday Night (27 February 1904): 6. 21 “Royal Canadian Academy,” 21 March 1904, 9. 22 Ibid.; see also no. 19, in osa Exhibition Catalogue, 1897. 23 “Royal Canadian Academy of Arts,” 18 March 1904, 5. 24 Ibid. 25 Carlyle exhibited four paintings: Sketch of the Artist, My Lady Ann, Christine, and A Book of Verse. Laura Muntz exhibited Little Miss Shy. See “New York Letter,” 8; “Ameri-

262 notes to pages 135–41

26 27 28

29 30

31 32

33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50

51 52 53

can Artists,” 26 March 1904, 9; “American Artists,” 28 April 1904, 8; Society of American Artists 26th Annual Exhibition, 25, 33, 37, 57. The saa held their last exhibition in 1905. In 1906 they merged back into the National Academy (Rubinstein, American Women Artists, 140–1). Meskimmon, Art of Reflection, 28. For more on the Saint Louis World’s Fair, see “Canada at St. Louis,” 33–42; Levy, American Art Annual 1903–04, 246–50; American Art Annual, 1905–06, 255–7; Sisler, Passionate Spirits, 80–1. “Department of Art, Louisiana Purchase Exhibition, List of Awards Granted to Canadian Artists,” rca Minute Books, 1880–1927, mg 28, i 126, vol. 14, file 14–8, lac. MacTavish was a member of the Canadian Art Club and was the author of two books on Canadian art. See MacTavish, Fine Arts in Canada (1925), and Ars Longa (1938); Lamb, Canadian Art Club, 78. MacTavish, Ars Longa, 106–9. The date of this meeting is speculative, and likely occurred between 1904, when Mackay published her first volume of poetry, and 1906, when MacTavish became the editor of the Canadian Magazine. Description of the meeting is taken from MacTavish, Ars Longa, 106–9. Muntz’s address for 1905 is given as “c/o Miss Moses, 7 W. 42nd St., nyc,” the same as Carlyle’s address during 1905 and 1906 (Falk, National Academy of Design, 371). A painting by Carlyle of Miss Moses is in the collection of wag. Falk, National Academy of Design, 119. Falk, Pennsylvania Academy, 125. Rubinstein, American Women Artists, 164. Interview with Carlyle’s niece, Florence Carlyle Johnston and author, August 1993, Woodstock, Ont. Macbeth, “Canadian Women,” 24. Bell, “Women and Art in Canada,” 15. Macbeth, “Canadian Women,” 24. Emphasis mine. Grant, “Royal Canadian Academy Exhibition,” 12 March 1898, 9. “Review of the Art Exhibition,” 5 March 1898, 7. Dignam, “Portrait Loan Exhibition.” “Artists and Friends Thronged Gallery,” 21 March 1902, 10. Kyle, “Ontario Society of Artists,” 188. Fleming, “Royal Canadian Academy of Arts,” 205. Cherry, Painting Women, 98, 101. Macbeth, “Canadian Women,” 24. Knoedler’s, Exhibition of Paintings by Women Artists, 4; Benezit, Dictionnaire critique, 531; and Levy, “Auction Sales of Paintings,” in American Art Annual, 1907–1908, 17–18. See also MacTavish, Ars Longa, 109; Florence Carlyle to O.B. Graves, 6 December 1922, Artist Files, ml. Kerr, “The Artist,” 29. Falk, National Academy of Design, 119. The data cards were sent out in April and were returned by September; the information therefore refers to 1905. Prior to 1901 this publication also listed the Canadian art society exhibitions and their participants. It later dropped this association with Canada and

notes to pages 141–6 263

54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62

63 64

65 66 67

68

69

70 71 72 73 74 75

76 77 78 79

concentrated solely on American exhibitions and artists working in the United States. See Levy, American Art Annual, 1905–1906, 317, 336. Falk, Pennsylvania Academy, 125. “Twenty-Ssecond Spring Exhibition,” 18 March 1905, 12. Fine Arts Department, Dominion Exhibition, Halifax, Nova Scotia, 1906, rca exhibition catalogues, mg28, i 126, vol. 10, 1903–1909, lac. Canadian National Exhibition Fine Art Department, catalogue, 1906, 24. Pisano, Students of William Merritt Chase, 14. Koch, Louis C. Tiffany’s Art Glass, 4. Gualtieri, Woman as Artist, 158. Luckyj, Helen McNicoll, 19, 23, 34; Lowrey, Visions of Light and Air, 144. In 1906 Carlyle exhibited Like unto a Flower (no. 70), offered for sale at $300. Both Grandmother’s Gown and Rose Birthday remain unlocated; however, in 1907 Rose Birthday was the property of the Provincial Government Normal School. See Canadian National Exhibition Art Department, catalogue, 1906, 24; 1907, 137. In the early years of the century the popular American artist and teacher William Merritt Chase took his summer class to Madrid. Spain also attracted Canadian artists George Reid and Mary Hiester Reid in 1896, and in the years prior to World War I, Harriet Ford and J.W. Morrice also painted in Spain. See Bell, “Women and Art in Canada,” 15; Miller, Reid, 76–79; Dorais, J.W. Morrice, 19–21. These paintings are in a private collection. Artist information form for Eva Bradshaw, Artist Clipping File, Library, ngc. Nancy Poole’s claim that Carlyle studied in New York with Robert Henri is supported by a biographical record form, completed by Carlyle in 1912 (Biographical data record, Artist File, ago Archives). See also Poole, Art of London, 76. Henri taught at the New York School of Art between 1902 and 1909, and between 1909 and 1912 at his own school, and later at the Art Students’ League. In 1923 he published The Art Spirit, in which he discusses his philosophy of art and advice to artists. See also Homer, Robert Henri and His Circle, 157. Collyer (1898–1979), Heward (1896–1947), Lockerby (1882–1976), May (1877–1971), Morris (1893–1986), Newton (1896–1980), Robertson (1891–1948), Savage (1896–1971), and Seath (1879–1963). Meadowcroft, Painting Friends, 15, 205. Canadian National Exhibition Department of Fine Arts, 1908, 41. Thumb-Box Exhibition to Be Held by Canadian Artists, November 4–17, 1908. Canadian National Exhibition Department of Fine Arts, Exhibition catalogue, 1908, 23. “Calendar of New York Special Exhibitions,” 6; “Calendar,” 25 April 1908, 6. Knoedler’s sponsored two exhibitions in support of the Woman Suffrage Campaign Fund: Paintings by El Greco and Goya, in 1912, and Loan Exhibition of Masterpieces by Old and Modern Painters in 1915. See Sharp, “How Mary Cassatt Became an American Artist,” 169, 175n83. “Paintings Shown by Women Artists,” 8; Knoedler’s Galleries, Exhibition of Paintings by Women Artists. “Exhibitions Now On,” 6. “Paintings Shown by Women Artists,” 8; “Women Artists at Knoedler’s,” 6. Cherry, Painting Women, 65–7; Garb, Sisters of the Brush, 4.

264 notes to pages 146–52 80 81 82 83 84 85 86

87 88

89 90

91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100

101 102 103 104

105 106

Garb, Sisters of the Brush, 5–6. “Art Exhibit,” 27 April 1897. Greenhorn, “Art Critic at the Ringside: Pearl McCarthy,” 99, 126, n. 134. Boutilier, Four Women Who Painted, 25. Garb, Sisters of the Brush, 7. For a discussion of the strategies involved in negotiation of sexual difference in nineteenthcentury British art institutions, see, chapter 4, in Cherry, Painting Women, 65–77. While Henri is not named in this interview with Florence Carlyle in 1912, he is likely the “prominent American artist friend” she referred to as advising her (Deacon, “Representative Women,” 4). The Graphic Arts Club was formed from a blending of the Mahlstick Club and the Toronto Art Student’s League (Tovell, A New Class of Art, 99). Women were not admitted as members of the Arts and Letters Club until 1985. See Raymond Peringer (archivist, Arts and Letters Club) to author, 15 May 1998; and Hill, Art for a Nation, 45–6. Hill, Art for a Nation, 40–1. The time Carlyle spent with Youmans helped the artist to come to terms with many of the anxieties about her art that had plagued her thoughts. In about 1979, at the urging of Florence Carlyle Johnston, Youmans Key (d. 1981), wrote a memoir, “Reminiscences of Florence Carlyle,” in which she recalled her memories of her cousin. Key was living with Johnston at the time. This unpublished manuscript is in the artist’s files at the wag (interview, Florence Carlyle Johnston and author, August 1993). Key, “Reminiscences,” 2. Ibid, 4. Ibid, 11. Ibid, 3. Ibid, 5. Ibid, 4. Ibid, 5. Ibid, 7. Ibid, 6. This is likely the address that she returned to in late 1908 after leaving her studio at Miss Moses’s house the previous spring; 32 West 24th Street is her last known New York City address (Morgan, Canadian Men and Women [1912], 200). Key, “Reminiscences,” 10. Ibid, 11. Morgan, Canadian Men and Women (1912), 200. Calendar print of Always Room for One More in collection of the Woodstock Art Gallery. A label on the verso reveals that the calendar was copyrighted in 1908 and sold in a drygoods store in Woodstock, Ontario. Key, “Reminiscences,” 12. Miss Betty sold for $100 at the Fifth Avenue Art Galleries auction sale of “modern” paintings on 6 May 1909, and Il y a toujours de la place pour un de plus, likely a version of the Osborne commission Always Room for One More, sold for $97 at the Sutcliffe Gallery auction sale in New York (“Sales, New York,” 1 May 1909: 1; and, Benezit, Dictionnaire critique, 531).

notes to pages 152–8 265 107 Harold Eustace Key, known in the Montreal arts community as an accomplished organist, would become a member of the Arts Club of Montreal. He was an early member of the Arts Club of Montreal whose members included many of Canada’s best-known male artists, writers, and musicians (Arts Club of Montreal, Portrait of a Club, 19). 108 Girl with a Bowl, also exhibited as Girl with Green Bowl, remains unlocated and is known only from black and white photographs and contemporary reviewers’ descriptions (Ontario Society of Artists Exhibition Catalogue, March 1912, fig. 33, pao; “osa Exhibition,” 7; “New Talent at the Art Exhibit,” 8). 109 Farr, Horatio Walker, 14. 110 Lowrey, “Into Line with Progress,” 35–6; See also Lamb, Canadian Art Club, 76, 78. 111 Spurr exhibited as Spurr Cutts after her marriage. See Canadian National Exhibition Art Department, catalogue, 1910, 23; MacDonald, Dictionary of Canadian Artists, 161–2. 112 Tovell, New Class of Art, 86, 88. 113 Lowrey, Visions of Light and Air, 142 –3. 114 Canadian National Exhibition Art Department, catalogue, 1910, 25; Lowrey, Visions of Light and Air, 143. 115 Although the osa catalogue for 5 March 1910 lists four paintings, a review notes that an additional painting by Carlyle, Thou Art My Single Day, was exhibited (“Ontario Artists Open Exhibition,” 15). 116 “Ontario Artists Open Exhibition,” 15. 117 Higonnet, “A Mother Pictures Her Daughter,” in Higonnet, Berthe Morisot’s Images, 212– 52. 118 Shadow and Sunlight and Book of Verse Beneath the Bough are presently unlocated. McNicoll’s painting In the Shadow of the Tree (1914) shows the artist’s treatment of a similar subject of a woman seated beside a baby carriage, reading in the chequered shade of a tree (illustrated in Luckyj’s Helen McNicoll, 16). See also “Thirty-Eighth Annual Exhibition of the osa,” 6. 119 “Thirty-Eighth Annual Exhibition of the osa,” 6. 120 Through her regular participation in aam exhibitions and with the rca from 1906, the cne in 1908, and the osa from 1910, McNicoll gained a significant national reputation by 1910. Her Impressionist figure studies were praised by contemporary Canadian critics, and one of her lasting contributions after her death in 1915 was the prominent role she played in the Canadian Impressionist tradition (Luckyj, Helen McNicoll, 70; see also Lowrey, “Into Line with Progress,” 35, 144; cne Art Department, catalogue, 1908, 37). 121 “Pictures at the o.s.a. Exhibition,” 23. 122 “Fine Collection of Pictures,” 15; Reid, Concise History of Canadian Painting, 126–8; Lowrey, Visions of Light and Air, 142–3. 123 Jean Honore Fragonard (French; 1732–1806). The Reader (ca. 1776) is in the collection of the nga, Washington. 124 The model was Miss N. Mabee of Simcoe, Ontario (Accession file, Grey and Gold, ngc, Ottawa). 125 Lennon, Female Archetypes in Art, n.p. 126 The Moth (no. 52) likely sold for its listed price of $250 to J. Gordon and Wilhelmina McIntosh at the aam exhibition in April 1910. The painting appears again in 1940 as a bequest by the McIntoshes to the McIntosh Memorial Gallery, University of Western Ontario (“History of Accession,” Curatorial File, McIntosh Gallery).

266 notes to pages 159–69 127 A painting by Carlyle entitled Contemplation was loaned by Ed Maxwell, Esq., to the Inaugural Loan Exhibition of the Montreal Arts Club in 1913 (notation on file card in artist’s file, Library, Musée du Quebec). The titles of both Thoughts and Reminiscences, on the evidence of contemporary exhibition catalogues, are those given to the paintings by the artist. Thoughts (982.3.1) is in the collection of the wag. 128 Hill, Art for a Nation, 40, 53. 129 Tovell, A New Class of Art, 113; “Works purchased at the rca Exhibition, November 1913, by the National Gallery of Canada,” rca Exhibition 1913, mg28, i 126, vol. 14, lac. 130 “Canadian Art in Liverpool.” 131 “Royal Canadian Academy,” 4 July 1910, n.p. 132 “Canadian Art,” Glasgow Herald, 5 July 1910, n.p. 133 “Canadian Pictures,” ca. 4 July 1910, n.p. 134 “Canadian Art Exhibition,” 9 July 1910, n.p. 135 A photograph of Carlyle’s painting The Red Gown (ca. 1912) showing a seated woman, possibly Judith Hastings, was reproduced in Margaret Bell’s 1914 article, “Women and Art in Canada,” 7. 136 Pollock, “Modernity and the Spaces of Femininity,” 50–90. 137 Ibid. 138 Ibid, 66. 139 Ibid, 82–3. 140 Other paintings by the artist known from exhibition records, reviews, and auctions reveal that Carlyle produced many more paintings exploring the theme of women working in the domestic environment. Examples include The Little Housewife (1903) exhibited as no. 33, rca exhibition, Ottawa, and Peeling Vegetables, in a private collection. The First Pie is presently unlocated. 141 Cherry, Painting Women, 146–8. 142 “The Royal Canadian Academy of Arts,” 10 December 1910, n.p. 143 Vindex, “The Royal Canadian Exhibition,” n.p.; and “The Royal Canadian Academy of Arts,” 10 December 1910, n.p. 144 “The Royal Canadian Academy of Arts,” 10 December 1910, n.p.; MacTavish, “Academy Pictures Shown at Montreal,” 4. 145 A.C., “Spring Exhibition at the Montreal Art Gallery,” 2. 146 Charlesworth, “The osa Exhibition,” 25. 147 A.C., “Spring Exhibition at the Montreal Art Gallery,” 2. 148 Charlesworth, “The osa Exhibition,” 25. 149 “The Passing of William Carlyle,” wag; Morgan, Canadian Men and Women (1912), 200.

chapter seven 1 In 1913 William lived in England, having formerly worked in Spain. Ernest was working in Argentina and would later work in Russia (“Mrs. W. Carlyle”). 2 Carlyle’s painting Shadow and Sunlight, exhibited in March 1910 at the osa in Toronto (no. 149), is described in a contemporary review as depicting a woman seated out of

notes to pages 169–72 267

3

4

5 6 7 8 9 10 11

12 13 14 15 16

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

doors watching a child at play (“Thirty-Eighth Annual Exhibition of the osa,” 6, Catalogue of the Ontario Society of Artists 38th Annual Exhibition, March 1910), ago. As discussed earlier, Carlyle had long held firm to the belief, expressed to her cousin, that her desire to pursue a career as a professional artist meant a decision not to marry (Key, “Reminiscences,” 27). Laura Muntz quoted in a letter from her niece, Elizabeth Muntz, to Marie Douglas, 14 July 1964. Quoted in typescript by Margaret Fallis on Laura Muntz, Laura Muntz, Artist File, acwa, Carleton University, Ottawa. Belden (1848– ?) was a partner in Belden Brothers, the proprietors of the Art Publishing Company and publishers of Picturesque Canada (“Art and Artists,” 4 February 1888, 3). “Davis Family History,” correspondence from Martha Millard Dasselaar to author, 5 August 1998, 21 August 1998, and February 2006. Harper, Early Painters, 167; biography typescript, Artist Clipping File, ngc Archives. Luckyj, From Women’s Eyes, 4. Ibid., 29; McLeod, In Good Hands, 31. MacDonald, Dictionary of Canadian Artists, 660–1; cne Art Department Catalogue 1904, 11; Luckyj, From Women’s Eyes, 4; Bell, “Women and Art in Canada,” 30. Artist information form, Elizabeth A. Beach McGillivray Knowles, 1920, Artist Clipping File, ngc Archives; “Talented Couple’s Works on Exhibit”; “Works by Mr. and Mrs. Knowles,” 3. Hare, “Close-Ups: Laura Muntz Lyall”; Luckyj, From Women’s Eyes, 28. Mulley, “Women and Children in Context,” 2–3. Harper, Early Painters, 81, 203; Morgan, Types of Canadian Women, 269; Poole, Art of London, 66. Cherry, Painting Women, 45. The 1898 source for Tully’s studies with Chase notes that she was there a “short time.” The Shinnicock School had hundreds of students during its years of operation every summer from 1891 to 1902. Her name is not on the limited list of members of the school sent to the author (Renee Minushkin, Art Museum of Parish, to author, 8 September 1998. See also “Painters and the Public,” 14; Bryant, William Merritt Chase, 159. Englishwoman’s Review (April 1885): 160, quoted in Deborah Cherry, Painting Women, 45 Macbeth, “Canadian Women in the Arts,” 24. Ibid. Recollections of Frank Carson, in Lilian Telfer to Florence Johnston, 24 February 1967, Florence Carlyle Artist Files, wag. “The Canadian Woman Who Is Born with a Gift.” “Florence Carlyle, Artist.” Kerr, “The Artist,” 29. MacTavish, “Laura Muntz,” 423. Tovell, New Class of Art, 119–20; and MacTavish, “Laura Muntz,” 419–26. Tully died in Toronto on 18 July 1911. See Harper, Early Painters, 313; Bayer, Ontario Collection, 120; Reid, “Biographical Note,” 3–5. Interview with Florence Carlyle from ca. November 1912, quoted in Blanche Hume, “Florence Carlyle, arca,” 10.

268 notes to pages 172–8 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41

42

43 44 45 46 47 48 49

50 51 52 53

Meadowcroft, Painting Friends, 39, 42, 204; “The Spring Exhibition,” 23 March 1912. Meadowcroft, Painting Friends, 205, 211. Bell, “Women and Art,” 15; see also “The Spring Exhibition,” 23 March 1912. “New Talent at the Art Exhibit,” 8. A Good Listener is presently unlocated. The Morrice exhibition was at Scott & Sons, 16–30 January 1912 (Dorais, J.W. Morrice, 16–17; Lowrey, Visions of Light, 146). “Over 800 Attend Last Exhibition,” 2; “Art Opening a Social Event;” “Impressionists Shock Local Art Lovers at the Spring Exhibition,” 5; Lowrey, Visions of Light, 22–3. A.C., “Pictures Shown at Spring Exhibition.” Deacon, “Representative Women: Florence Carlyle,” 4. Key, “Reminiscences,” 15. “Painters and the Public.” MacTavish, “Laura Muntz,” 419–26; Deacon, “Representative Women,” 4. Kerr, “The Artist,” 29. Bell, “Women and Art in Canada,” 7, 15, 30. Some sources cite 1897 as the date of Carlyle’s trip to the acc camp; however, this date appears too early as she did not meet Hastings until 1911. Her attendance at the 1912 camp does not rule out the possibility of the artist having made an earlier trip to the area, especially in the light that her brother William held the position of provincial mineralogist and director of the Department of Mines in B.C. between 1895 and 1898 and worked as a geologist in Rossland, B.C. from 1898 to 1899. See Morgan, Canadian Men and Women, (1912), 200; Hume, “Florence Carlyle, arca,” 10; Alpine Club of Canada letterhead on letter from acc to Sir Wilfrid Laurier, 1 December 1909, Laurier Papers, c-883, lac; Root, Rocky Mountain Landmarks, 44–5. Lillian Carlyle married A.A.W. Hastings and had two daughters, Blanche and Lillian, either of who could have been the little girl described as visiting the Carlyle home in 1912. Carlyle’s other sister, Maud, had no children (“The Carlyle Tree,” typescript, Carlyle Artist File, wag; Hume, “Florence Carlyle, arca,” 10). Judith Hastings to Russell Carlyle, 10 June 1923, Carlyle Correspondence File, wag. Hume, “Florence Carlyle, arca,” 10. “Alpine Club of Canada,” 7. Hume, “Florence Carlyle, arca,” 10. See, for example, Maria Tippett, By a Lady, 34. Lockiel, “Aftermath of the Alpine Club,” 31. The archives of the 1912 camp record climbs and excursions to many lakes, ridges, and peaks in the vicinity of Vermilion Pass including Lake Louise. Lake Louise, Spring remains unlocated, yet was listed in the paintings exhibited in the Jenkins’ Art Galleries’ Memorial Exhibition, 1925 catalogue, 15. Papers of F.W. Freeborn, list of Alpine Club photographs, ac55–18, collection of the Whyte Museum of the Canadian Rockies, Banff, Alberta. Hume, “Florence Carlyle, arca,” 10. For further information on the acc see Harmon, Great Days in the Rockies; Harmon, Byron Harmon. Duncan (1861–1922) is today recognized as an early feminist and writer of New Women fiction. See bibliography for Duncan, A Social Departure, and other titles. Hume, “Florence Carlyle, arca,” 10. Minutes of meeting of rca Council, Ottawa, 29 November 1912, rca Minute Book (Transcripts), 1906–27, p. 178, mg28, i 126, lac.

notes to pages 178–84 269 54 Blanche B. Hume wrote for New Outlook and also worked as an editor of Rod and Gun in Canada. She was known to Carlyle through her membership in Woodstock’s Saturday Morning Club reading and discussion group (Hume, “Florence Carlyle, arca,” 10). 55 Deborah Cherry describes these practices as popular among some professional artists of the time (Painting Women, 87). 56 Deacon, “Representative Women,” 4. 57 Hume, “Florence Carlyle, arca,” 10. 58 Carlyle quoted in ibid. This painting remains unlocated. 59 Fleming, Year Book of Canadian Art 1913, 205. 60 Review of the 34th rca exhibition, November 1912, by Roy Franklin Fleming, ibid. 61 Minutes of meeting of rca Council, Ottawa, 29 November 1912, rca Minute Book (Transcript), 1906–27, p. 178, mg28 i 126, vol. 17, lac; see also Tovell, A New Class of Art, 138. 62 Catalogue of the Winnipeg Museum of Fine Arts, Royal Canadian Academy Exhibition of Paintings, 7, ngc. Spring Song was later exhibited in March 1913 at the aam exhibition. The Threshold was exhibited once more by Carlyle in April 1913 at the osa exhibition. 63 “Mrs. W. Carlyle,” 20 December 1912, n.p. 64 Silcox, Painting Place, 50, 52. 65 Hill, Art for a Nation, 50. “Little Pictures,” 2, is illustrated by a photograph of the exhibit. 66 Music was exhibited in Toronto at the osa exhibition which opened 5 April 1913; it appears to have sold at that exhibition since there is no further record of the artist exhibiting it. It next appears in 1926 as the property of J.C. Breckenridge, on loan to the Inaugural Exhibition of the Art Gallery of Toronto (List of Florence Carlyle’s paintings exhibited with the osa 1910–1947, Florence Carlyle, Artist File, ago). 67 Arts and Letters Club, Year Book of Canadian Art 1913, 188; MacTavish, Ars Longa, 81. 68 In 1913 the painting was on display in the Ottawa Normal School and later was transferred to Woodstock Collegiate in Woodstock where it hung on display until 1975 (Bayer, Ontario Collection, 73). 69 Another painting by Carlyle, also titled The Threshold, was exhibited in Montreal in 1902, at the annual rca exhibition (no. 31). Photographs of the exhibition reveal that this painting depicted a woman in a white dress with a vase of white lilies in the foreground. This paintings is presently unlocated. See photograph c-98562, collection lac. 70 “Points about People, in an Art Gallery,” 3. 71 Estelle Kerr quotes from “one of our leading [male] artists,” in “The Artist,” 29. 72 S.M.P., “Art and the Post-Impressionists,” 22; “Spring Exhibition,” 26 March 1913. 73 “Ontario Society of Artists,” 10; Tovell, New Class of Art, 89, 90, 106; Lowrey, Visions of Light, 29. 74 “Bohemian Crowd at Opening of New Art Rooms,” 9. 75 Arts Club, Portrait of a Club, 19. 76 “Bohemian Crowd at Opening of New Art Rooms,” 9. 77 Arts Club, Portrait of a Club, 18. 78 “Florence Carlyle and Inaugural Loan Exhibition of the Arts Club, Montreal, 1913,” Carlyle Artist File, Library, Musée du Quebec; Arts Club, Portrait of a Club, 5, 11, 19. 79 Key, “Reminiscences,” 12. 80 Florence Carlyle’s address is given as “Grange Cottage, The Grange, Wimbledon, London, England,” in the cne Department of Fine Arts catalogue, 53. The cne opened that year on 23 August 1913.

270 notes to pages 184–91 81 82 83 84 85

86 87

88 89

90 91 92

93 94

95 96 97 98 99

100

101 102 103

Johnston, “Florence Carlyle, 1864–1923.” Kerr, “The Artist,” 29. “Canadian Pictures” (1913), 59. rca Exhibition Catalogue (November 1913), 11, 26, lac. Carlyle’s figure paintings commonly were offered for sale at this time at between $300 and $400. Two other small paintings, Summer Morning (no. 48) and A Byway, Venice (no. 50), were purchased by A. Browning for $50 and $30. See “Works purchased at the rca Exhibition, Montreal, Nov. 1913,” mg28, i 126, vol. 14, lac; “W. Brymner, Esq, 26 November 1913, Works Purchased, Canadian, 1.12-r. Purchased from Royal Canadian Academy Exhibitions,” rca Exhibition, mtt., 1913, lac. Lafleur, “To Promote Art in Minor Centres,” n.p. Homer Watson’s Evening after Rain (no. 300) and Lawren Harris’ Sunrise through Rime and The Corner Store (no. 132) were shown at the 1913 rca exhibit. Harris was influenced by the wilderness and winter landscapes at the Exhibition of Contemporary Scandinavian Art at the Albright Art Gallery in January 1913 and would become a founding member of the Group of Seven. See Lafleur, “To Promote Art in Minor Centres;” Sibley, “Greatest Show,” 3; Fabien, “L’Academie royale”; Stacey, “Sensations,” 64–5. Sibley, “Greatest Show,” 3. Gertrude Spurr Cutts’s Low Tide, and Laura Muntz’s Madonna with Angels were bought by the trustees of the National Gallery. See “Works purchased at the rca Exhibition, Montreal, Nov. 1913,” rca Exhibition, mtt., mg28, i 126, vol. 14, lac. This portrait of her niece was exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1914 as no. 650, Kathleen Carlyle (Royal Academy, Royal Academy Exhibitors, 1905–1970, 268). “Winnipeg Exhibition 1914,” List of Pictures, Exhibition (rca), mg28, i 126, vol. 14, 1914, lac. The Guest, Venice (1913), also exhibited as The Guest, was offered for $200 (no. 26). See osa Annual Exhibition, March 1914, catalogue, 11, ago Archives. Charlesworth, “Ontario Society of Artists Annual Exhibit,” 5. Ibid. A similar intimate and long-term friendship existed between Canadian painter Helen McNicoll and British artist Dorothea Sharp (Luckyj, Helen McNicoll, 42, 44). See also Cherry, Painting Women, 45–6; Cherry, Beyond the Frame, 11. Stacey, “Sensations,” 61. Charlesworth, “Ontario Society of Artists Annual Exhibit,” 5. Stacey, “Sensations,” 66. Bell, “Women and Art in Canada,” 7, 15. A bronze sculpture Seated Woman (prior to 1914) by Winifred Kingsford is in the collection of the ngc (no. 16985). See Kerr, “Women Sculptors in Toronto;” McLeod, In Good Hands, 129. Kingsford is discussed extensively in Kerr’s 1913 “Women Sculptors in Toronto,” for which she interviewed and photographed Kingsford, Loring, and Wyle. Kingsford is mentioned only in passing in Boyanoski’s catalogue essay on Loring and Wyle. Lang, “Separate Entrances: The First Generation,” 76–91. Ibid; McMullen, introduction to Re(dis)covering Our Foremothers, 2, 76–91. Carlyle’s essay was titled “A Week of Student Life in Paris” and is mentioned in “Memory of Florence Carlyle Honoured by Art Association,” 7 February 1936, which docu-

notes to pages 191–8 271

104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111

112

113 114 115 116 117

ments a Woodstock Art Gallery exhibition where family and friends of Florence Carlyle spoke. Publication of Carlyle’s essay in the “Women’s Kingdom” column is cited here. See also Bell, “Women and Art in Canada,” 7, 15, 30; McMurchy, “Representative Women: Mrs. G.A. Reid; Deacon, “Representative Women: Florence Carlyle,” 4. Exhibited as (no. 178) Miss Hastings and (no. 650) Kathleen Carlyle (Royal Academy, Royal Academy Exhibitors 1905–1970, 268). Macbeth, “Canadian Women,” 23–5. Johnston, “Painting and Sculpture in Canada,” 593–642. William Brymner to Eric Brown, 12 July 1915, rca fonds, 04.2, Correspondence re. Patriotic Fund, 1914–1915, ngc. Mortimer-Lamb, “Canadian Artists and the War,” 259–61. Known only from black and white photographs, Spring Song remains unlocated. Colour description taken from “Exhibition of Canadian Art,” 1915. Ball, “Canadian Artists Showing Patriotism That Is Practical,” n.p. In Ottawa, Montreal, and Toronto, the Women’s National Service Committee and the International Order of the Daughters of the Empire (iode) served refreshments, and at one afternoon tea made $35 (“Margaret Polson Murray and Lady Scott Chapter,” n.p.; Patriotic Fund, “Rules”; see also F.T.C., “The Best in Canadian Art on Exhibition in Salon at Art Gallery”). The source for these successful bids is Robert F. Gagen’s marked copy. See Patriotic Fund, Catalogue of Picture and Sculpture Given by Canadian Artists in Aid of the Patriot Fund Exhibitions. The Farm Yard is illustrated as no. 30 in Catalogue of Pictures, Patriotic Fund. Sale information taken from R. Gagen’s marked copy. See also Luckyj, Helen McNicoll, 53. Annotated Catalogue of Patriotic Fund Exhibition, R.C.A. Catalogues 1914–1916, mg28, i 126, vol. 11, 1914–16, lac; also Gagen’s marked copy. William Brymner to Eric Brown, 12 July 1915, rca correspondence re. Patriotic Fund, 1914–15, ngc fonds, 04.2. ngc. “Exhibition of Works of Art,” 9 April 1915. F.T.C., “The Best in Canadian Art on Exhibition.”

chapter eight 1 Mortimer-Lamb, “Canadian Artists and the War,” 259. 2 Harris was writing to Brown to refuse work on the grounds that there were many other Canadian artists who desperately needed to work in order to earn their living (Lawren Harris to Eric Brown, 29 October 1918, Canadian War Artists Files, Harris, Lawren S., 5.42h, ngc Archives). 3 E.B., “Over Three Hundred Pictures Displayed at the Art Gallery.” 4 Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, 6 August 1920, Florence Carlyle Correspondence File, wag. 5 Kerr, “Those War-Time Jig-Saw Toys,” 97–8. 6 Butlin, “Landscape as Memorial: A.Y. Jackson and the Landscape of the Western Front, 1917–1918,” 62–70; Mortimer-Lamb, “Canadian Artists and the War,” 259. 7 These and other members of the rca were listed as on active service in the 1916 catalogue and included architect Major Percy E. Nobbs (1875–1963), and painter Private James L.

272 notes to pages 198–204

8 9 10

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

19 20 21 22 23 24 25

26 27 28 29 30 31

32 33

Graham (1873–ca. 1971). See “Art Works on View;” Jackson, Lawren Harris: Paintings, 1910–1948, 9. Phrase used by Florence Carlyle when describing her war activities (Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, 6 August 1920, Florence Carlyle Correspondence, wag). McLeod, In Good Hands, 173–4, 199n22. Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, 6 August 1920, Florence Carlyle Correspondence, wag; President’s Annual Reports, osa Papers, 28 February 1918, f1140, mu2257, p. 7, pao. A photograph of Carlyle in her nurse’s uniform appeared in “Paintings Typify Artist,” n.p., and “Roehampton House as a Hospital,” 239–41. McMann, Montreal Museum, 59. Royal Academy, Royal Academy Exhibitors, 1905–1970, 268. Luckyj, Helen McNicoll, 17; Lowrey, Visions of Light, 145. Harper, Early Painters, 203. Key, “Reminiscences,” 13; Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, 6 August 1920, wag. Key, “Reminiscences,” 15. Carlyle was fondly known as “Bird” by her family and many of her close friends. Key, “Reminiscences,” 15. In the reviews and catalogue of the November 1916 rca exhibition Carlyle is described as “now doing hospital work … at Queen Mary’s Hospital,” in Woolwich, England. See “Art Works on View;” E.B., “Over Three Hundred Pictures Displayed.” E.B., “Over Three Hundred Pictures Displayed.” Kerr, “Impressions of the osa,” 13. Minutes of the General Assembly of the rca, 5 December 1916, 6 February 1917, 6 March 1917; rca Minute Books, lac. Key, “Reminiscences,” 17. Ibid., 16. Charlesworth, “Good Pictures at osa Exhibition,” 2. See also Kerr, “Paintings at osa.” The enlargement of munitions factories created an acute problem of supplying meals for the large influx of workers. The Munition Workers’ Auxiliary Committee, of which Lady Henry Grosvenor was a member, was formed in June 1915 to organize and run the ymca canteens for munitions workers across England. Grosvenor had charge of the canteens in Woolwich, Crayford, and the adjoining district(Times History of the War, 195–6). Ibid., 196. Key, “Reminiscences,” 19. Ibid. Florence Carlyle to Blanche and Russell Carlyle, ca. May 1917, Artist Correspondence File, wag. Key, “Reminiscences,” 22. The canvas The Hour of Call to Service, no. 439, was exhibited in 1918 at the Royal British Colonial Society of Artists War and Peace exhibition in London, England (Royal British Colonial Society of Artists, Royal British Colonial, 44, Archives, Royal Academy, London). Kerr, “Art Notes,” 13. “1917,” no. 196, was offered for sale at $1,000, The Late Lieut, a.d. Kirkpatrick, no. 157, was not for sale, and Camp Borden (The Tattoo), no. 120, was offered for sale at $700. BellSmith and Reid’s paintings are illustrated in the Catalogue of Department of Fine Arts Canadian National Exhibition, Toronto 1917, cne Archives.

notes to pages 204–10 273 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43

44 45

46 47

48 49

50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

58

“French, Italian, and Canadian Paintings at the Exhibition,” n.p. “Collected Pictures of Florence Carlyle,” n.p. “French, Italian, and Canadian Paintings at the Exhibition,” n.p. Key, “Reminiscences,” 23. Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, 16 October 1917, wag. Ibid. Ibid. Florence Carlyle to Blanche Carlyle, 20 January 1918, wag. Ibid. The Hour of Call to Service was exhibited by Carlyle in 1918 as no. 439, at the Royal British Colonial Society of Artists, “War and Peace Exhibition,” held at Burlington House, London under the auspices of the Royal Academy. The painting remains unlocated and was described as “a portrait of a Red Cross nurse” (Charlesworth, “Pictures by Florence Carlyle.”). Tippett, Art at the Service, 44. In 1918 the Canadian War Memorials Fund expanded its coverage of the First World War to include the Canadian home front. Armington was given work as an etcher and printmaker with the cwmf in 1918 (Tovell, A New Class of Art, 145; Tippett, Art at the Service, 23–35). “List of Artists, in Canadian War Records Office Report, submitted by Lord Beaverbrook,” ngc. Carlyle’s name does not appear on the list of artists that was compiled on 14 December 1917; however, the completed portrait is included in the list of commissioned paintings dated 20 June 1918. See Lord Beaverbrook to Sir Edmund Walker, 14 December 1917, Canadian War Art, 5.41c, Canadian War Memorials (General), File 1, ngc; see also “List of Pictures Commissioned for, Purchased by and Presented to the Canadian War Memorials Fund. June 20th. 1918,” Canadian War Art, 5.41c, Canadian War Memorials (General), File 1, ngc. Moore, “Canadian Women War Workers Overseas,” 739. The mlcw was the Montreal city branch of the ncwc. See McLeod, In Good Hands, 62; see also “Connoisseur in Pictures, Lady Drummond,” 33; “Coming London Sales, Drummond Picture Sale,” 6; Gwyn, Tapestry of War, 126. “Canadian War Memorials,” 17; see also Westley, Remembrance of Grandeur, 115; and Gwyn, Tapestry, 149. Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, 3 April 1918, wag. Key, “Reminiscences,” 25. Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, 3 April 1918, wag. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Lady Drummond’s insignia is likely Grade iv, that of an Officer, Brother or Sister. Insignia composition and meaning were confirmed by the staff of the Canadian War Museum, Ottawa, 2 May 1994. See also Dorling, Ribbons and Medals, 30–1; “Canadian War Memorials,” 17. In 1946 the painting Son and Heir, which had been bought by the family ca. 1918, was owned by Frank Carlyle Millard of Dunnville, Ont. Millard was the grandson of Sophia

274 notes to pages 210–14

59

60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74

75

76 77 78

79 80 81

Youmans who was Florence Carlyle’s aunt and sister to her mother, Emily Youmans. (Frank Millard to Blanche Carlyle, 18 October 1946; Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, 16 April 1918; and Judith Hastings to Russell Carlyle, 21 April 1918, wag). Brass and Nasturtiums (no. 126) was offered for sale at $50. Daughter (no. 127), presently in the collection of the Art Gallery of Hamilton in Ontario, was offered at $150 (Catalogue of Department of Fine Arts cne, 1917, 53, cne Archives). Florence Carlyle to Robert Gagen, 20 June ca. 1918 (no year given). Carlyle Artist Files, E.P. Taylor Research Library and Archives, ago. Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, ca. 15 July 1918, wag. Hugh Walpole to Florence Carlyle, 15 July 1918 and 24 July 1918, Carlyle Correspondence File, wag. Catalogue of the Canadian National Exhibition Department of Fine Arts, August 1918, 38, cne Archives. Irene Hare, “Close-Ups: Laura Muntz Lyall,” n.p.; Canadian National Exhibition Department of Fine Arts, catalogue, 1918, 42, cne Archives. “Canadian War Memorials,” 17. Florence Carlyle to Russell and Blanche Carlyle, ca. 11 November 1918, wag. The artist shared rooms with three other people, including Judith Hastings. Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, 27 March 1919, wag. Carlyle Correspondence File, wag. Key, “Reminiscences,” 24. A.W. Potter (Library/Archives, Royal Academy of Arts, London) to author, 4 August 1998. Royal British Colonial Society of Artists, War and Peace Exhibition, 28–45. Ibid. Princess Louise exhibited Evening Light, no. 288, and Carlyle’s painting Chioggia was exhibited as no. 298 (ibid., 28–9). Florence Carlyle to Blanche Carlyle, 11 December 1918, wag. The total number of artists participating in the cwmf scheme by its end, in 1921, was 116: 1 Dane, 3 Belgians, 2 Australians, 1 Serbian, 66 Britons, and 43 Canadians. A list of the artists employed by the cwmf appears in Wodehouse, Check List of the War Collections (Ottawa 1968). Lady Drummond was exhibited as no. 132. See Canadian War Memorials Exhibition, Burlington House (London, 1919), 20, Canadian War Memorials Exhibition catalogues, cwm Archives. Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, 27 October 1919, wag. Their flat was at 20 Gledhow Gardens, South Kensington, London. Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, 23 March 1918, wag. Invitation, Canadian War Memorials Exhibition, Anderson Galleries, New York City, June 1919, Canadian War Art, 5.41 c Canadian War Memorials (General) File 1, ngc Archives. C.M., “The Canadian War Memorials,” American Magazine of Art (June 1919): 290; and, “Canadian War Memorial Show,” 1. “iode Exhibit of War Memorial Paintings,” 32; “Canada’s War Memorial Pictures,” 32. “Women’s Interests in the Home and State, More Paintings, 10.

notes to pages 214–20 275 82 Edward Greig to Eric Brown, 1 November 1919. Canadian War Art, 5.41 c, Canadian War Art Loans (Misc.) File 1, ngc Archives. 83 “Canadian War Art Exhibition,” 3. 84 “War’s Last Phase Shown in Paint,” 5. 85 Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, 27 October 1919, wag. 86 Key, “Reminiscences,” 26. The painting Reverie was sold by the artist and remains unlocated. 87 Ibid. 88 Elizabeth Barrett Browning, Sonnets from the Portuguese xliii, in Ricks, The Brownings: Letters and Poetry, 194. 89 Key, “Reminiscences,” 27. 90 Ibid. 91 Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, 27 October 1919; Florence Carlyle to Blanche Hunter Carlyle, 28 June 1919, wag. 92 Florence Carlyle to Blanche Hunter Carlyle, 28 June 1920; Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, ca. Christmas 1920, wag. Carlyle Correspondence Files, wag. 93 Mary Nicholena MacCord was a member of the American National Academy of Design, and the American Water Color Society. Her work is represented in the collection of the National Arts Club, New York City. See Lowrey, “A Noble Tradition: American Paintings from The National Arts Club,” 90–7; Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, 6 August 1920, wag; Levy, American Art Annual (1899), 466. 94 Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, 6 August 1920, wag. 95 Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, ca. Christmas 1920, wag. 96 Ibid. 97 Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, 1 December 1921, wag. 98 Auguste Joseph Delecluse (1855–1928). See Falk, “European Teachers of American Artists,” xxxiv; Florence Carlyle to Russell Carlyle, ca. December 1921. Carlyle Correspondence File, wag. 99 Russell Carlyle worked in the District Engineer’s Office, at the Winnipeg Department of Public Works. 100 “Minutes of Council Meeting at the Art Association of Montreal on Friday the 17th. November 1922,” rca Minute Books, 28 i 126, vol. 17, Minute Book (Transcripts) (1906– 27), lac. 101 Florence Carlyle to O.B. Graves, 6 December 1922, and ca. December 1922, Florence Carlyle Artist File, ml. 102 This short story was sent by the artist to the publishers of Time and Tide, a literary arts focused periodical, based in London’s Fleet Street. It was published on 28 November 1923, seven months after Carlyle’s death. Sadly, she had died without knowing of its acceptance. See Carlyle, “Mary’s Child,” Time and Tide (28 November 1923): 1177–9; Judith Hastings to Russell Carlyle, 10 June 1923, wag. 103 Judith Hastings to Russell Carlyle, 17 February 1923, wag. 104 Maud Carlyle Hill to Russell and Blanche Carlyle, 31 May 1923, wag. 105 Maud Carlyle Hill was with Florence in Crowborough; Lillian’s married name was Hastings. Unidentified clipping, Artist Clipping File, wag.

276 notes to pages 221–22 106 “In the Estate of the Late Miss Florence Carlyle,” Listing of Florence Carlyle’s possessions in contents of “The Cottage, Sweethaws,” Crowborough. Artist Files, wag; obituary column, London Times (England), 5 May 1923. 107 Florence Carlyle Dies in England,” n.p. 108 Phrase taken from the title of the book, A Social Departure (1890), by the Canadian writer Sara Jeanette Duncan (1862–1922). 109 Strong-Boag, introduction, 1. 110 Section written by [Mary] Dignam in publication by the ncwc for distribution at the 1901 Pan American Exposition, Buffalo, N.Y., in National Council of Women of Canada, Women of Canada, 222. See Dignam, “Arts, Handicrafts, Music and Drama.” 111 Macbeth, “Canadian Women in the Arts,” 23. 112 Bell, “Women and Art in Canada,” 7. 113 Kerr, “The Artist,” 29. 114 “The Canadian Woman Who Is Born with a Gift”; see also “Death in England of Florence Carlyle,” n.p.; and an article from the Montreal Star, “Florence Carlyle,” Montreal Star.

bibliography 

archival sources Art Gallery of Ontario [ago], formerly Art Gallery of Toronto, E.P. Taylor Research Library and Archives, Toronto Artist Files: Florence Carlyle, Gertrude Spurr Cutts, Harriet Ford, Estelle Kerr, Elizabeth McGillivray Knowles, Laura Muntz Lyall, Mary Hiester Reid, Louise Beresford Tully, Sydney Strickland Tully, Mary Wrinch Reid. Mary Wrinch Reid Scrapbook. Canadian National Exhibition [cne], Records and Archives, Toronto cne and tie Annual Art Exhibition Files, Art Exhibition Catalogues, 1885–1920. Canadian War Museum [cwm], Archives, Ottawa Canadian War Memorial Exhibition Papers; Exhibition Catalogues. Knoedler’s Galleries, now M. Knoedler & Company, Library/Archives, New York Exhibition Catalogues, Exhibition of Paintings by Women Artists, 1908, catalogue and files. Library and Archives Canada [lac], formerly National Archives of Canada, Ottawa Royal Canadian Academy Papers: rca exhibition records, minute books, and catalogues; rca Clipping Scrapbook, mg28, i 126, vols. 14 and 15. London Public Library, London Room Archives, London, Ont. Clipping Files, Women’s Art Club of London (wacl). McIntosh Gallery, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont. Curatorial File, The Moth. Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York Watson Library/Archives Society of American Artists Annual Exhibition Catalogues, 1900–1905. Communication from Christine Reik, Watson Library, 4 August 2004. Department of Drawings and Prints Osborne Company Annual Catalogue of Calendars, 1901, Collection of American Trade Catalogues Montreal Museum of Art, Library and Archives, Montreal Florence Carlyle, Artist Clipping File. Musée du Quebec, Library/Archives, Quebec City, Quebec Florence Carlyle Artist Clipping File. Museum London, Archives [ml], London, Ont. Florence Carlyle, Artist File, Florence Carlyle to O.B. Graves, 6 December 1922.

278 bibliography National Gallery of Canada, Archives [ngc], Ottawa Artist Files: Florence Carlyle, Gertrude Spurr, Mary Dignam, Mary Bell Eastlake, Harriet Ford, Elizabeth McGillivray Knowles, Laura Muntz, Mary Wrinch Reid, Sydney Strickland Tully. waac Exhibition Catalogues, 1897; Accession Files, Grey and Gold; Afternoon, Venice; Canadian War Memorials Fonds. National Library of Canada, Special Collections, Ottawa Book of the Victorian Era Ball, 1898. Parrish Art Museum, William Chase Archives, Southampton, New York Shinnecock Summer School of Art Fonds. Public Archives of Ontario [pao], Toronto osa Papers; osa Exhibition Catalogues, 1880–1925. Toronto Heliconian Club Fonds. Society of Arts and Crafts of Canada Fonds. Royal Academy of Arts, Archives, Burlington House, London Royal British Colonial Society of Artists in Conjunction with the Society of Australian Artists Exhibition: War and Peace (1918), Exhibition Fonds. Smithsonian Institution, Swift Archives Center, National Museum of American History, Washington, D.C. Osborne Art Calendars in Miniature, Warshaw Collection of Business Americana. University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware Library, Special Collections, Osborne Calendar Company Catalogues. University of Western Ontario, Regional History Room, London, Ont. Women’s Art Club of London Papers. Western Fair Art Department Papers, Exhibition Catalogues. Whyte Museum of the Canadian Rockies, Banff, Alberta F.W. Freeborn Papers. Woodstock Art Gallery, Archives [wag], Woodstock, Ont. Florence Carlyle, Artist Files, Clipping Files, Correspondence Files, Curatorial Files. Florence Carlyle Johnston, “Florence Carlyle, arca, 1864–1923.” Typescript, ca.1984. Florence Carlyle, Artist Files. E.J. Carlyle, “The Carlyle Tree.” Typescript, n.d. Florence Carlyle, Artist Files. Women’s Art Association of Canada, Archives [waac], and Lyceum Club, Toronto waac Annual Reports, 1894–1922. waac Papers, Scrapbooks, 1890–1920, Correspondence, Publications.

personal sources Correspondence re Granite Club, Toronto, Art Collection Gilmour, George W., to Susan Butlin, 7 December 1994. Diamond, Kim, to Susan Butlin, 20 August 1998. Fyvie, Peter, to Susan Butlin, 16 October 1998.

bibliography 279 Correspondence re Arts and Letters Club Peringer, Raymond to Susan Butlin, 15 May 1998. Correspondence re Florence Carlyle MacCausland, Marian, to Susan Butlin, 22 November 1993. Correspondence re William Chase and Students at Shinnecock Summer School of Art Minushkin, Renee (Parish Art Museum, N.Y.), to Susan Butlin, 8 September 1998. Correspondence with Relatives of Florence Carlyle Correspondence with grandchildren of Cecile Davis Dasselaar, Martha Millard, to Susan Butlin, 5 August 1998; 21 August 1998; February 2006. Millard, M. Paul, to Susan Butlin, 20 August 1998. Correspondence with Florence Carlyle’s niece Johnston, Florence Carlyle, to Susan Butlin, 29 July 1993. Johnston, Florence Carlyle, to Susan Butlin, 15 May 1994. Correspondence with Florence Carlyle’s great-niece Skeoch, Marjorie, to Susan Butlin, 3 June 1997. Skeoch, Marjorie, to Susan Butlin, 6 August 1998. Correspondence re 1918 War and Peace Exhibition Potter, A.W. (Royal Academy of Arts, London, England), to Susan Butlin, 4 August 1998. Correspondence re Florence Carlyle’s Exhibitions in the United States Moynihan, Cornelia (Library/Archives, National Museum of Women in the Arts, Washington, D.C.), to Susan Butlin, 4 May 1994; 23 May 1994.

interview Johnston, Florence Carlyle. Personal interview by Susan Butlin, Woodstock, Ont., August 1993.

newspapers consulted Crewe Observer (Crewe, England) Le Devoir (Montreal) The Farmer’s Sun Glasgow Herald London (Ontario) Advertiser London (Ontario) Free Press London (Ontario) News Montreal Gazette Montreal Standard Montreal Star

Montreal Telegraph Morning Post (Liverpool, England) New York Times Ottawa Citizen Toronto Globe Toronto Mail Toronto Mail and Empire Toronto Sunday World Toronto Telegram Woodstock Daily Sentinel-Review

280 bibliography periodicals consulted (pre-1930) American Art News American Magazine of Art Arcadia Canadian Courier (Toronto) Canadian Home Journal Canadian Magazine Canadian Monthly Christmas Echo (London, Ont.) The Craftsman The Critic (New York)

Dominion Illustrated News Everywoman’s World (Toronto) Harper’s Monthly Magazine International Studio (New York) Monthly Illustrator (New York) North American Review Organe des interets Canadiens et Français (Paris) Saturday Night (Toronto) Scribner’s Magazine

primary and secondary sources A.C. “The Spring Exhibition at the Montreal Art Gallery.” Montreal Star, 11 March 1911. – “Pictures Shown at Spring Exhibition of the Art Gallery Reach a High Level.” Montreal Star, 15 March 1912. “About Town.” Toronto Globe, 16 December 1887, 8. Acton, Janice, ed. Women at Work: Ontario, 1850–1930. Toronto: Canadian Women’s Press 1974. Adler, Kathleen. “The Suburban, the Modern and ‘une Dame de Passy.’” Oxford Art Journal 12, no. 1 (1889): 3–13. Aikin, Roger. “Henrietta Shore and Edward Weston.” American Art 6, no. 1 (winter 1992): 42 –61. Allaire, Sylvain. “Les Canadiens au salon officiel de Paris entre 1870 et 1910: Sections peinture et dessin.” Journal of Canadian Art History (1977–78): 141–52. Alpine Club of Canada.” Saturday Night 20 (1 June 1907): 7. “Amateurs in Art.” London Free Press, 19 March 1896. “American Artists.” New York Times, 28 April 1904. “American Artists.” New York Times, 26 March 1904. Amos, Robert. Mary Riter Hamilton. Victoria: Art Gallery of Greater Victoria 1977. Anderson, Janice. “Negotiating Gendered Spaces: The Artistic Practice of Mary Hiester Reid.” In Quiet Harmony: The Art of Mary Hiester Reid, 27–47. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario 2000. – “Mary Hiester Reid.” Paper presented at opening of exhibition Quiet Harmony: The Art of Mary Hiester Reid. Carleton University Art Gallery, Ottawa, 24 September 2001. Antaki, Karen. Emily Coonan (1885–1971). Montreal: Concordia University Art Gallery 1987. – “H. Mabel May (1877–1971), the Montreal Years: 1909–1938.” Master’s thesis, Concordia University, 1992. Ardis, Ann L. New Woman, New Novels: Feminism and Early Modernism. New Brunswick and London: Rutgers University Press 1990.

bibliography 281 Armstrong, Regina. “Representative American Women Illustrators: The Child Interpreters.” The Critic 36 (May 1900): 417–29. – “Representative American Women Illustrators: The Decorative Workers.” The Critic 36 (June 1900): 520–29. – “Representative American Women Illustrators: The Character Workers.” The Critic 37, no. 1 (July 1900): 43–54. – “Representative American Women Illustrators: The Character Workers II.” The Critic 37, no. 2 (Aug. 1900): 131–41. “Art.” Canadian Home Journal (March 1897). “Art.” Saturday Night 9 (18 March 1896): 9. “Art.” Saturday Night 10 (6 March 1897): 9. “Art and Artists.” Saturday Night 1 (4 February 1888): 3. “Art and Artists.” Saturday Night 4 (4 April 1891): 11. “Art Association.” London Free Press, 17 October 1895. “Art Association.” Montreal Star, 19 April 1892. “Art Association.” Unidentified Montreal newspaper article, May 1896. waac Scrapbook, waac archive. Art Association of Montreal. A Catalogue of Oil Paintings by Mrs. C.H. Eastlake (M.A. Bell). Montreal: Art Association of Montreal 1923. “Art Awards at Buffalo.” New York Times, 7 August 1901, 7. “Art Club Exhibition.” London Free Press, 13 March 1895. “Art Display.” London Free Press, 30 May 1898. “Art Exhibit.” London News, 27 April 1897. “Art Exhibition, Connoisseurs Select Some of the Best.” rca Clipping Scrapbook, lac. Art Gallery of Ontario. Farquhar McGillivray Knowles, Elizabeth McGillivray Knowles: A Selection of Paintings and Works on Paper from the Collection of the Art Gallery of Ontario. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario 1980. – Introduction to Art Gallery of Ontario: Selected Works. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario 1990. “Artists and Friends Thronged Gallery.” Montreal Star, 21 March 1902. “Art Notes.” Saturday Night 8 (4 May 1895): 9. “Art Notes.” The Week (Toronto), (January 1895). “Art Opening a Social Event.” Montreal Gazette, 15 March 1912. “Art Review.” Hamilton Spectator, 22 March 1947. “Art Studies in Paris.” New York Times, 6 September 1896. “Art Works on View.” Montreal Gazette, 17 November 1916. rca Scrapbook, vol. 14, mg 28, i 126, lac. “Arts and Letters Club. The Year Book of Canadian Art, 1913. London and Toronto: J.M. Dent 1913. Arts Club of Montreal. Portrait of a Club. Montreal: Arts Club of Montreal 1962. Aylward, Emily Meredyth. “The American Girls’ Art Club in Paris.” Scribner’s Magazine (November 1894): 598. Bacchi, Carol Lee. Liberation Deferred: The Ideas of the English-Canadian Suffragists, 1897–1918. Toronto: University of Toronto 1983. Baker, Victoria. Paul Peel: A Retrospective, 1860–1892. London, Ont.: London Art Gallery 1986.

282 bibliography Ball, Helen. “Canadian Artists Showing Patriotism That Is Practical.” Toronto News, 30 December 1914. rca Scrapbook 1880–1915, mg28, i 126, vol. 15, lac. Bannerman, Jean. Leading Ladies: Canada, 1639–1967. Dundas, Ont.: Carrswood 1967. Bashkirtseff, Marie. Journal of Marie Bashkirtseff. Translated by A.D. Hall. Chicago and New York: Rand, McNally & Co. 1890. Bayer, Fern. “The ‘Ontario Collection’ and the Ontario Society of Artists Policy and Purchases, 1873–1914.” Canadian Art Review/racar 8, no. 1 (1981): 32–54. – The Ontario Collection. Markham: Ontario Heritage Foundation, Fitzhenry & Whiteside 1984. Beatty, J.W. “The Royal Canadian Academy of 1913.” Canadian Courier 15, no. 2 (13 December 1913). Beauvoir, Simone de. The Second Sex. 1949. Reprint, London: Pan 1988. Beaux, Cecilia. Background with Figures. Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin 1930. Bell, Margaret. “Women and Art in Canada.” Everywoman’s World (June 1914): 7, 15, 30. Belton, Robert. Sights of Resistance: Approaches to Canadian Visual Culture. Calgary: University of Calgary Press 2001. Benezit, E. Dictionnaire critique et documentaire des peintres, sculpteurs, dessinateurs et graveurs. Paris: Librarie Grund 1976. Benstock, Shari. Women of the Left Bank, Paris, 1900–1940. Austin: University of Texas Press 1986. Berry, Virginia. Vistas of Promise: Manitoba, 1874–1919. Winnipeg: Winnipeg Art Gallery 1987. Betterton, Rosemary. An Intimate Distance: Women, Artists and the Body. London: Routledge 1996. Betterton, Rosemary, ed. Looking On: Images of Femininity in the Visual Arts and Media. London and New York: Pandora Press 1987. Bice, Clare. “Eva Bradshaw, 1873–1938.” In Eva Bradshaw. London, Ont.: London Art Museum 1970. Blackburn, Henry. “Pont-Aven and Douarnenez – Sketches in Lower Brittany.” Magazine of Art 2. London, Paris and New York: Cassell, Petter, Galpin & Co. 1879. Blanchard, Paula. The Life of Emily Carr. Vancouver: Douglas and McIntyre 1987. Bland, Lucy. “Marriage Laid Bare: Middle-Class Women and Marital Sex, 1880s–1914.” In Labour and Love: Women’s Experience of Home and Family, 1850–1940, edited by Jane Lewis. Oxford: Basil Blackwell 1986. – “The Married Woman, the ‘New Woman’ and the Feminist: Sexual Politics of the 1890s.” In Equal or Different: Women’s Politics, 1800–1914, edited by Jane Rendall. Oxford: Basil Blackwell 1987. “Bohemian Crowd at Opening of New Art Rooms.” Montreal Star, 3 March 1913. Book of the Victorian Era Ball Given at Toronto on the Twenty Eighth of December MDCCCXCVII . Toronto: Rowsell and Hutchins 1898. Boutilier, Alicia. Four Women Who Painted in the 1930s and 1940s: Courtice, Haworth, Housser, McLaughlin. Ottawa: Carleton University Art Gallery 1998. Boyanoski, Christine. Loring and Wyle: A Sculptor’s Legacy. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario 1987. Braide, Janet. William Brymner, 1855–1925: A Retrospective. Kingston: Agnes Etherington Art Centre 1979.

bibliography 283 Brooke, Janet M. Discerning Taste: Montreal Collectors, 1880–1920. Montreal: Montreal Museum of Fine Arts 1989. Browning, Elizabeth Barrett. Sonnets from the Portuguese XLIII . In The Brownings’ Letters and Poetry, edited by Christopher Ricks. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday 1970. Bryant, Keith L. William Merritt Chase: A Genteel Bohemian. Columbia and London: University of Missouri Press 1991. Burgoyne, St George. “Montreal’s Spring Art Show.” Canadian Courier 9, no. 17 (25 March 1911): 11. Burkhauser, Jude, ed. Glasgow Girls: Women in Art and Design, 1880–1920. Edinburgh: Canongate 1990. Burns, Sarah. “The ‘Earnest Untiring Worker’ and the Magician of the Brush: Gender Politics in the Criticism of Cecilia Beaux and John Singer Sargent.” Oxford Art Journal 15 (1992): 36–53. Butlin, Susan. “Making a Living: Florence Carlyle and the Negotiation of a Professional Artistic Identity.” Master’s thesis, Carleton University, 1995. – “Women Making Shells – Marking Women’s Presence in Munitions Work, 1914–1918: The Art of Frances Loring, Florence Wyle, Mabel May, and Dorothy Stevens.” Canadian Military History 5, no. 1 (spring 1996): 41–8. – “Landscape as Memorial: A.Y. Jackson and the Landscape of the Western Front, 1917– 1918.” Canadian Military History 5, no. 2 (autumn 1996): 62–70. – “Telling Her Stories: Emily Carr’s This and That.” Canadian Literature 196 (spring 2008). – “A New Matrix of the Arts: A History of the Professionalization of Women Artists in Canada, 1880–1914.” Ph.D. diss., Carleton University, 2008. – Review of This Wild Spirit: Women in the Rocky Mountains of Canada,” edited by Colleen Skidmore. British Journal of Canadian Studies 21, no. 1 (spring 2008). C.M. “The Canadian War Memorials.” American Magazine of Art (June 1919): 290. “Calendar.” American Art News 6 (25 April 1908): 6. “Calendar of New York Special Exhibitions.” American Art News 6 (18 April 1908): 6. “Calendars.” New York Times, 17 December 1904. Callen, Anthea. “Sexual Division of Labour in the Arts and Crafts Movement.” In AView from the Interior: Feminism, Women and Design, edited by Judy Attfield and Pat Kirkham, chapter 10. London: Women’s Press 1989. – Angel in the Studio: Women in the Arts and Crafts Movement, 1870–1914. London: Astragal Books, 1979. Cameron, Elspeth. And Beauty Answers: The Life of Frances Loring and Florence Wyle. Toronto: Cormorant 2007. Cameron, F. “China Painting: Second Exhibition of the Women’s Art Club.” Unidentified London, Ont., newspaper, ca. March 1897.waac Scrapbook, waac Archives. Cameron, F. “Beauties of the Brush, Annual Spring Exhibition of the Woman’s Art Association.” London Advertiser, 18 March 1897. “Canada at St Louis.” Canadian Magazine 24, no. 1 (1904): 33–42. “Canada Building.” Advertisement. Saturday Night 15 (1 March 1902): 11. “Canada’s Grand Old Man Opened Our Exhibition.” Toronto Globe, 31 August 1903. “Canada’s Great Fair, Exhibition Formally Opened Yesterday.” Toronto Globe, 13 September 1883, 9.

284 bibliography “Canada’s Great Fair Successful, as Have Been the Efforts.” Toronto Globe, 29 August 1883, 4. “Canada’s War Memorial Pictures,” Saturday Night 33 (9 August 1919): 32. “Canadian Art.” Glasgow Herald, 5 July 1910. rca Scrapbook, mg28, i 126, vol. 15, lac. “Canadian Art Exhibition.” Crewe Observer, 9 July 1910. rca Scrapbook, mg28, i 126, vol. 15, lac. “Canadian Art in Liverpool.” Liverpool Courier, ca.5 July 1910. rca Scrapbook, vol. 15, mg28, i 126, lac. “Canadian Artist.” Canadian Home Journal, November 1914, 26. “Canadian Artists in Paris.” Dominion Illustrated News, 11 January 1890, 22. “Canadian Pictures.” Catalogue of Department of Fine Arts, Canadian National Exhibition, Toronto 1913, 59. cne Archives. “Canadian Pictures.” Liverpool Daily, ca. 4 July 1910. rca Scrapbook, mg28, i 126, vol. 15, lac. “Canadian War Art Exhibition.” Montreal Herald, 25 September 1920. “Canadian War Memorial Show.” American Art News (14 June 1919): 1. “Canadian War Memorials.” Saturday Night 32 (26 October 1918): 17. Canadian Who’s Who. Toronto and London: Musson Book Co. and The Times 1910. “Canadian Woman Who Is Born with a Gift.” Unidentified newspaper clipping, ca. 1911. Florence Carlyle Artist File, ago Reference Library. Canadienne [pseud.]. “The Advertising Profession for Women.” Saturday Night 26 (1913). Carlyle, Florence. “A Week of Student Life in Paris.” In “Woman’s Kingdom,” prior to 1923. Column edited by Kathleen Blake Coleman in the Toronto Mail. Reprinted as “Student Life in Paris as Told by the Late Florence Carlyle.” Woodstock Daily SentinelReview, 10 February 1936. – “Mary’s Child.” Time and Tide 4, no. 47 (28 November 1923): 1177–9. Casteras, Susan P. Images of Victorian Womanhood in English Art. London and Toronto: Associated University Presses 1987. – “‘The Necessity of a Name,’ Portrayals and Betrayals of Victorian Women Artists.” In Gender and Discourse in Victorian Literature and Art, edited by Antony H. Harrison and Beverly Taylor. DeKalb, Ill.: Northern Illinois University Press 1992. Census of Canada 1891. Vol. 2. Ottawa: Queen’s Printer 1893. “Centennial Art Exhibition Features City Native.” Woodstock Daily Sentinel-Review, 23 January 1967. Chad [pseud.]. “Woman’s Art Club Spring Exhibition.” Saturday Night 4 (2 May 1891): 7. Charlesworth, Hector. “Ontario Society of Artists Annual Exhibit.” Saturday Night 27 (21 March 1914): 5. – “The o.s.a. Exhibition.” Saturday Night 24 (8 April 1911): 25. – “Good Pictures at o.s.a. Exhibition.” Saturday Night 31 (24 March 1917): 2. – “Pictures by Florence Carlyle, Memorial Exhibition by a Famous Canadian Painter.” Saturday Night 40 (6 June 1925). – “Schools and Colleges, Arts and Letters: The Late Florence Carlyle.” Canadian Home Journal, July 1925. Cheney, Anne. Millay in Greenwich Village. University of Alabama Press 1975.

bibliography 285 Cherry, Deborah. “Surveying Seamstresses.” Feminist Art News 9 (1983): 27–9. – Painting Women: Victorian Women Artists. London and New York: Routledge 1993. – Beyond the Frame: Feminism and Visual Culture, Britain, 1850–1900. London and New York: Routledge 2000. Chesterton, Laura Prieto. “A Cultural History of Professional Women Artists in the United States, 1830–1930.” Ph.D. diss., Brown University, 1998. – [as Prieto, Laura R.]. At Home in the Studio: The Professionalization of Women Artists in America. Cambridge, Mass., and London: Harvard University Press 2001. Chilvers, Ian, and Harold Osborne, eds. The Oxford Dictionary of Art. Oxford: Oxford University Press 1988. “Chit, Chat.” Toronto Globe, 4 April 1899. Citoyenne [pseud.] See Fitzgibbon, Mary Agnes. Cleaverdon, Catherine L. The Woman Suffrage Movement in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press 1974. Colgate, William. Canadian Art: Its Origin and Development. Toronto: Ryerson Press 1943. – The Toronto Art Students’ League, 1886–1904. Toronto: Ryerson Press 1954. “Collected Pictures of Florence Carlyle.” Toronto Mail and Empire, 28 May 1925. Collins, Georgia, and Renee Sandell. Women, Art, and Education. Reston, Va.: National Art Education Association, 1984. Collins, John E. “Pictures from Paris.” Canadian Courier 10, no. 26 (25 November 1911). Colonial and Indian Exhibition, Official Catalogue of the Canadian Section. 2nd ed. London, England, 1886. “Coming London Sales, Drummond Picture Sale.” American Art News 17, no. 34 (June 1919): 6. “Connoisseur in Pictures, Lady Drummond.” Everywoman’s World (July 1914): 33. Cooper, Cynthia. Magnificent Entertainments: Fancy Dress Balls of Canada’s Governors General, 1876–1998. Hull, Que., and Fredericton, N.B.: Canadian Museum of Civilization and Goose Lane Editions 1997. Cott, Nancy. The Grounding of Modern Feminism. New Haven: Yale University Press 1987. Courtivron, Isabelle de, ed. Significant Others: Creativity and Intimate Partnership. London: Thames and Hudson 1993. Cowan, John. Canada’s Governors’-General: Lord Monck to General Vanier. Toronto: York Publishing 1965. Coxe, Reginald Cleveland. “Canada’s Art Exhibit.” Unidentified newspaper clipping, 1901. Cuttings Scrapbook, 1880–1915, mg28, i 126, vol. 15, p. 25, lac. Crawford, Gail. A Fine Line: Studio Crafts in Ontario from 1930 to the Present. Toronto: Dundurn 1998. Crawford, Lenore. “Beauties of Nature Captured on Canvas.” London Free Press, 12 June 1949. wacl Clipping Files, London Public Library. Crean, Susan. The Laughing One: A Journey to Emily Carr. Toronto: HarperCollins 2001. Davidoff, L. “Class and Gender in Victorian England: The Diaries of ArthurJ. Munby and Hannah Cullwick.” Feminist Studies 5, no. 1 (1979): 87–141. Davies, Barrie. At the Mermaid Inn: Wilfred Campbell, Archibald Lampman, Duncan Campbell Scott in The Globe, 1892–3. Toronto: University of Toronto Press 1979.

286 bibliography Davis, Angela. “Laying the Ground: The Establishment of an Artistic Milieu.” Manitoba History 4 (1982). Davis, Angela, and Sarah McKinnon. No Man’s Land: Commemorating the 70th Anniversary of the World War I Armistice. Ottawa: National Archives of Canada and War Amputations of Canada 1995. Dawkins, Heather. “The Diaries and Photographs of Hannah Cullwick.” Art History 10, no. 1 (1987): 154–87. Deacon, Florence E. “Representative Women: Florence Carlyle.” Toronto Globe, 8 June 1912. “Death in England of Florence Carlyle.” Toronto Mail and Empire, 9 May 1923. Deeks, R. Historical Sketch of the Women’s Art Association of Canada. Toronto: Women’s Art Association of Canada 1912. waac Archives. Dell, Floyd. Love in Greenwich Village. New York: George H. Doran Co. 1926. Dennison, Marie Caudill. “The American Girls’ Club in Paris.” Woman’s Art Journal 26, no. 1 (spring–summer 2005): 32–37. Deutch, Sarah. Women and the City: Gender, Space and Power in Boston, 1870–1940. London: Oxford University Press 2000. Dickman, Chris. The Prints of Mary Wrinch. Exhibition Catalogue. Durham, Ont.: Durham Art Gallery, 1980. – “Colour and Contrast: The Graphic Work of Mary Wrinch.” Canadian Collector (January/February 1982): 41–4. Dignam, Mary Ella. “The Loan Portrait Exhibition.” Unidentified Toronto newspaper clipping, ca. April 1899. waac Scrapbook, waac Archives. – “Art, Handicrafts, Music and Drama.” In Women of Canada: Their Life and Work, edited by the National Council of Women of Canada, 209–39. Ottawa: Minister of Agriculture, 1900. Reprint ncwc, 1975. Dodge, Grace H., ed. What Women Can Earn: Occupations of Women and Their Compensation. New York: Frederick A. Stokes 1899. Dorais, Lucie. J.W. Morrice. Ottawa: National Gallery of Canada 1985. Dorling, H. Taprell. Ribbons and Medals. London: Osprey 1983. “Double Treat for Lovers of Art Here.” Unidentified clipping, May 1923, lac. Downie, Jill. The Passionate Pen: The Life and Times of Faith Fenton. Toronto: HarperCollins 1993. Doyle, James. “Research – Problems and Solutions – Canadian Women Writers and the American Literary Milieu of the 1890s.” In Re(dis)covering Our Foremothers: Nineteenth Century Canadian Women Writers, edited by Lorraine McMullen, 31. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press 1990. Doyle, Lynn C. [pseud.]. Saturday Night 8 (30 March 1895): 9. – “Art Notes.” Saturday Night 8 (6 April 1895): 9. – “Art Notes.” Saturday Night 8 (13 April 1895): 9. – “Royal Canadian Academy 16th Annual Exhibition.” Saturday Night 8 (27 April 1895): 9. – “Art Notes.” Saturday Night 8 (4 May 1895): 9. – “Art Notes.” Saturday Night 8 (22 June 1895): 9. – “Art Notes.” Saturday Night 8 (29 June 1895): 7. – “Art Notes.” Saturday Night 8 (19 October 1895): 9.

bibliography 287 – “Art Notes.” Saturday Night 9 (30 November 1895): 9. – “Art Notes.” Saturday Night 9 (14 March 1896): 9. – “Art.” Saturday Night 9 (21 March 1896): 9. – “Art.” Saturday Night 9 (28 March 1896): 9. – “Art.” Saturday Night 9 (4 July 1896): 9. – “Art.” Saturday Night 10 (23 January 1897): 9. – “Art.” Saturday Night 10 (6 March 1897): 9. – “Art.” Saturday Night 10 (20 March 1897): 15. – “Studio and Gallery.” Saturday Night 10 (22 May 1897): 19. Drysdale, William. “Women Flock to the Pan-American Fair.” New York Times, 13 June 1901. Duncan, Sara Jeanette [Mrs Everard Cotes; Garth Grafton; Jane Wintergreen, pseud.]. A Social Departure. 1890. – An American Girl in London. 1891. – The Simple Adventures of a Memsahib. 1893. – A Daughter of Today. 1894. – The Pool in the Desert. 1903. – The Imperialist. 1904. “During the Princess’ Inspection.” Toronto Mail, 17 September 1883. E.B. “Over Three Hundred Pictures Displayed.” Toronto Telegraph, 17 November 1916. “E.N. Hunt.” Advertisement. London Free Press, 31 August 1888. Effigy [pseud.]. “About Town.” Saturday Night 6 (18 March 1893): 15. Elliott, Bridget, and J.A. Wallace, eds. Women Artists and Writers: Modernist (Im)positionings. London and New York: Routledge 1994. Elliott, Bridget, and Janice Helland, eds. Women Artists and the Decorative Arts, 1880–1935: The Gender of Ornament. Aldershot: Ashgate 2002. Ellis, Mrs. Family Monitor and Domestic Guide. New York 1844. Empress Hotel. Canada’s First Ladies: A Portrait Collection in the Empress Hotel, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. Victoria: Empress Hotel, 1946. Errington, Jane. Wives and Mothers, Schoolmistresses and Scullery Maids: Working Women in Upper Canada, 1790–1840. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press 1995. “Exhibition of Canadian Art.” Ottawa Citizen, 9 April 1915. rca Scrapbook, mg28, i 126, vol. 14, lac. “Exhibition of Works of Art.” Ottawa Citizen, 9 April 1915. rca Scrapbook, mg28, i 126, vol. 14, lac. “Exhibitions Now On.” American Art News 6 (25 April 1908): 6. “Explained, Bazar.” Cartoon. Saturday Night 10 (14 May 1898): 9. F.T.C. “The Best in Canadian Art on Exhibition in Salon at Art Gallery.” Montreal News, 15 March 1915. rca Scrapbook, mg28, i 126, vol. 14, p. 21, lac. Fabien, M. Henri. “L’académie royale.” Le Devoir, 6 December 1913. [Fabre, Paul]. “Nos artistes à Paris, M F. Carlyle.” Organe des Interets Canadiens et Français, 20 May 1893. – “Nos artistes à Paris.” Organe des Interets Canadiens et Français, 9 June 1894. Fairbairn, Margaret Laing. “Art Notes.” Toronto Globe (Women’s Edition), 18 April 1895. – “A Decade of Canadian Art.” Canadian Magazine (June 1901): 157–63.

288 bibliography – “A Milestone in Canadian Art.” Unidentified clipping, 1907, 12. – [signed M.L.F.]. “Carlyle Versatility Shown in Exhibition.” Toronto Star, 27 May 1925. Falk, Peter Hastings. “European Teachers of American Artists.” In Who Was Who in American Art, edited by Peter Falk. Madison, Conn.: Sound View Press 1985. Falk, Peter Hastings, ed. The Annual Exhibition Record of the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts, 1876–1913. Madison, Conn.: Sound View Press, 1989. – The Annual Exhibition Record of the Art Institute of Chicago, 1889–1950. Madison, Conn.: Sound View Press 1990. – The Annual Exhibition Record of the National Academy of Design, 1901–1950. Madison, Conn.: Sound View Press 1990. Fallis, Margaret. “Laura Muntz.” Research Paper, 1985, acwa Artist File, Carleton University. – “Sydney Strickland Tully, arca, 1861–1911.” Research paper, 1985, acwa Artist File, Carleton University. Farnsworth, P.T. “The Artists’ Colony in MacDougal Alley, Where Some of Our Best Known American Painters and Sculptors Live and Work.” Craftsman 11, no. 1 (October 1906): 57–69. Farr, Dorothy. Horatio Walker, 1858–1938. Kingston, Ont.: Agnes Etherington Art Centre 1977. Farr, Dorothy, and Natalie Luckyj. From Women’s Eyes. Kingston, Ont.: Agnes Etherington Art Centre 1975. Fehrer, Catherine. “New Light on the Academie Julian and Its Founder (Rodolphe Julian).” Gazette des beaux-arts 103 (May–June 1984): 207–16. “Fine Art, the Exhibition of the Ontario Society of Artists.” Canadian Monthly 11, no. 6 (June 1877): 681. “Fine Collection of Pictures.” Montreal Star, 5 April 1910. “Fine Exhibit of Oil Paintings.” Toronto Daily News, 28 February 1902. “Fine Exhibition by Toronto Painters.” Montreal Star, 10 December 1921. “Fine Show of Pictures.” Toronto Mail and Empire, 7 March 1903. Fish, Arthur. Henrietta Rae (Mrs Ernest Normand). London, Paris, New York and Melbourne: Cassell 1905. Fitz-clare [pseud]. See Fitzgibbon, Mary Agnes. Fitzgibbon, Mary Agnes [Lally Bernard, pseud.]. “Driftwood.” Toronto Globe, 13 April 1901. – “Driftwood.” Toronto Globe, 20 April 1901. – “Driftwood.” Toronto Globe, 26 February 1902. – “Driftwood.” Toronto Globe, 4 March 1902. Fleming, Roy Franklin. “The Royal Canadian Academy of Arts. In The Year Book of Canadian Art, 1913. London and Toronto: Arts and Letters Club and J.M. Dent & Sons 1913. “Florence Carlyle.” Montreal Star, 4 June 1923. Florence Carlyle Clipping File, mmfa. “Florence Carlyle.” Obituary column. London (England) Times, 15 May 1923. “Florence Carlyle and Inaugural Loan Exhibition of the Arts Club, Montreal, 1913.” Carlyle Artist’s File, Library, Musée du Quebec. “Florence Carlyle, arca.” Selkirk Weekly Record, 2 December 1926. Artist Clipping Files, ago Reference Library.

bibliography 289 “Florence Carlyle, Artist.” Christmas Echo, December 1911. Carlyle Artist Files, wag. “Florence Carlyle Dies in England.” Toronto Globe, 9 May 1923. Ford, Harriet. “The Royal Canadian Academy of Arts.” Canadian Magazine 3 (May 1894): 45. Forster, Audrey. “From the cpr to the Canada Council.” In Report of the Royal Commission on National Development in the Arts, Letters and Sciences, 1949–1951, edited by Glen Carruthers, Gordanna Lazarevich et al., 214. Ottawa: Edmond Cloutier 1951. Forster, J.W.L. “Art and Artists in Ontario.” In Canada: An Encyclopedia of the Country, vol. 4, edited by J. Castell Hopkins. Toronto: Linscott Publishing 1898. – Under the Studio Light: Leaves from a Portrait Painter’s Sketch Book. Toronto: Macmillan 1928. Foss, Brian, and Janice Anderson. Quiet Harmony: The Art of Mary Hiester Reid. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario 2000. Fowler, Marian. The Embroidered Tent. Toronto: Anansi 1982. Fox, Caroline. Stanhope Forbes and the Newlyn School. Newton Abbot: David & Charles 1993. Fox, Shirley. An Art Student’s Reminiscences of Paris in the Eighties. London: Mills and Boon 1909. Frederickson, Kristen, and Sarah E. Webb, eds. Singular Women: Writing the Artist. Los Angeles and London: University of California Press 2003. Freeman, Barbara. Kit’s Kingdom: The Journalism of Kathleen Blake Coleman. Ottawa: Carleton University Press 1989. “French, Italian and Canadian Paintings at the Exhibition,” 27 August 1917. Unidentified clipping. Carlyle Artist File, wag. Gagen, Robert F. “Industrial Exhibitions, 1878–1915,” 92. In “Ontario Art Chronicle,” n.d., ms mu 2252, pao. Gall, Nancy. “Researcher Pieces Together Florence Carlyle Story.” Woodstock SentinelReview, 26 March 1983. Gamble, Sarah, ed. The Routledge Critical Dictionary of Feminism and Postfeminism. New York: Routledge 1999. Garb, Tamar. “‘Unpicking the Seams of Her Disguise:’ Self-Representation in the Case of Marie Bashkirtseff.” Block 13 (1987–88): 79–86. – Sisters of the Brush: Women Artistic Culture in Late Nineteenth-Century Paris. New Haven and London: Yale University Press 1994. Gee, Ellen M. Thomas. “Marriage in Nineteenth-Century Canada.” Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 19, no. 3 (August 1982). “Gentlewoman.” Woodstock Daily Sentinel-Review, 2 October 1895. Gerson, Carole. “Anthologies and the Canon of Early Canadian Women Writers.” In Re(dis)covering Our Foremothers: Nineteenth Century Canadian Women Writers, edited by Lorraine McMullen, 56–7. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press 1990. – “The Business of a Woman’s Life: Money and Motive in the Careers of Early Canadian Women Writers.” In Women’s Writing and the Literary Institution, edited by C. Potvin. Edmonton: University of Alberta 1992. Gerson, Carole, and Veronica Strong-Boag, eds. E. Pauline Johnson Tekahionwake: Collected Poems and Selected Prose. Toronto: University of Toronto Press 2002.

290 bibliography Gillett, Margaret. We Walked Very Warily: A History of Women at McGill. Montreal: Eden Press 1981. Goodman, Helen. “Women Illustrators of the Golden Age of American Illustration.” Woman’s Art Journal (spring/summer 1989): 13–22. Graham, Julie. “American Women Artists’ Groups, 1867–1930.” Woman’s Art Journal (spring/summer 1980): 7, 10. Grant, Jean. “Living Model in Art.” Saturday Night 13 (9 June 1900): 9. – “Ontario Society Exhibition.” Saturday Night 13 (17 March 1900): 9. – “Royal Canadian Academy Exhibition.” Saturday Night 11 (12 March 1898): 9. – “Royal Canadian Academy of Arts.” Saturday Night 13 (3 March 1900): 9. – “Studio and Gallery.” Saturday Night 11 (5 February 1898): 9. – “Studio and Gallery.” Saturday Night 12 (10 December 1898): 15. – “Studio and Gallery.” Saturday Night 12 (24 December 1898): 15. – “Studio and Gallery.” Saturday Night 12 (30 September 1899): 9. – “Studio and Gallery,” Saturday Night 12 (25 March 1899): 9. – “Studio and Gallery,” Saturday Night 13 (16 December 1899). – “Studio and Gallery.” Saturday Night 13 (5 May 1900): 9. – “Studio and Gallery.” Saturday Night 13 (26 May 1900). – “Studio and Gallery.” Saturday Night 13 (2 June 1900): 9. – “Studio and Gallery.” Saturday Night 13 (23 June 1900): 9. Graves, Algernon. The Royal Academy of Arts: A Complete Dictionary of Contributors to 1904. Vol. 1. London: Henry Graves and George Bess 1905. Gray, Charlotte. Sisters in the Wilderness. Toronto: Viking 1999. “Great Exhibition Now in Full Swing.” Toronto Mail and Empire, 1 September 1903. “Great Fair Formally Opened.” Toronto Mail and Empire, 1 September 1897. “Great Vice-Regal Ball.” Toronto Globe, 29 December 1897. Greenhorn, Beth. “An Art Critic at the Ringside: Mapping the Public and Private Lives of Pearl McCarthy.” Master’s thesis, Carleton University, 1996. Greer, Germaine. The Obstacle Course: The Fortunes of Women Painters and Their Work. New York: Farrer Strauss Giroux 1979. Grier, E. Wyly. “Art and Artists.” Saturday Night 4 (4 April 1891): 11. – “Art Notes.” The Week 12, no. 14 (1 March 1895): 329. Griffiths, N.E.S. The Splendid Vision: Centennial History of the National Council of Women of Canada, 1893–1993. Ottawa: Carleton University Press 1993. Gualtieri, Julia. “The Woman as Artist and Subject in Canadian Painting (1890–1930): Florence Carlyle, Laura Muntz Lyall, Helen McNicoll.” Master’s thesis, Queen’s University, 1989. Gwyn, Sandra. The Private Capital: Ambition and Love in the Age of MacDonald and Laurier. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart 1984. – Tapestry of War: A Private View of Canadians in the Great War. Toronto: Harper Collins 1992. H. “Art in Toronto.” Arcadia 1, no. 4 (1 July 1892): 97–8. Hale, Katherine. “The Art of Homer Watson.” Canadian Magazine 20 (November 1902): 138–41. Hall, Catherine. White, Male and Middle Class: Explorations in Feminism and History. Cambridge: Polity 1992.

bibliography 291 Hammond, M.O. “Leading Canadian Artists: Florence Carlyle, arca.” Unidentified clipping. – Painting and Sculpture in Canada. Toronto: Ryerson Press, 1930. Hare, Irene B. “Close-Ups of Toronto’s Women Artists, No. 5, Miss Clara Hagarty.” Sunday World (ca. 1919). – “Close-Ups of Toronto’s Women Artists, No. 4, Miss Estelle Kerr.” Sunday World (10 June 1924). – “Close-Ups of Toronto’s Women Artists, No. 8, Laura Muntz Lyall, A Painter of Mothers and Little Children.” Sunday World (13 July 1924). – “Close-Ups of Toronto’s Women Artists, No. 13, Miss E. May Martin.” Sunday World (31 August 1924). – “Close-Ups of Toronto’s Women Artists, No. 14, Mrs. MacGillivray Knowles. Sunday World (17 September 1924). Harmon, Carole, ed. Byron Harmon, Mountain Photographer. Banff, Alberta: Altitude Publishing 1992. Harmon, Carole, and Peter Whyte Foundation, eds. Great Days in the Rockies. Toronto: Oxford University Press 1978. Harper, J. Russell. “Ontario Painters, 1846–67.” National Gallery of Canada Bulletin 1 (May 1963): 16–28. – Painting in Canada: A History. Toronto: University of Toronto Press 1966. – Early Painters and Engravers in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press 1970. Heliconian Club Gets Its Membership.” Unidentified Clipping, 25 January 1914. Toronto Heliconian Club fonds, f1182–1, Box mu 8092, pao. Helland, Janice. “Frances Macdonald: The Self as Fin-de-Siécle Woman.” Woman’s Art Journal 14, no. 1 (spring/summer 1993): 15–22. – The Studios of Frances and Margaret Macdonald. Manchester: Manchester University Press 1996. – “This Woman in Particular: Contexts for the Biographical Image of Emily Carr, by Stephanie Kirkwood Walker” (Review). Journal of Canadian Art History 18, no. 2 (1997). – Professional Women Painters in Nineteenth-Century Scotland: Commitment, Friendship, Pleasure. Aldershot and Brookfield, Vt.: Ashgate 2000. Heller, Jules, and Nancy G. Heller. North American Women Artists of the Twentieth Century: A Biographical Dictionary. New York and London: Garland 1995. Henri, Robert. The Art Spirit. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott 1923. Herzog, Charlotte. “A Rose by Any Other Name: Violet Oakley, Jessie Wilcox Smith, and Elizabeth Shippen Green.” Woman’s Art Journal (fall 1993/winter 1994): 11–16. Higonnet, Anne. Berthe Morisot. New York: Harper 1991. – Berthe Morisot’s Images of Women. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press 1992. – “Myths of Creation, Camille Claudel and Auguste Rodin.” In Significant Others: Creativity and Intimate Partnership, edited by Whitney Chadwick and Isabelle de Courtivron. London: Thames and Hudson 1993. – “Two Ways of Thinking about Mary Cassatt.” In Singular Women: Writing the Artist, edited by Kristen Frederickson and Sarah E. Webb. Berkeley: University of California Press 2003.

292 bibliography Hilderley, Lauvene. “Carlyle Painting Finds a New Home.” Woodstock Sentinel-Review, 2 March 1992. Hill, Charles C. The Group of Seven: Art for a Nation. Ottawa: National Gallery of Canada 1995. Hills, Patricia. Turn-of-the-Century America: Paintings, Graphics, Photographs, 1890–1910. New York: Whitney Museum of American Art 1977. Hirshler, Erica E. A Studio of Her Own: Women Artists in Boston, 1870–1940. Boston: Museum of Fine Arts 2001. Hoeber, Arthur. “A Summer in Brittany.” Monthly Illustrator 4, no. 2 (1895): 74–80. Holland, Clive. “Lady Art Students’ Life in Paris.” International Studio 21 (1904): 226. Holmes, R. “The Royal Canadian Academy.” Saturday Night 21 (18 April 1908): 11. Homer, William Innes. Robert Henri and His Circle. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1969. “Honor for Mrs. Knowles.” Toronto Mail and Empire, 2 February 1928. Hoyt, Eleanor. “Women Are Made Like That.” Harper’s Monthly Magazine 103 (November 1901), 854–60. Hughes, Mary Jo. Marion Nelson Hooker: Two Lives, One Passion. Winnipeg: Winnipeg Art Gallery 1999. Hume, Blanche B. “Florence Carlyle, arca.” Woodstock Daily Sentinel-Review, 10 July 1925. Huneault, Kristina. “Heroes of a Different Sort: Gender and Patriotism in the War Works of Frances Loring and Florence Wyle.” Journal of Canadian Art History 25, no. 2 (1993): 26–45. “Impressionists Shock Local Art Lovers at the Spring Exhibition.” Montreal Daily Witness, 26 March 1913. “Impressions – Woman’s Art Exhibit.” Cartoon. Saturday Night 10, no. 16 (6 March 1897): 1. “iode Exhibit of War Memorial Paintings.” Saturday Night 33 (2 August 1919): 32. Jackson, A.Y. Lawren Harris: Paintings, 1910–1948. Toronto: Art Gallery of Toronto 1948. Jefferys, C.W. “The Art of Mary Hiester Reid.” In Quiet Harmony: The Art of Mary Hiester Reid, by Brian Foss and Janice Anderson, 19–23. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario 2000. Jenkins’ Art Gallery. A Memorial Exhibition of the Paintings of the Late Florence Carlyle. Toronto: Jenkins’ Art Gallery 1925. Jessup, Lynda. Antimodernism and Artistic Experience: Policing the Boundaries of Modernity. Toronto: University of Toronto Press 2001. Johnson, Terence J. Professions and Power. London: Macmillan Education 1972. Johnston, Charles Murray. McMaster University, the Toronto Years. Toronto and Buffalo: University of Toronto Press 1981. Johnston, Ebenezer Forsyth Blackie. “Painting and Sculpture in Canada.” In The Dominion, Missions: Arts and Letters, Part 2. Canada and Its Provinces, vol. 12, edited by Adam Shortt and Arthur G. Doughty, 593–642. Toronto: Glasgow, Brook and Co. 1914. Johnston, Florence Carlyle. “Florence Carlyle, arca, 1864–1923.” Typescript, 1984. Florence Carlyle artist files, wag. Kay, Charles de. “Paintings at the Pan-American.” New York Times, 7 July 1901.

bibliography 293 Kealey, Linda, ed. A Not Unreasonable Claim: Women and Reform in Canada, 1880s to 1920s. Toronto: Women’s Press 1979. Kerr, Estelle M. “The Artist.” Saturday Night 26 (7 June 1913): 29. – “Women Sculptors in Toronto.” Saturday Night 27 (20 June 1914): n.p. Copy in Frances Loring, Artist File, Archives, ago. – “Those War-Time Jig-Saw Toys.” Canadian Magazine (December 1915): 97–8. – “Impressions of the osa,” Canadian Courier (25 March 1916): 13. – “Paintings at osa.” Canadian Courier 21, no. 7 (24 March 1917): 15. – “Art Notes.” Canadian Courier 22, no. 3 (16 June 1917): 13. Key, Helene Youmans. “Reminiscences of Florence Carlyle.” Unpublished manuscript, ca. 1979. Florence Carlyle, Artist File, wag. Kinnear, Mary. In Subordination: Professional Women, 1870–1970. McGill-Queen’s University Press 1995. Klumpke, Anna Elizabeth. Memoirs of an Artist. Edited by Lillian Whiting. Boston: Wright & Potter 1940. Knoedler’s Galleries. Exhibition of Paintings by Women Artists. Exhibition catalogue. New York, 1908. Koch, Robert. Louis C. Tiffany’s Art Glass. New York: Crown 1977. Koltun, Lilly, ed. Private Realms of Light: Amateur Photography in Canada, 1839–1940. Markham, Ont.: Fitzhenry & Whiteside 1984. Kritzwiser, Kay. “At Home with Florence Carlyle.” Toronto Globe and Mail, 29 December 1982. Kyle, Fergus. “The Ontario Society of Artists.” In The Year Book of Canadian Art, 1913, 183–9. London and Toronto: Arts and Letters Club and J.M. Dent 1913. Lacroix, Laurier. “The Surprise of Today Is the Commonplace of Tomorrow: How Impressionism Was Received in Canada.” In Visions of Light and Air: Canadian Impressionism, 1885–1920, edited by Carol Lowrey. New York: Americas Society Art Gallery 1995. Lafleur, Paul T. “To Promote Art in Minor Centres.” Montreal Gazette, 9 December 1913. Lally Bernard. See Fitzgibbon, Mary Agnes. Lamb, Robert J. The Canadian Art Club, 1907–1915. Edmonton: Edmonton Art Gallery 1988. Lang, Marjory. “Separate Entrances: The First Generation of Canadian Women Journalists,” 76–91. In Re(dis)covering Our Foremothers: Nineteenth-Century Canadian Women Writers, edited by Lorraine McMullen. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press 1990. – Women Who Made the News: Female Journalists in Canada, 1880–1945. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press 1999. Langdale, Cecily, and David Fraser Jenkins. Gwen John: An Interior Life. New York: Rizzoli 1985. Latham, David, ed. Scarlet Hunters: Pre-Raphaelitism in Canada. Toronto: Archives of Canadian Art and Design and the Journal of Pre-Raphaelite Studies 1998. Lavigne, Marie, and Jennifer Stoddart. “Women’s Work in Montreal at the Beginning of the Century.” In Women in Canada, edited by Marylee Stephenson, 128–47. Rev. ed. Don Mills, Ont.: General Publishing 1977.

294 bibliography “Lecture on Impressionism, Mr. Brymner, rca, at the Art Gallery.” Montreal Star, 14 April 1897. Ledger, Sally. The New Woman: Fiction and Feminism at the Fin de Siècle. Manchester: Manchester University Press 1997. Lennon, Madeline. Female Archetypes in Art: Madonna/Venus/Eve. London, Ont.: McIntosh Gallery 1982. Leonard, J.W. ed. Woman’s Who’s Who of America, 1914–1915. New York, 1914. Levy, Florence N., ed. “Private Galleries of Toronto.” In American Art Annual, 137–8, 1898. Boston: Noyes, Platt & Co. 1898. – American Art Annual. 6 vols. Boston: Noyes, Platt & Co. 1898–1908. “Light, Colour and Beauty in Toronto Artists’ Exhibition.” Montreal Star, 17 October, n.d. Likos, Patt. “The Ladies of the Red Rose.” Feminist Art Journal (fall 1976): 11–15, 43. “Little Pictures.” Toronto Globe, 15 March 1913. “List of Artists, Canadian War Records Office Report, submitted by Lord Beaverbrook to the Honourable Sir Edward Kemp, kcmg, mp, Minister, Overseas Forces of Canada, 1919.” Appendix 2, Canadian War Art, 5, 41 c, Canadian War Memorial (General, File 1), ngc Archives. Lockiel [pseud.]. “Aftermath of the Alpine Club.” Saturday Night 25 (4 May 1912): 31. “Lookout, The.” Woodstock Daily Sentinel-Review, ca. 1925. Carlyle Clipping File, wag. Lowrey, Carol. “A Noble Tradition: American Paintings from the National Arts Club.” American Art Review 7, no. 3 (June–July 1995): 90–97. – “Into Line with the Progress of Art: The Impressionist Tradition in Canadian Painting, 1885–1920.” In Visions of Light and Air: Canadian Impressionism, 1885–1920. New York: Americas Society Art Gallery 1995. Lowrey, Carol, ed. Visions of Light and Air: Canadian Impressionism, 1885–1920. New York: Americas Society Art Gallery 1995. Luckyj, Natalie. Visions and Victories: Ten Canadian Women Artists (London, Ont.: London Regional Art Gallery 1983. – Helen McNicoll: A Canadian Impressionist. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario 1999. Macbeth, Madge. The Winning Game. 1910. – “Canadian Women in the Arts.” Maclean’s 27, no. 12 (October 1914): 23–5, 105–8. – Kleath. 1917. – “National Gallery of Art.” Saturday Night 37 (14 January 1922): 21. – The Patterson Limit. 1923. – The Land of Afternoon. 1924. – “All Canadian Exhibition of Paintings at Ottawa.” Saturday Night 41 (13 March 1926): 25. – Shackles. 1926. Reprinted, Ottawa: Borealis Press 2007. – The Kinder Bees. 1935. – “The Changeling.” Canada West (n.d.) – “Frieda’s Engagement.” Canadian Magazine (n.d.). MacCausland, Marian. “Florence Carlyle in England.” Unpublished typescript, ca. 1980. Florence Carlyle Artist File, Montreal Museum of Fine Arts. MacCuaig, Stuart. Climbing the Cold White Peaks: A Survey of Artists in and from Hamilton, 1910–1950. Hamilton, Ont.: Hamilton Artists Inc. 1986.

bibliography 295 MacDonald, Colin S., ed. A Dictionary of Canadian Artists. Ottawa: Canadian Paperbacks 1967. MacDonald, Florence. “Strickland Family Artists.” Canadian Collector (April 1927): 6–8. MacDonald, Mary Lu. “English and French Language Periodicals and the Development of Literary Culture in Early Victorian Canada.” Victorian Periodicals Review 26, no. 4 (1993): 221–7. Machar, Agnes [Fidelis, pseud.]. “The New Ideal of Womanhood.” Canadian Monthly and National Review 11 (June 1879): 665. MacIntyre, T.M. “Our Ladies’ Colleges in Relation to our Educational System.” In The Proper Sphere: Woman’s Place in Canadian Society, edited by Ramsay Cook and Wendy Mitchison, 139–45. Toronto: Oxford University Press 1976. Originally published in Canadian Educational Monthly and School Magazine 7 (February 1885). MacTavish, Newton. “Academy Pictures Shown at Montreal.” Toronto Globe, 3 December 1910. – “Laura Muntz and Her Art.” Canadian Magazine 37, no. 5 (September 1911): 419–26. – The Fine Arts in Canada. Toronto: Macmillan 1925. – Ars Longa. Toronto: Ontario Publishing Co. 1938. “Margaret Polson Murray and Lady Scott Chapter.” Montreal Gazette, 18 March 1915. rca Scrapbook, mg28, i 126, vol. 14, lac. “Mary Riter Hamilton, an Artist Impressionist on the Battlefields of France.” Gold Stripe 3 (December 1919): 12. Marzolf, Marion. Up from the Footnote. New York: Hastings House 1978. Mathews, Elizabeth Mowll. “American Women Artists at the Turn of the Century: Opportunities and Choices.” In Lilla Cabot Perry: An American Impressionist Washington, D.C.: National Museum of Women in the Arts 1990. – Mary Cassatt: A Life. New Haven and London: Yale University Press 1994. Mavor, James. Book of the Victorian Era Ball Given at Toronto on the 28th of December MDCCXCVIII . Toronto: Rowsell & Hutchinson: G.N. Morang 1898. – Notes on Appreciation of Art and on Art in Ontario with Remarks on the Exhibition of the Ontario Society of Artists MDCCCXCVIII . Toronto, 1898. – “Prof. Mavor on Ontario Artists.” Toronto News, 4 March 1899. McInnes, Graham. A Short History of Canadian Art. Toronto: Macmillan 1939. McIntosh, Terresa. “Other Images of War: Canadian Women War Artists of the First and Second World War.” Master’s thesis, Carleton University, 1990. McKay, Marilyn. A National Soul: Mural Painting in Canada, 1860s to 1930s. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press 2002. McKellar, Elisabeth Leiss. “Out of Order: Florence Carlyle and the Challenge of Identity, 1864–1923.” Master’s thesis, University of Western Ontario, 1995. McLeod, Ellen Mary Easton. “Enterprising Women and the Early History of the Canadian Handicrafts Guild, 1905–1936.” Master’s thesis, Carleton University, 1995. – In Good Hands: The Women of the Canadian Handicrafts Guild. Montreal and Kingston: Carleton University Press and McGill-Queen’s University Press 1999. McMann, Evelyn de R. The Royal Canadian Academy/Académie royale des arts du Canada: Exhibitions and Members, 1880–1979. Toronto, Buffalo, London: University of Toronto Press 1981.

296 bibliography – Montreal Museum of Fine Arts, Formerly Art Association of Montreal, Spring Exhibitions, 1880–1970. Toronto: University of Toronto Press 1988. McMullen, Lorraine, ed. Re(dis)covering Our Foremothers. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press 1990. McMurchy, Marjory. “Representative Women: Mrs. G.A. Reid, Painter.” Toronto Globe, 16 July 1910. Meadowcroft, Barbara. Painting Friends: The Beaver Hall Women Painters. Montreal: Véhicule Press 1999. “Memorial Exhibition Catalogue, Julius Rolshoven.” New York Public Library Artist File, on microfiche, ngc Library. Memorial Exhibition of the Paintings of Eva Bradshaw. London: Ont.: Elsie Perrin Williams Memorial London Public Library and Art Museum 1941. “Memorial Exhibition Tribute to Artist.” Toronto Star, 9 October 1922. “Memory of Florence Carlyle Honored by Art Association.” Woodstock Daily SentinelReview, 7 February 1936. Merritt, Anna Lea. “A Letter to Artists: Especially Women Artists.” Lippincott’s Monthly Magazine 65 (March 1900): 463–9. Meskimmon, Marsha. The Art of Reflection: Women Artists’ Self-Portraiture in the Twentieth Century. New York: Columbia University Press 1996. Millar, Joyce. “The Beaver Hall Group: Painting in Montreal, 1920–1940.” Woman’s Art Journal (spring/summer 1992): 3–9. Miller, Muriel. “Famous Canadian Artists, Mary E. Wrinch, a.r.c.a., Landscapist in Oil, Block Print Artist and Miniaturist.” Onward (January 1940): 58–9. – George Reid: A Biography. Toronto: Summerhill Press 1987. Milner, John. The Studios of Paris: The Capital of Art in the Late Nineteenth Century. New Haven and London: Yale University Press 1988. “Miss Florence Carlyle.” The Gentlewoman (London, England) (10 August 1895): n.p. Artist Files, wag. Mitchell, Sally. “Careers for Girls: Writing Trash.” Victorian Periodicals Review 25, no. 3 (fall 1992). Moore, Mary MacLeod. “Canadian Women War Workers Overseas.” Canadian Magazine 52 (January 1919): 739. Moray, Gerta. “Northwest Coast Native Culture and the Early Indian Paintings of Emily Carr, 1899–1913.” Ph.D. diss, University of Toronto, 1993. Moray, Gerta. Unsettling Encounters: First Nations Imagery in the Art of Emily Carr. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press 2006. Morgan, Henry. The Canadian Men and Women of the Time. Toronto: William Briggs 1898. – Types of Canadian Women. Vol. 1. Toronto: William Briggs 1903. – The Canadian Men and Women of the Time. 2nd ed. Toronto: William Briggs 1912. Morgan-Powell, S. “Some Notable Pictures.” Montreal Star, November 1913. rca Scrapbook, vol. 15, lac. Morris, Harrison. “American Portraiture of Children.” Scribner’s Magazine 30, no. 6 (December 1901): 641–56. Morrison, Toni. “The Site of Memory.” In Inventing the Truth: The Art and Craft of Memoir, edited by William Zinsser, 101–24. Boston: Houghton Mifflin 1998.

bibliography 297 Mortimer-Lamb, Harold. “Canadian Artists and the War.” The Studio 65 (September 1915): 259–61. “Mrs. W. Carlyle.” Woodstock Daily Sentinel-Review, 20 December 1912. Carlyle Clipping Files, wag. Mulley, Elizabeth. “Madonna/Mother/Death and Child: Laura Muntz and the Representation of Maternity.” Canadian Art Review 25, nos. 1–2 (1998): 84–93. – “Women and Children in Context: Laura Muntz and the Representation of Maternity.” Ph.D. diss., McGill University, 2000. Murray, Heather. “Great Works and Good Works: The Toronto Women’s Literary Club, 1877–1883.” In Rethinking Canada: The Promise of Women’s History, edited by Veronica Strong-Boag. 4th ed. Toronto: Oxford University Press 2002. Murray, Joan. “Mary Wrinch: Canadian Artist.” Canadian Antiques Collector (September 1969): 16–18. – Ontario Society of Artists: 100 Years. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario 1972. – Introduction to Helen McNicoll: Oil Paintings from the Estate. Morris Gallery 1976. Nadeau-Saumier, Monique. Nina M. Owens (1869–1959). Sherbrooke, Que.: Art Gallery of Sherbrooke 1992. National Council of Women of Canada. Women of Canada: Their Life and Work. Ottawa: Minister of Agriculture, 1900. Reprint, ncwc 1975. “New Talent at the Art Exhibit.” Toronto Globe, 9 March 1912. “New York Letter.” Saturday Night 18 (1 April 1905): 8. Nieriker, Abigail May Alcott. Studying Art Abroad, and How to Do It Cheaply. Boston, 1869. Nobili, M.R. “The Academie Julian.” Cosmopolitan Magazine 8 (1886): 748. Nochlin, Linda. “Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists?” In Art and Sexual Politics, edited by Thomas B. Hess and Elizabeth C. Baker. New York and London: Collier Macmillan 1973. – Women Artists: 1550–1950. New York: Knopf 1976. – “Morisot’s Wet Nurse: The Construction of Work and Leisure in Impressionist Painting.” In Women, Art, and Power, and Other Essays. London and New York: Thames and Hudson 1989. – Representing Women. New York: Thames & Hudson 1999. “Nos artistes à Paris, Mlle. F. Carlyle.” Organe des interests Canadiens et Français (20 May 1893): n.p. Nunn, Pamela Gerrish. Victorian Women Artists. London: Women’s Press 1987. – “Ruskin’s Patronage of Women Artists.” Woman’s Art Journal (fall/winter 1981–82): 8–13. – Canvassing: Recollections by Six Victorian Women Artists. London: Camden Press 1986. “On Dit.” Toronto Mail and Empire, 4 March 1898, 7. “On Dit.” Toronto Mail and Empire, 5 March 1898, 7. “On Dit.” Toronto Mail and Empire, 5 March 1910, 7. “Ontario Artists Open Exhibition.” Toronto Mail and Empire, 5 March 1910. Ontario College of Art. 100 Years: Evolution of the Ontario College of Art. Toronto: Ontario College of Art 1976. Ontario Society of Artists. Ontario Society of Artists 75th Annual Spring Exhibition. Toronto: Ontario Society of Artists 1972.

298 bibliography “Ontario Society of Artists.” Toronto Globe, 5 April 1913. “Ontario Society of Artists Held the Annual Opening.” Saturday Night 15 (8 March 1902): 2. “osa Exhibition: More Pictures and of Better Quality.” Toronto Globe, 28 February 1902. “osa Exhibition.” Saturday Night 25 (16 March 1912): 7. Osborne Company. Osborne Art Calendars in Miniature. New York: Osborne Company, 1903. Brochure. Warshaw Collection of Business Americana, Archives Center, National Museum of American History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. – Girl with the Laughing Eyes. Calendar title-leaf. New York: Osborne Company, 1905. Carlyle Artist Files, wag. – Annual Catalogue [of Art Calendars]. New York: Osborne Company, 1906. Folio in Special Collections Department, University of Delaware Library, Newark, Delaware. – Always Room for One More. Calendar title-leaf. New York: Osborne Company, 1908. Carlyle Artist Files, wag. “Over 800 Attend Last Exhibition in Old Gallery.” Montreal Daily Star, 15 March 1912. Owen, Nancy E. “Domesticity and Women’s Labor.” In Rookwood and the Industry of Art: Women, Culture, and Commerce, 1880–1913. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press 2001. Page, Anne Mandely. “Canada’s First Professional Women Painters, 1890–1914: Their Reception in Canadian Writing on the Visual Arts.” Master’s thesis, Concordia University, 1991. “Painted China.” London Free Press, 2 December 1897. “Painter of Flowers.” Farmer’s Sun, 24 October 1922. “Painters and the Public.” Toronto Mail and Empire, Christmas 1898. “Paintings by a Canadian Artist.” Toronto World, 14 October 1890. “Paintings Shown by Women Artists.” New York Times, 21 April 1908. “Paintings Typify Artist.” Toronto Telegram, 16 May 1925. Palette [pseud.]. “The Ontario Society of Artists’ Exhibition.” Saturday Night 17 (27 February 1904): 6. Pantazzi, Sybille. “Notes on Some Canadian Magazines and Their Illustrations, 1900 – 1940.” In The Art and Pictorial Press in Canada: Two Centuries of Art Magazines, edited by Karen McKenzie and Mary F. Williamson, 20–4. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario 1979. Parker, Rozsika, and Griselda Pollock. The Old Mistresses: Women, Art and Ideology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul 1974. “Passing of William Carlyle.” Woodstock Daily Sentinel-Review, 26 June 1911. Acquisition file an 991.3.4, wag. Patriotic Fund. “Rules.” In Catalogue of Pictures and Sculpture given by Canadian Artists in Aid of the Patriotic Fund Exhibitions. 1914. osa Papers fonds, Clippings 1900–1919, f 1140, mu 2267, pao. Patterson, Norman. “The Academy Exhibition.” Canadian Magazine 10, no. 6 (April 1898): 509–14. – “The Exhibition Habit.” Canadian Magazine 27 (August 1906): 290–8. Pepall, Rosalind M. “Architect and Muralist: The Painter George Reid in Onteora, New York.” Canadian Collector (July/August 1984): 44–7.

bibliography 299 – Building a Beaux-Arts Museum, Montreal, 1912. Montreal: Montreal Museum of Fine Arts 1986. Petteys, Chris. Dictionary of Women Artists. Boston: G.K. Hall and Co. 1985. “Pictures at the osa Exhibition.” Toronto Globe, 5 March 1910. Pisano, Ronald G. The Students of William Merritt Chase. Huntington, N.Y.: Heckscher Museum 1973. “Points about People, in an Art Gallery.” Saturday Night 26 (19 April 1913): 3. Pollock, Griselda. “Modernity and the Spaces of Femininity.” In Vision and Difference: Femininity, Feminism, and the Histories of Art, edited by Griselda Pollock, 50–90. London: Routledge 1988. – Differencing the Canon: Feminist Desire and the Writing of Art’s Histories. London and New York: Routledge 1999. Poole, Nancy. The Art of London, 1830–1980. London, Ont.: Blackpool Press 1984. Prentice, Alison, et al. Canadian Women: A History. Toronto and Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovish 1988. Prieto, Laura R. At Home in the Studio: The Professionalization of Women Artists in America. Cambridge: Harvard University Press 2001. “Prize List.” London Free Press, 17 September 1896. “Prominent Women, No. 13, Miss Bell.” Ladies’ Pictorial Weekly 3, no. 25 (18 June 1892): 390. Quiller [pseud.]. “Studio News.” Saturday Night 15 (15 March 1902): 2. Rawlyk, G.A., ed. Canadian Baptists and Christian Higher Education. Kingston and Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press 1988. “rca Pictures on View at Ottawa.” Saturday Night 16 (15 April 1903): 4. Rechnitzer, Olaf P. “Nations Acclaim London Artists.” London Advertiser (magazine section), 17 January 1925. Redford, J.A. “Art at the World’s Fair.” Canadian Magazine 2 (December 1893): 130. Reid, Dennis. A Concise History of Canadian Painting. Toronto: Oxford University Press 1973. – “Our Own Country Canada”: Being an Account of the National Aspirations of the Principal Landscape Artists in Montreal and Toronto, 1860–1890. Ottawa: National Gallery of Canada 1979. – Lucius R. O’Brien: Visions of Victorian Canada. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario 1990. Reid, George. “Biographical Note.” In Sydney Strickland Tully, arca, Memorial Exhibition of Paintings and Drawings, Art Metropole Galleries, December 1911, 3–5. Rembrandt, Jimmie. “Art and Artists.” Saturday Night 1 (3 December 1887): 10. “Return of Paul Peel.” Toronto Mail, 16 July 1890. “Review of the Art Exhibition.” Toronto Mail and Empire, 5 March 1898. Ricks, Christopher, ed. The Brownings: Letters and Poetry. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday 1970. Ritchie, David, and James Paget. “Canadian Artists William Malcolm Cutts and Gertrude Spurr Cutts. Antique Showcase (May 1987): 25–8, 52. Robson, A.H. Canadian Landscape Painters. Toronto: Ryerson Press 1932. “Roehampton House as a Hospital.” Country Life, 14 August 1915, 239–49. Rothwell, Greg. “City to Honour Its Famous Artist.” Woodstock Sentinel-Review, 25 February 1983.

300 bibliography Root, John, Rocky Mountain Landmarks. Edmonton and Toronto: Hosford 1981. Royal Academy. Royal Academy Exhibitors, 1905–1970: A Dictionary of Artists and Their Work in the Summer Exhibitions of the Royal Academy of Arts. Wakefield: ep Publishing 1973. Royal British Colonial Society of Artists. Royal British Colonial Society of Artists in Conjunction with the Society of Australian Artists Exhibition: War and Peace Including the War Pictures Painted for and Lent by the Commonwealth of Australia (London, 1918). Royal Academy of Arts Archives, London. “Royal Canadian Academy of Arts.” Montreal Standard, 10 December 1910. rca Scrapbook, mg28, i 126, vol. 15, lac. “Royal Canadian Academy of Arts.” Toronto Mail and Empire, 13 April 1901. “Royal Canadian Academy of Arts.” Montreal Star, 18 March 1904. “Royal Canadian Academy Purchases from Exhibitions of 1913–1918.” rca Exhibition, 1913, mg28, vol. 14, ngc Archives. “Royal Canadian Academy.” Morning Post (Liverpool, England), 4 July 1910. rca Scrapbook, mg28, i 126, vol. 15, lac. “Royal Canadian Academy.” Saturday Night 8 (27 April 1895): 9. “Royal Canadian Academy.” Toronto News, 21 March 1904. Rubinstein, Charlotte Streifer. American Women Artists. Boston: G.K. Hall 1982. – American Women Sculptors. Boston: G.K. Hall 1990. S.M.P. [S. Morgan-Powell]. “Art Association Spring Exhibition Shows Notable Features.” Montreal Star, 25 March 1913. – “Art and the Post-Impressionists.” Montreal Star, 29 March 1913. – “Art Association Exhibition Shows Excellent Work.” Montreal Star, November 1913. “Sales, New York.” American Art News (1 May 1909): 1. Seigel, Jerrold E. Bohemian Paris: Culture, Politics, and the Boundaries of Bourgeois Life, 1830–1930. New York: Viking 1986. Shackelford, George. Monet, Renoir, and the Impressionist Landscape. Ottawa and Boston: National Gallery of Art, Ottawa and Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, 2000. Shadbolt, Doris. The Art of Emily Carr. Vancouver: Douglas and McIntyre 1979. Sharp, Kevin. “How Mary Cassatt Became an American Artist.” In Mary Cassatt: Modern Woman, organized by Judith A. Barter. Chicago: Harry N. Abrams and the Art Institute of Chicago 1998. – “Lifetime Exhibition History.” In Mary Cassatt: Modern Woman. Chicago: Harry N. Abrams and the Art Institute of Chicago 1998. Sheehan, Nancy M. “Women Helping Women: The wctu and the Foreign Population in the West, 1905–1930.” International Journal of Women’s Studies 9, no. 5 (1983): 395– 411. Sheppard, Alice. Cartooning for Suffrage. University of New Mexico Press 1994. Sherman, Claire Richter, and Adele M. Holcomb. “Widening Horizons 1890–1930.” In Women as Interpreters of the Visual Arts, 1820–1979. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press 1981. Sherwood, M.E.W. “American Girls in Europe.” North American Review (June 1890): 681–9 Sibley, C.L. “Greatest Show of Canadian Paintings.” Toronto Globe, 20 December 1913.

bibliography 301 Silcox, David. Painting Place: The Life and Work of David Milne. Toronto: University of Toronto Press 1996. Sisler, Rebecca. The Girls: A Biography of Frances Loring and Florence Wyle. Toronto: Clarke, Irwin 1972. – Passionate Spirits: A History of the Royal Canadian Academy of Arts, 1880–1980. Toronto and Vancouver: Clarke, Irwin 1980. Smith, Greg. “Watercolour: Purpose and Practice.” In The Business of Watercolour: A Guide to the Archives of the Royal Watercolour Society, edited by S. Fenwick and G. Smith. Aldershot: Ashgate 1997. Smith-Rosenberg, Carroll. “The Female World of Love and Ritual, Relations between Women in Nineteenth-Century America.” In Disorderly Conduct: Visions of Gender in Victorian America. New York: Knopf 1985. Originally published in Signs 1, no. 1 (autumn 1975): 1–29. “Social and Personal.” Saturday Night 16 (14 March 1903): 3. Société des Artistes Français. Catalogue illustre de peinture et sculpture, Salon de 1894. Paris: Société des Artistes Français 1894. ngc Library. Société des Artistes Français. Explication des ouvrages de peinture, sculpture, architecture gravure et lithographie. 3rd ed. Paris: Société des Artistes Français 1893. ngc Library. Society Blue Book of Toronto, Hamilton, and London, A Social Directory. Toronto: W.W. Tyrrell and Co. 1904. Society of American Artists 26th Annual Exhibition, 1904. Watson Library/Archives, New York Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. “Spring Exhibition.” Arcadia 1, no. 1 (2 May 1892): 14–15. “Spring Exhibition.” Montreal Gazette, 26 March 1913. “Spring Exhibition.” Montreal Standard, 23 March 1912. “Spring Exhibition.” Montreal Star, 21 April 1892. “Spring Exhibition.” Montreal Star, 2 April 1897. “Spring Exhibition Opened at the Art Gallery Last Night.” Montreal Star, 7 March 1895. Stacey, Robert. “The Sensations Produced by (Their Own) Landscape: Some Alternative Paths to – and away from – Canadian Impressionism.” Visions of Light and Air: Canadian Impressionism, 1885–1921, edited by Carol Lowrey. New York: Americas Society Art Gallery 1995. Stapley, Mildred. “Is Paris Wise for the Average American Girl?” Ladies’ Home Journal, April 1906, 16, 54. Stranahan, C.H. A History of French Painting. New York: C. Scribner’s Sons 1888. Strong-Boag, Veronica. “‘Setting the Stage:’ National Organizations and the Women’s Movement in the Late Nineteenth Century.” In The Neglected Majority: Essays in Canadian Women’s History, edited by Susan Mann Trofimenkoff and Alison Prentice, 87–103. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart 1977. – “Independent Women, Problematic Men: First and Second Wave Anti-Feminism in Canada from Goldwin Smith to Betty Steele.”Social History/Histoire sociale 57 (May 1996): 1–22. Strong-Boag, Veronica, ed. Introduction to Rethinking Canada: The Promise of Women’s History. 4th ed. Don Mills, Ont.: Oxford University Press 2002.

302 bibliography Strong-Boag, Veronica, and Carole Gerson. Paddling Her Own Canoe: The Times and Texts of E. Pauline Johnson (Tekahoinwake). Toronto: University of Toronto Press 2000. “Studio News.” Saturday Night 15 (15 March 1902): 9. “Success of a Young Canadian Artist in France.” Toronto Globe, 2 May 1889. Swinth, Kirsten. Painting Professionals: Women Artists and the Development of Modern American Art, 1870–1930. Chapel Hill and London: University of North Carolina Press 2001. T. Square [pseud.]. “r.c.a. Exhibition Reviewed.” Saturday Night 14 (27 April 1901): 9. – “Notes on the osa Exhibition.” Saturday Night 15 (8 March 1902): 7. “Talented Couple’s Works on Exhibit.” Montreal Gazette, 12 December 1921. Taylor, F. Beatrice. “Her Own Country.” London Free Press, 7 July 1956, n.p. Taylor, Joshua C., ed. Nineteenth Century Theories of Art. Berkeley: University of California Press 1987. Tedeschi, Martha, and Britt Salvesen. Songs on Stone: James McNeill Whistler and the Art of Lithography. Chicago: Art Institute of Chicago 1998. “Thirty-Eighth Annual Exhibition of the osa.” Saturday Night 23 (12 March 1910): 6. Thom, Ian M. Emily Carr in France. Vancouver: Vancouver Art Gallery 1991. Thom, Ian M., Charles C. Hill, and Johanne Lamoureux. Emily Carr: New Perspectives on a Canadian Icon. Vancouver: Douglas and McIntyre 2006. Thomas, Alison. Portraits of Women: Gwen John and Her Forgotten Contemporaries. Cambridge: Polity Press 1994. Thompson, Allison. “A Worthy Place in the Art of Our Country: The Women’s Art Association of Canada, 1887–1987.” Master’s thesis, Carleton University, 1989. Thumb-Box Exhibition to Be Held by Canadian Artists, W. Scott & Sons’ Galleries, November 4–17, 1908. Toronto: W. Scott & Sons’ Galleries, 1908. Copy of catalogue in Artist File, Caroline Farncomb, ngc Library, ngc. Ticknor, Caroline. May Alcott: A Memoir. Boston: Little, Brown and Co. 1928. Times History of the War. Vol. 9. London: The Times 1916. Tippett, Maria. “Emily Carr’s Klee Wyck.” Canadian Literature 72 (spring 1977): 49 –58. – Emily Carr: A Biography. Toronto: Oxford University Press 1979. – “The Writing of English-Canadian Cultural History.” Canadian Historical Review 67, no. 4 (1986): 548–61. – Making Culture: English Canadian Institutions and the Arts before the Massey Commission. Toronto: University of Toronto Press 1990. – By a Lady: Celebrating Three Centuries of Art by Canadian Women. Toronto: Penguin 1992. Toronto Heliconian Club. Toronto Heliconian Club: A Meeting Place for Professional Women in the Arts and Letters. Toronto: Toronto Heliconian Club 2002. Tovell, Rosemarie L. A New Class of Art: The Artist’s Print in Canadian Art, 1877–1920. Ottawa: National Gallery of Canada 1996. Trépanier, Esther. “Les femmes, l’art et la presse francophone Montréalaise de 1915 à 1930.” Journal of Canadian Art History 18, no. 2 (1997): 68–80. Trestain, W.G. “Art Study in Paris, Hard Work, Wrote Florence Carlyle.” London Free Press, 18 November 1938.

bibliography 303 Trotter, Mary Josephine. “Prominent Women: A Department Conducted by Mary Josephine Trotter.” Everywoman’s World (May 1914): 6. Trudel, Jean. “Aux origines du Musée des Beaux-Arts de Montreal.” Journal of Canadian Art History 16, no. 1 (1992): 31–62. Tuele, Nicholas. Sophia Theresa Pemberton, 1869–1959. Victoria: Art Gallery of Greater Victoria 1979. “Twenty-Second Spring Exhibition.” Montreal Star, 18 March 1905. Unitt, Doris. “Writers of the Kawarthas.” Canadian Antiques Collector (September 1966): 20–1. Valverde, Mariana. The Age of Light, Soap, and Water: Moral Reform in English Canada, 1885–1925. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart 1991. Van [pseud.]. “Art and Artists.” Saturday Night 1 (4 February 1888). – “Art and Artists.” Saturday Night 3 (25 January 1890): 6. “Very Fine Collection.” London Free Press, 19 March 1897. Vindex [pseud.]. “The r.c. Exhibition, a Contributor’s View of Some of the Leading Pictures.” Montreal Gazette, 10 December 1910. Vipond, Mary. “The Nationalist Network: English Canada’s Intellectuals and Artists in the 1920s.” Canadian Review of Studies in Nationalism 7, no. 1 (spring 1980): 32–52. Vivian, Nina. “A Corner for Women Readers Conducted by Nina Vivian, ‘Studio Day.’” Evening News, 4 January 1901. Walker, Lynne. “Vistas of Pleasure: Women Consumers of Urban Space in the West End of London, 1850–1900.” In Women in the Victorian Art World, edited by Clarissa Campbell Orr. Manchester: Manchester University Press 1995. Walker, Stephanie Kirkwood. This Woman in Particular: Contexts for the Biographical Image of Emily Carr. Waterloo, Ont.: Wilfrid Laurier University Press 1996. Walkerdine, V. Democracy in the Kitchen: Regulating Mothers and Socializing Daughters. London: Virago 1989. Ward, Susan H. “Women Art Students in Paris.” Chautauquan (September 1892): 748. “War’s Last Phase Shown in Paint.” Montreal Gazette, 30 September 1920. [Waters], Clara Clement. Women in the Fine Arts from the Seventh Century b.c. to the Twentieth Century a.d. New York: Hacker Art Books 1904. Waterston, Elizabeth. The Travellers – Canada to 1900: An Annotated Bibliography of Works Published in English from 1577. Guelph, Ont.: University of Guelph 1989. Watson, Jennifer C. “Rediscovering E. May Martin.” Canadian Collector 15 (July/August 1980): 22–5. – Water Colours by E. May Martin. Oshawa, Ont.: Robert McLaughlin Gallery 1980. – “Harriet Ford: An Expatriate Rediscovered.” In Harriet Ford. Hamilton, Ont.: Art Gallery of Hamilton 2001. Weaver, Emily P. “Pioneer Canadian Women: Mrs. Charlotte M. Schreiber, Painter.” Canadian Magazine (May 1917): 32–6. – “Pioneer Canadian Women: Mrs. Letitia Youmans.” Canadian Magazine (June 1917): 170–4. Wein, Jo Ann. “The Parisian Training of American Women Artists.” Woman’s Art Journal 2 (spring–summer 1981): 41–4.

304 bibliography Westley, Margaret W. Remembrance of Grandeur: The Anglo-Protestant Elite of Montreal. Montreal: Editions Libre Expression 1990. “What Our Women Can Do: How Many London Ladies Secure Extra Pin Money.” London Free Press, 1 December 1894. Williamson, Mary F. “Description Fails: Periodical Illustration in Nineteenth-Century Ontario.” In The Art and Pictorial Press in Canada: Two Centuries of Art Magazines, edited by Karen McKenzie and Mary Williamson. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario 1979. Wissman, Fronia E. Bouguereau. San Francisco: Pomegranate 1996. Wistow, David. Canadians in Paris, 1867–1914. Toronto: Art Gallery of Ontario 1979. Withrow, William J. Art Gallery of Ontario: The Canadian Collection. Toronto: McGrawHill 1970. Wodehouse, R.F. ACheck List of the War Collections of World War I, 1914–1918, and World War II, 1939–1945. Ottawa: National Gallery of Canada 1968. Wolff, Janet. “The Invisible Flâneuse: Women and the Literature of Modernity.” Theory, Culture & Society 2, no. 3 (1985): 37–46. “Woman’s Art Club, Exhibition of Paintings at the ‘y’ Rooms.” Unidentified London, Ont., newspaper, 19 March 1897. “Woman’s Art Club Spring Exhibition.” Saturday Night 4 (2 May 1891): 7. Woman’s Canadian Historical Society of Toronto. Woman’s Canadian Historical Society of Toronto, Transaction No. 1. Toronto: William Briggs 1896. “Women and Art: The Conference in the Art Gallery a Very Successful Affair.” Unidentified Montreal newspaper (May 1896). waac Scrapbook, waac Archives. “Women Artists at Knoedler’s.” American Art News 6 (25 April 1908): 6. “Women Artists’ Work.” Toronto Mail, March 1897. Unidentified clipping, waac Scrapbook, waac Archives. Women’s Art Association of Canada. Loan Portrait Exhibition. Toronto: Women’s Art Association of Canada, 1899. Printed Ephemera, Baldwin Room, Metropolitan Toronto Library, cihm, Microfiche Series, 38719. Women’s Art Association of Canada. “Historical Sketch of the waac.” Toronto: Women’s Art Association of Canada 1912. “Women’s Interests in the Home and State, More Paintings of War Activities.” Toronto Mail, 20 October 1919, 10. “Woodstock Artist.” Woodstock Daily Sentinel-Review, 28 April 1894. “Works by Mr. and Mrs. Knowles.” American Art News (20 April 1918): 3. World’s Columbian Exposition 1893 Official Catalogue, Part X, Art Galleries, 1893, Canada. ngc Library. “Year’s Harvest of Art,” Toronto Globe, 7 March 1903, 32. Yeldam, Charlotte. Women Artists in Nineteenth-Century France and England. 2 vols. New York: Garland 1984.

index  Page numbers in italics refer to illustrations. Aberdeen, Lady Ishbel, 70 Académie Julian, 42, 48–57, 63, 227, 246 Alpine Club of Canada, 176–7 Armington, Caroline, 206 Armstrong, Elizabeth, 226. See also Elizabeth Forbes Art Association of Montreal (aam): exhibitions, 47, 64, 143, 157, 164–6, 174–5, 183; founding, 47; school, 143, 172, 227, 231 art critics (Canadian), 85; Hector Charlesworth, 90, 186, 189, 190, 202; Florence E. Deacon, 175–6, 178–9, 191; Margaret Laing Fairbairn, 104, 255; Mary Agnes Fitzgibbon (“Lally Bernard”), 112, 113; Roy Franklin Fleming, 140, 269; Ford, Harriet, 22–3, 66, 176, 227; Blanch B. Hume, 178–80; E.F.B. Johnston, 192; Estelle Kerr, 104, 122 184, 222; Fergus Kyle, 140; Paul T. Lafleur, 185–6; Newton McFaul MacTavish, 119, 138, 154, 164, 172, 193; James Mavor, 95, 106, 193; “T. Square,” 118 art dealers, 140, 171 Art Metropole, 255. See also Toronto, commercial art galleries Arts and Letters Club (Toronto), 147–8 Arts Club of Montreal, 183–4, 193 Bashkirtseff, Marie, 50–2 Beaux, Cecilia, 104 Beaver Hall Group, 143 Bell, Mary Alexandra, 169, 226, 62. See also Eastlake, Mary Bell Bouguereau, Adolphe-William: as teacher, 42, 52–4; and Elizabeth Jane Gardner, 52 Boyle, Joseph Whiteside, 16 Bradshaw, Eva Theresa, 119–20, 143, 225 Canadian art, 184, 189; “Canadian” subjects, 160; institutions, 148, 159, 174, 180,

194; landscape painting, 154–5, 164, 175, 176–7, 190, 201; “school” of Canadian art, fostering, 96–7, 160, 164; schools of art in Canada, 26–8 Canadian Art Club, 154 Canadian artists leaving Canada, 104 Canadian Literary Institute, 15, 90. See also Woodstock College Canadian National Exhibition, 111, 121, 142, 159, 178, 185, 197, 204, 214–15, 228 Canadian War Memorials (art commissions/fund/exhibition), 205–11, 213–15, 229 Carlyle, Edwin (brother), 69 Carlyle, Ernest (brother), 69, 181, 266 Carlyle, Emily (mother), 9–11, 10, 17, 19, 33, 68, 165, 167, 168, 178, 181 Carlyle, Florence: Alpine Club, trip with, 176–7; as art educator 28, 119, 225; appearance, 19–20, 178, 208; in Brittany 45; commercial art/illustration, (see also Osborne Co.), 122, 151–2, 184, 222; correspondence with family, 198, 204–5, 207– 11, 214, 215; critical reception of work, American: 115, 147; critical reception of work, British, 160; critical reception of work, Canadian, 64, 81, 89–90, 93–5, 108, 113, 118, 123, 135, 155–7, 164–6, 171, 175, 180, 183, 185, 186, 192, 202, 204, 221; critical reception of work, French, 59; dealers (Canadian), 219; death of, 219–20; education 13–15, 26, 42–4, 48–52, 59; England, trips to, 58, 66–8, 165; family background of 9–12, 16; and France, 39–40, 43, 58, 60, 63–4, 124, 217–18; home in Crowborough, Sussex, 184, 187, 188, 208, 213–15, 217, 218; Impressionism, and, 77–9, 89, 182, 256; marriage, attitudes toward, 22, 31, 162, 169, 216, 267; models used by, 5, 58, 72, 78, 95, 115–17, 133, 139, 148, 151, 163, 172,

306 index 180, 265; New York City, 103–5, 122, 125, 130, 135, 139; nursing, 198, 199, 200; Osborne Calendar Co., 122, 125–34, 151; photographs of, 17, 37, 165, 168, 171, 177, 179, 195, 218; portraits by, 12, 93–4, 139– 40, 164, 205– 10, 270; prices and sales, 89, 108, 112, 118, 124, 126, 132, 142, 151, 152, 157, 158, 178, 185, 198, 210, 264, 270; Princess Louise and, 23–4; professional practice, 74, 140–1, 175, 178–80, 221–3; role model, 172, 185, 191, 221; Salon, Paris, 55; selfportrait, xvii, 136; studios, 67, 72, 119, 138, 139, 148, 151, 171, 173, 175, 178–80, 220–1; subject matter in work, 45–6, 48, 57, 108, 162–4, 176–7, 180; themes in work, 57, 72, 115, 117, 124, 126, 130, 134, 153, 155, 157–8, 161–4, 180, 266, 181; unlocated paintings, 162–3, 173, 266, 268, 273; war work, 197–8, 199, 201, 202, 204–10; writing by, 48–51, 60, 63, 205, 211, 216, 219, 270, 275 Carlyle, Florence, exhibitions of work: aam (Montreal) 47, 64, 158, 164; Canadian War Memorials Exhibition, 205–11, 213, 214; Dominion Exhibition (Halifax), 141; Festival of Empire (London, England), 160; Hull Art Gallery (Hull, England), 217; Knoedler and Co. (New York), 145; osa (Toronto) 3–5, 95, 109, 155, 164, 173, 182, 202, 210; Pan-American Exposition (Buffalo), 113–14; Patriotic Fund Exhibition, 192–4; Royal Academy (London, England), 199, 201, 216, 217, 270; Royal British Colonial Society (London, England), 212–13; rca, 64, 83, 92–3, 108, 124, 157, 164, 178, 180, 185, 201, 219; Roberts’ and Sons Galleries (Toronto), 81; Société des Artistes Français (Paris), 54–5; Society of American Artists (New York), 135, 261; St Louis World’s Fair (St Louis), 135–6, 137; tie/ cne (Toronto), 22–4, 111, 121, 142, 178, 211; waac, 66, 75–6, 81, 105, 109; Walker Art Gallery (Liverpool, England), 160, 161 Carlyle, Florence, friendships with women artists and writers: Davis, Cecile B., 169; Holden, Sarah (Hunter), 62, 83, 169, 252; MacCord, Mary N., 216–17; Mackay, Isabel Ecclestone, 25, 74, 138; Minhinnick, Gertrude M., 110; Muntz, Laura (Lyall), 62, 154; Patterson, Edith Lalande Ravenshaw, 63, 92; Spurr, Gertrude (Cutts), 110, 154, 232

Carlyle, Florence, paintings: Afternoon, Venice, 184, 185; Always Room for One More, 122, 132, 133; April, 198; Badinage, 120, 123, 134, 158, 180; Before Her First Communion, 78, 80, 108, 157, 182; Book of Verse beneath the Bough, 155, 162; Brass and Nasturtiums, 210; Brass and Copper, 69, 250; Conscience (The Still Small Voice), 180; Contemplation, 183; Critic, The, 179–80; dame hollandaise, Une, 52–4; Daughter, 204, 210; First Pie (Lemon Pie), 115, 162; Flowers’ Revenge, 29–30, 31, 46, 244; Footpath, The, 74, 251; Fruit, 216; Garden, The (The Garden at Englewood), 78, 107, 108, 116, 162, 256; Girl with a Bowl (Girl with Green Bowl), 152–3, 153, 173, 190; Girl with the Laughing Eyes, 130, 132; Golden Rod, 78, 113–14, 162; Good Listener, A, 173; Grandmother’s Gown, 126, 142; Grey and Gold, 157, 158, 162, 185; Guest, Venice, The, 162, 184, 186, 189; Harvest Moon, 95; High Noon, 162, 163, 201; Hollyhock Time, 107; Hour of Call to Service, 203– 4, 212, 272; Interesting Chapter, (Dreams), 72, 73, 89, 98, 116; Joe Boyle’s Dog, 90; Joy of Living, 116, 117, 160, 161, 162–4; Kathleen Carlyle, 189, 270; Lake Louise, Spring, 177; Lemon Pie (The First Pie), 115, 162; Lily of Florence, A, 143, 144, 145, 166; Mère Adele (see vieille Victorine, La), 56, 58–9, 64, 125; Miss Mischief, 128, 132, 157, 180; Miss Moses, 139; Monday Morning, 95, 96, 116, 162; Moth, The, 157–8, 159; Mother and Child, 155, 156, 162, 164, 171; Mother, The, 181; Mumsie, 181; Music, 182, 269; Notre bon camarade, 57, 246; Old Canal, 81; Peeling Potatoes, 162; Pippa Passes, 148, 149, 155, 164, 166; Portrait, Blanche, 109–10; Portrait Group, 181, 202; Portrait of a Friend, 199; Portrait of Lady Drummond, 205–9, 209, 210, 213, 214; Portrait of My Brother, 93, 94; Portrait of My Father, 12, 164; Portrait of My Mother, 10, 116; Reading to Mother, 181; “Reminiscences,” 89, 135; Red Gown, The, 161, 190, 266; Rose Birthday, 142; Shadow and Sunlight, 169, 266; Sketch, Darning Stockings, 162; Sketch of the Artist, xix, 85, 136, 157, 255; Son and Heir, 181, 210; Spinning Woman, 81, 162; Spring Song, 172, 173, 178, 179, 181, 193; Still Life,

index 307 My Studio Corner, 220; Studio, The, 116, 121, 124, 180; Studio Study of Male Model, 42, 43, 48, 50; Summer, 64, 65, 77–8, 89, 107, 116, 162, 162, 256; Summertime, 142; Threshold, The (On the Threshold), 172, 174, 181, 182–3; Tiff, The, 3, 4, 5, 79, 116, 117–18, 126, 137–8, 157, 160, 256; vieille Victorine, La (Victorine; Mère Adele), 56, 59, 81, 162; “We Beseech Thee to Hear Us, O Lord,” (Amen), 108, 123; With the Boys in the Transvaal, 109; When Mother Was a Girl, 64, 125 Carlyle, Lillian (sister), 18–19, 176, 178, 268 Carlyle, Maud (sister), 18–19, 107, 164, 204–5, 219–21, 268 Carlyle, Russell (“Buster,” brother), 69, 94, 198, 205, 218 Carlyle, Thomas (great-uncle): 11, 58, 67–8 Carlyle, William (Will, brother): 18, 28, 46, 64, 92, 104, 143, 166, 213 Carlyle, William (father): 11, 12, 13, 17, 164, 166 Cassatt, Mary, 61 Cawthra, (Ann) Mabel, 92, 225. Challener, Frederick. S., 127, 260 Cherry, Deborah, 70–1, 90, 116, 140, 170 commercial art, 98, 126; Canadian artists and, 127–9; women and, 128 Coleman, Kathleen, 191 Coonan, Emily, 184 Davis, Cecile B. (cousin of Florence), 29, 169, 225 Deacon, Florence. See art critics, Canadian Delécluse, Auguste Joseph, 43–4, 217–18 Des Clayes, Gertrude, 175–6, 184 Dignam, Mary Ella Williams, 27, 57, 75, 76, 226, 252, 256. Drummond, Lady Grace Julia, 205–9, 209, 210 Dufferin, Lady Harriot Rowan Hamilton, 54–5, 71 Duncan, Sara Jeanette, 61, 177, 248 Eastlake, Mary Alexandra, 57, 62, 226, 228. See also Bell, Mary Alexandra Englewood, 16, 168, 171, 181 Farmer, Jones H., 16 Farncomb, Caroline B., 119–20, 143, 144, 226, 259 Fitzgibbon, Agnes Moodie, 71

Fitzgibbon, Mary Agnes (“Lally Bernard”), 112, 113 Forbes, Elizabeth Adela Armstrong, 226, 252. See also Armstrong, Elizabeth Ford, Harriet, 22–3, 66, 176, 227 Forster, John W.L., 53–4 Freeman, Alice (Faith Fenton), 70, 91 Greenwich Village, 103–4 Grier, E. Wyly, 97 Hagarty, Clara S., 93, 144, 176, 198 Hamilton, Mary Riter, 172–3, 176 Hastings, Judith, 161, 166, 172, 173, 266, 176, 177, 178, 179, 181, 184, 189, 190, 198, 201–4, 215, 217, 219 Hawley, Wilhelmina Douglas, 61–2, 227 Heliconian Club, 76, 146, 201, 225, 228, 231, 251 Henri, Robert, 143, 147, 263 Holden, Sarah Baldwin, 32, 57, 66, 83, 169, 227, 252 Hooker, Marion Nelson, 32 Hopkins, Frances Anne, 20 Hosmer, Harriet, 31. Houghton, Margaret (May), 57, 83, 228 illustration, 122–9, 140–1. See also Osborne Calendar Co. Johnson, E. Pauline, 70 Judson, William Lees, 14, 238 Kerr, Estelle Muriel, 60, 70, 122, 141, 175, 176, 190, 198, 201, 222, 228 Key, Helene. See Youmans, Helene Kingsford, Winnifred, 228, 270, 190 Knowles, Elizabeth Annie Beach McGillivray, 32, 93, 105, 169–70, 175, 228–9 Lamuel, Miss, 110 Lefebvre, Jules, 48. Lhermitte, Léon-Augustin, 66, 116 Lismer, Arthur, 129 London, Ont.: artists, 29; art stores/ dealers, 29, 171; Carlyle and, 119 Loring, Frances, 104, 144, 190, 229 Louise (Princess), 21, 23, 177, 212–13 MacDonald, J.E.H., 127, 129 MacDonnell, Harriette J., 229

308 index Mackay, Isabel Ecclestone, 25, 74, 119, 138 MacMurchy, Marjory, 271, 191 Marquis of Lorne (John Campbell), 22 marriage, 22; influence on women’s careers, 31–3, 162, 167, 168–71, 267 May, Mabel, 176, 184 McNicoll, Helen Galloway, 61, 62, 142, 155–6, 193, 199, 229, 265 Millet, Jean-Francois (The Angelus), 58 Milne, David, 129 Minhinnick, Gertrude M., 110, 257. See also Carlyle, Florence, friendships Minto, Lady (Mary Caroline Grey), 124 Montreal: Montreal Arts Club, 266; Victoria School of Art, 226, 229, 231. See also Art Association of Montreal Moodie, Susanna, 20, 71, 230, 232. Muntz, Laura, 28, 32, 57, 63, 66, 84, 98, 137, 141, 142, 154, 169, 170, 172, 175–6, 183, 193, 199, 204, 211, 230; and Florence Carlyle, 62, 130–1, 261; students of, 98, 110, 222; and Wilhelmina Hawley, 61–2, 227 Muntz, Laura, paintings: Angel, The, 135; April Comes, 123; Daffodil, A, 164, 172; Fairy Tale, A, 57; Gleaner, The, 254; Little Miss Shy, 261; Little Scribe, The, 135; Madonna with Angels, 187, 270 National Club (Toronto), 123–4 National Council of Women of Canada, 70. See also Drummond, Lady Grace Julia Nelson, Marion, 32 New York City, 103–5, 122, 125, 130, 135, 139, 141, 151–2, 181 O’Brien, Lucius R., 97 Ontario Provincial Government art collection purchases: Rose Birthday, 142; The Threshold, 182, 269 Ontario Society of Artists: exhibitions, 89, 123, 166, 182, 210; founding, 88; purchases, 159; school, 27, 232 Osborne Calendar Company: Florence Carlyle’s commissions, 126, 128, 130–4, 133, 151, 152; competitions, 122–3, 126 Paris, 39–46, 44; art schools in, 40–4; Canadian artists in, 44 Patterson, Edith Lalande Ravenshaw, 32, 63, 92, 124, 230 Peel, Clara Louise, 169, 230, 232, 267

Peel, Mildred, 29, 170, 230–1 Peel, Paul, 14, 29, 44, 46, 52, 231 Pemberton, Sophie, 32 Phillips, Mary (May) Martha, 57 Pollock, Griselda, 161–2 Reid, George A., 98, 108, 110, 142, 123, 155, 204 Reid, Mary Hiester, 32, 57, 61, 92, 98, 111, 123, 175–6, 231; illustration work, 98, 255 Robert-Fleury, Tony, 48, 51–2 Roberts’ and Sons Galleries, 81, 255. See also Carlyle, Florence, exhibitions Rolshoven, Julius, 59, 67 Royal Academy of Arts, 75, 82–3, 199, 201, 212 Royal Canadian Academy, 64, 75, 107–8, 109, 124, 135, 137, 157, 159, 160, 164, 178, 180–1, 193, 201 Salon, Société des Artistes Français (Paris), 54–5 Saturday Reading Club (Woodstock), 25 Schreiber, Charlotte M., 21, 32, 88, 232 Shore, Henrietta, 176 Spurr, Gertrude E., 32, 57, 62, 66, 97, 110, 154, 170, 175, 232, 257, 270, 187 Stevens, Dorothy, 175, 176, 228 Thomson, Tom, 127, 204 Thumb-Box Exhibition (Toronto), 144 Toronto, 88, 147, 154; art gallery, 107; artists and studios, 97, 181–2, 190, 228–9, 231; commercial art galleries and dealers, 88, 232, 255; ose art school, 26; Patriotic Fund Exhibition (Public Library, College Street), 194; Temple Building, 105; Toronto Industrial Exhibition (tie/cne), 22–4, 204; Yonge Street Arcade, 26, 71, 233, 255 Traill, Catharine Parr, 71, 232 Tully, Louise Beresford, 71, 93, 232 Tully, Sydney Strickland, 47, 57, 62, 71, 98, 137, 170, 172, 175–6, 232, 233; students of, 98 Vickers, Henrietta Moodie, 71, 93, 230, 232 Victorian Era Ball, 91–2, 233 Victoria, Queen (of England), 20, 239 Westmacott, Esther K., 26 Windeat, Emma S., 93 Winnipeg Museum of Fine Arts, 180–1

index 309 Woman’s Art Association of Canada: 27, 66, 70, 76–7, 81–2, 146, 226, 231; Loan Portrait Exhibition, 105–6. See also Woman’s Art Club Woman’s Art Club, 27, 76–7. See also Woman’s Art Association of Canada Woman’s Art Club of London, 84–7, 91 women artists, 221; access to nude/draped model, 48, 50; accommodations in Paris, 39–40, 48–9, 60; art education of, 48–51, 169, 172; articles about, 98–9, 175–6, 190–1; class, 61, 70–2, 162–4; critical reception, 81–2, 82, 84–6, 89–90, 145–6, 175; cultural societies/clubs and, 111, 147–8, 154; friendships between women artists, 60–63, 189, 270; illustration and commercial art, 122, 128, 129, 131–4, 140, 184, 228; marriage and family responsibilities, 31–3, 162, 167, 168, 169– 71, 225, 267; portraiture, 86–7, 98, 105, 172, 164; professional art practice, 74–5, 140–1, 170, 162, 175, 178, 184, 222; sexuality, 30; structuring of sexual difference, 60–1, 74–5, 140–1, 169, 190, 223; studios, 71, 72, 121, 173, 178–80; transition to professional, 85, 63, 70–2, 146, 172–3, 191; women’s art and cultural societies, 76–7, 146–7; World War I and, 198, 199, 206, 212–13. See also Heliconian Club women-only art exhibitions/societies, 146–7

Women’s Art Club of New York, 145–6 women writers and journalists (Canadian), xv–xvi, 190–1, 221–2. See also art critics, Canadian: Bell, Mary; Coleman, Kathleen; Duncan, Sara J.; Fitzgibbon, Mary A.; Kerr, Estelle; Mackay, Isabel E.; MacMurchy, Marjory; Moodie, Susanna; Traill, Catharine Parr. Woodstock College, 15. See also Canadian Literary Institute Woodstock, Ontario, 11–12 Woolwich munitions factory, 202–3, 272 World Fairs: Paris International Exhibition (1900), 97; Pan-American Exposition, Buffalo (1901), 112–15; World’s Columbian Exposition, Chicago (1893), 57; St Louis World’s Fair, St Louis (1904), 137 Wrinch, Mary Evelyn, 32, 71, 93, 98, 176, 204, 234 Wyle, Florence, 104, 190, 229, 233. See also Loring, Frances Yonge Street Arcade (Toronto), 26, 71, 227, 230, 255 Youmans, Emily (mother of Florence), 10. See also Carlyle, Emily Youmans, Helene (cousin), 16, 133, 134, 148, 148, 151, 173, 175, 183, 190, 199–203, 210, 215–16, 238