Academic literature on the topic 'Exposition universelle (1900 : Paris, France). Russia'

Abstract This article focuses on the French reception of Russian Arts and Crafts in the early 1900s. As a consequence, firstly, of the Russian display at the 1900 “Exposition Universelle,” and, secondly, of the increasing number of Russian exhibitions and other cultural events in Paris, French art periodicals and sections on art in the mainstream press contained many reports about the movement. Several writers expressed their opinion about Russian modern Arts and Crafts and participated in their promotion in France. The main purpose of the article is to shed light on those French critics who were responsible for this process of mediation and the way in which their discourses adopted a comprehensive approach to Russian Arts and Crafts experiments. It examines which artists and which exhibitions were particularly welcomed in around 1906; special attention is paid to Abramtsevo and Talashkino, and, therefore, to Maria Tenisheva.

Known primarily as a jeweler in the vanguard of Art nouveau and an important collector of the Impressionists, Henri Vever (1854-1942), as his private diaries make clear, was also a foremost connoisseur of Japanese art in fin-de-siècle France, “the most passionate of all,” to Edmond de Goncourt. Well-connected to networks of dealers, museum officials, publications, and sites of sociability such as the dîners japonais, Vever figures among the most prominent members of a second wave of Parisian enthusiasts of Japanese art, active from approximately 1880 to 1900. Under the tutelage of the Japanese art dealers Hayashi Tadamasa and Siegfried Bing and the fine art printer Charles Gillot, Vever constituted a renowned collection of not only Japanese prints but also other art objects previously disregarded by collectors. Vever’s multiple and intersecting identities as luxury craft producer, leading member of professional associations, art historian and critic, collector, and Republican mayor placed him at the forefront of efforts to legitimate the collection and appreciation of Japanese art in France. His diaries also underscore the connections between the worlds of Japanese and Impressionist art collectors, and between proponents of japonisme and Art nouveau. Further, they highlight the importance of the 1900 Paris Exposition universelle as a triumphant moment for japonisme in France, just as they signal the shift on the part of some japonisants, at the same time, from Japanese art towards the decorative arts of the Islamic world.

A culturally significant, vibrant group of textiles gathered in the nineteenth century by Natalia Leonidovna Shabelsky, praised by critics and celebrated worldwide, was nearly lost to history. Born in Taganrog, Russia, in 1841, Shabelsky moved after her marriage to a rural estate in the Lebedinsky region where she developed an interest in the indigenous textile practice of ethnic Russia. She collected and preserved examples of embroidery and lace, as towel ends and costume accessories, all filled with traditional motifs such as the Tree of Life, the Sirin, and the Mother Goddess in her various guises. At the end of the nineteenth century, Shabelsky exhibited her collection at numerous world’s fairs. After the 1900 Exposition Universelle in Paris, Shabelsky, her two daughters, and the collection remained in France. Shabelsky died in 1904; her daughters ensured that the collection was properly documented and published. Neither of Shabelsky’s daughters had children; they entrusted Count and Countess Basil Musin Pushkin to exhibit and sell the collection to museums in the United States. In the early 1930s, the Brooklyn Museum, the Cleveland Museum of Art, and the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, all purchased Shabelsky textiles. Within Cleveland’s collection, only Pushkin’s name was associated with the original accession records, omitting key provenance information. This unfortunate error led to the deaccession of a portion of this influential collection. My paper will address Shabelsky’s biography, the history of her collection, and its current status in museums and private collections. In keeping with the theme of this conference—Hidden Stories, Human Lives—I hope not only to unravel the narrative of this collection and its hidden story, but to emphasize the necessity of revealing and preserving the histories of women in the arts, in this case Natalia Leonidovna Shabelsky, champion and savior of Russian textiles.

L’année 1900 marque la fin théorique du XIXe siècle, dont les dernières années se caractérisent encore trop souvent dans les esprits par l’opposition irréversible entre académisme et avant-garde. Si le premier est parfois synonyme de sclérose artistique et de peintres vieillissants, la seconde est toujours considérée de nos jours comme victime du système officiel des Beaux-Arts, ne trouvant de salut que dans les réseaux parallèles constitués par les galeries et marchands d’art. L’étude des expositions de peintures ayant eu lieu à Paris au cours de l’année 1900 tend à revenir sur ce présupposé. Les manifestations organisées relèvent de différentes structures, qu’il s’agisse de l’Exposition universelle, du Salon de la Société des Artistes français ou des marchands d’art indépendants néanmoins, toutefois l’analyse approfondie du mode de fonctionnement et du contenu des expositions permet de mettre en lumière les différentes passerelles qui existent à la fin du siècle entre la sphère officielle et la sphère mercantile. C’est donc en confrontant l’intégralité des expositions ayant eu lieu dans la capitale au cours de l’année 1900 que cette thèse propose de rendre compte de la complexité du monde artistique parisien à cette époque, des multiples facettes de l’école picturale française, et surtout de la perméabilité entre académisme, modernité et avant-garde
The year 1900 marks the theoretical end of the 19th century, the last years of which still too often translate in people’s mind to irreversibly opposing Academism and Avant-garde. While the first one is sometimes synonymous of artistic sclerosis and ageing painters, the latter is still considered nowadays as a victim of the Fine Arts official system, finding its salvation only in parallel networks operated by galleries and art dealers. The study of painting exhibitions which took place in Paris during the year 1900 tends to go back on this presupposition. The shows are put together by different structures such as the Universal Exposition, the Salon of the Société des Artistes français or independent art dealers, yet a thorough analysis of their organization and content brings to light the various footbridges that exist between the official and the mercantile spheres at the turn of the century. It is thus by confronting the entirety of the Parisian painting exhibitions in the year 1900 that this thesis offers to render the complexity of the Parisian artistic world of the time, the multiple faces taken on by the pictorial French school, and above all the permeability between Academism, modernity and Avant-garde

Coubertin avait souhaité organiser les premiers Jeux de l’ère moderne à Paris en 1900 dans le cadre de l’Exposition universelle ou en relation avec elle. Mais dès janvier 1894, le Commissaire général de cette Exposition universelle, Alfred Picard, a rejeté sa proposition, préférant organiser des concours d’exercices physiques et de sport sous le contrôle du comité d’organisation de l’Exposition, privant ainsi Coubertin des soutiens qui lui auraient permis d'organiser les Jeux olympiques. Il ne restait alors plus au président du CIO qu’à sauver les apparences, afin d’assurer la survie du mouvement olympique naissant. Il y a si bien réussi que le mythe des Jeux olympiques de 1900 perdure jusqu’à nos jours, entretenu, il est vrai, par le CIO lui-même. Cette thèse se propose de démêler le vrai du faux à propos des « Jeux olympiques » de 1900 qui, de fait, n’ont pas eu lieu
Coubertin wished to organize the first games of the modern era in Paris in 1900, within the framework of, or in connection with, the World Fair. But from January 1894, Alfred Picard, the World Fair General Commissioner, rejected his proposal, rather choosing to organize physical exercises and sport competitions, thus depriving Coubertin of the supports who would have allowed him to organize Olympic Games. Therefore the only solution left for the IOC President was to keep up appearances, in order to ensure the survival of the rising Olympic movement. He made it so well that the myth of the 1900 Olympic Games still goes on, a myth preserved by the IOC itself. The purpose of this thesis is to separate fact from fiction about the so-called 1900 “Olympic Games” which n fact never occurred

Coubertin avait souhaité organiser les premiers Jeux de l’ère moderne à Paris en 1900 dans le cadre de l’Exposition universelle ou en relation avec elle. Mais dès janvier 1894, le Commissaire général de cette Exposition universelle, Alfred Picard, a rejeté sa proposition, préférant organiser des concours d’exercices physiques et de sport sous le contrôle du comité d’organisation de l’Exposition, privant ainsi Coubertin des soutiens qui lui auraient permis d'organiser les Jeux olympiques. Il ne restait alors plus au président du CIO qu’à sauver les apparences, afin d’assurer la survie du mouvement olympique naissant. Il y a si bien réussi que le mythe des Jeux olympiques de 1900 perdure jusqu’à nos jours, entretenu, il est vrai, par le CIO lui-même. Cette thèse se propose de démêler le vrai du faux à propos des « Jeux olympiques » de 1900 qui, de fait, n’ont pas eu lieu
Coubertin wished to organize the first games of the modern era in Paris in 1900, within the framework of, or in connection with, the World Fair. But from January 1894, Alfred Picard, the World Fair General Commissioner, rejected his proposal, rather choosing to organize physical exercises and sport competitions, thus depriving Coubertin of the supports who would have allowed him to organize Olympic Games. Therefore the only solution left for the IOC President was to keep up appearances, in order to ensure the survival of the rising Olympic movement. He made it so well that the myth of the 1900 Olympic Games still goes on, a myth preserved by the IOC itself. The purpose of this thesis is to separate fact from fiction about the so-called 1900 “Olympic Games” which n fact never occurred

Defence date: 9 April 1999
Examining Board: Prof. Heinz-Gerhard Haupt, Université de Bielefeld ; Prof. Pascal Ory, Université de Versailles-Saint Quentin en Yveslines ; Prof. Luisa Passerini, Institut Universitaire Européen, Florence ; Prof. Lucia Strappini, Université de Sienne
PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digitised archive of EUI PhD theses completed between 2013 and 2017