The Facebook Facescape

I found the CNN Money.com article on the Facebook Economy (the social networking site) interesting + the article's authors provides some insights on the operating system (s) + other viewpoints on opportunities for new business models.

The Reasons Why People Like Synthetic Gemstones

I think lab-grown gemstone industry is evolving + it hasn’t impacted the natural colored gemstone and diamond market + many believe its threat has been greatly exaggerated + most synthetic gem materials are detectable via standard / advanced gemological tests + they are affordable + some people love technology, so like the product + consumers tend to like the stones if they are properly disclosed with less technical jargons + they are popular in fashion pieces + some buy it for themselves.

Peter Doig

Peter Doig is a Scottish painter + he's one of Europe's most expensive living painters + his pictures are landscapes + he uses unusual colour combinations + depicts scenes from unexpected angles giving his work a magic realist feel + I like it because they simulate inclusion-landscapes in gemstones + they are beautiful.

Useful links:
http://www.saatchi-gallery.co.uk/artists/peter_doig.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Doig
www.michaelwerner.com
www.victoria-miro.com

Bottle Shock

The film, Bottle Shock, by director Randall Miller revisits a 1976 blind tasting in which French experts hailed California wines over some of France's finest vintages + the movie was shown at the Sundance film festival this week + expect more fireworks from the French wine sector.

Useful links:
www.sundance.org
www.bottleshockthemovie.com
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0914797

Smart Money Decisions

In a great book Smart Money Decisions by Max H. Bazerman, there are some insights on why some people lose at auctions + the examples deal with important decision problems everyone of us is confronted with at least once in her/his lifetime + I think gem dealers, jewelers, and art dealers should read it because it contains wealth of insights.

Here is what the description of Smart Money Decisions has to say (via Amazon):
When it comes to money matters, even the smartest of us can make some pretty dumb decisions. From falling in love at first sight with a house and hastily negotiating a price to blindly following the pack in investment dealings, life is fraught with financial choices that are settled on with gut instinct rather than a level head—moves that can, and often do, lead to costly mistakes. In order to sidestep major money blunders, resisting first impulses, though not easy to do, is absolutely crucial. This groundbreaking book gives you the tools necessary to think through fiscal issues practically so you don't continue making decisions rashly.

Written by Max Bazerman, a renowned expert in the field of decision making and negotiation, Smart Money Decisions illustrates both how and why we make the decisions we do. Offering an intriguing mental audit of people's psychological relationship with money, it provides the essential understanding you need to identify your own approach to finances, recognize any inherent problems, and determine ways to overcome them.

Bazerman guides you through these basic steps with the goal of permanently improving your financial decisions in a wide range of real-life scenarios, such as buying and selling a home or a car, making investments, and choosing careers. Highlighting the errors too often made in these and other situations, Smart Money Decisions presents the 10 most important money mistakes, including:

- Overconfidence—the engine that fuels other monetary missteps
- Being unprepared —'winging it' leads to mishaps that could easily be avoided
- Focusing on beating the other side—coming out on top shouldn't overshadow making a decision that will help you in the long run
- Ignoring alternatives—having your heart set on only one option isn't always the wisest strategy

Packed with sound advice and expert recommendations on how to make more reasoned monetary decisions, Smart Money Decisions is essential reading for anyone who wants to stop making costly financial errors.

Seeing Snowflakes

This is what I found interesting from Ken Libbrecht's website @ SnowCrystals.com + Ken Libbrecht is the chairman of the physics department @ the California Institute of Technology + he studies the physics of snow crystals.

Here is what he has to say about snowflakes:
A snow crystal forms up in the atmosphere + it starts with, say, a small water droplet which freezes into a very tiny piece of ice and then that grows and gets this hexagonal shape + then, as it gets larger, these corners of the hexagon sprout branches and they can become very elaborate as it grows larger + one thing you can do, as a physicist, is you can try to calculate how many ways there are to make a snowflake, and I've done that + it's a very large number + The number of ways to make a complex snowflake is far greater than the total number of atoms in the universe + with such large numbers, you can say fairly confidently that if you looked at all the snowflakes that grew on earth, you would never see one that looked exactly the same.

Full Table Cuts With Blunt, Missing Or Broken Corners

(via Diamond Cuts in Historic Jewelry:1381-1910) Herbert Tillander writes:

The Great Cross of Francis I, of about 1540, contained five Table Cut diamonds, one Burgundian Point Cut and three faceted Gothic Roses. In 1988, Morel presented a wrong faceting design of the three drop-shaped gems: the quasi rond diamond alone was a Burgandian Point Cut whereas the drops, described as taillés en face—i.e flat-bottomed—can only have been Gothic, trihedrally faceted Rose Cuts. Bapst, writing in 1888, simply indicated that the diamonds were faceted. The 1559 Crown inventory gave the following description: ‘Une grande croix composée de neuf grands dyamans, c’est a scavoir cinq grandes tables faisant la croix au plus hault , au dessoubs ung dyaman quasi rond et trois aultres dyamans en larmes ou fers de lances taillés en face faisant le pied de la croix auquel pied pend une perle en poire.’ The Cross was pawned several times before disappearing completely.

The ‘Elephant with a Tower’ pendant is one of the central pieces in the Schatzkammer der Residenz, Munich. It dates from between 1557 and 1559, and was made in Munich, probably by Hans Reimer; it is 5.6 cm high. The jewel is still in the former Royal Collection, though no longer in its original state. The fine large Table Cut diamond has unfortunately been replaced by a cheap Blister pearl, the suberb ruby by a spinel, and the exquisite pearl which originally hung from the pendant has disappeared and not been replaced. It was possible to reproduce, from a portrait of Duchess Anne among the miniatures painted by Hans Mielich, the cut of the original diamond, which was found to be perfectly fashioned High Table, 22.3 x 15.9 mm in size, with a table facet of ideal size. The small diamonds which now fill the corners round the Blister pearl are eighteenth century Rose Cuts.

The sitter in the portrait of Christine of Lorraine, Grand Duchess of Tuscany, by Scipione Pulzone, 1590 (Museo degli Argenti, Palazoo Pitti, Florence) is wearing jewels worthy of the wife of the powerful and wealthy Medici Grand Duke Ferdinand I. In contrast to those of other contemporary Florentine princesses, the Duchess Christine’s larger diamonds are all High Table and Mirror Cuts. Some are square and others rectangular, but they are all appear to be very well proportioned.

A three-dimensional St George pendant, with both the front and the back worked in great detail, is the best known, and artistically the finest, of all the Renaissance pendants in the Grϋnes Gewölbe. Here, we shall concentrate on the diamonds in the pedestal. Either the master goldsmith could not find a perfect set of gems, or the jewel was made to order and the jeweler was given only a very limited selection of Table Cut diamonds to work with. The stones themselves are of three types: in the center, blending with red cabochons, are two oblong Table Cuts; next to these are two well-matched Mirror Cuts, one on either side; at the ends, placed vertically because they are smaller than the other stones, are two more Table Cuts. These may have been all the jeweler had at his disposal, but it is also possible that he chose them and positioned them deliberately because they marked so clearly the end of the pedestal while maintaining the height of the rest of the diamonds in the row.

As long as the settings remained clean and the underlying foiling still reflected the incident light, the pedestal formed a bright base for the rest of the jewel. The fact that the cuts were mixed was noticeable only on close examination and did not disturb the integrity of the jewel as a whole. Today, the light entering the jewel is not reflected back at the viewer and the table facets themselves appear disturbingly dark, even black.

Full Table Cuts With Blunt, Missing Or Broken Corners (continued)

Early Jewelry Of The British Isles

(via 5000 Years of Gems and Jewelry) Frances Rogers and Alice Beard writes:

2. Anglo Saxon Jewelry

It would seem that whatever a conquered people might feel toward the Romans who came as victors to settle in their country, they were always ready enough to do as the Romans did—in respect to jewelry. For more than three hundred years after the Roman invasion, British jewelry followed, to a great extent, the fashions set by Italy.

With the invading Teutonic tribes in the fifth century there came a new wave of influence, which was, of course, reflected in personal ornaments. Nevertheless, the established traditions of the Roman and Celtic arts were too deeprooted to be easily overthrown, and the work of the Anglo-Saxon goldsmith was never entirely free from their influence.

Both the skill and originality of the goldsmith-jeweler was stimulated by the constant demand for personal ornaments. He was called upon to fashion rings and bracelets intended to be given as rewards of valor; he made amulets of amber and necklaces of precious stones in settings of twisted gold. He made clever use of thin slices of garnet or millefiori glass or pastes of various colors, employing them like bits of mosaic in representations of birds, flowers, or geometrical designs. Many brooches were shaped like birds whose feathers and colorful markings were wrought in bright inlays of glass set within partitions of tiny wires soldered to a metal base.

Following the introduction of Christian art from Rome and Byzantium, Anglo-Saxon jewels took on new forms and character. The Byzantine school sought to combine exquisite treatment of detail with the Oriental love of color. Under this influence the Saxon goldsmith became a master in the use of colorful translucent cloisonńe enamel and delicate gold work.

The ring worn by the Anglo-Saxon at an earlier period had been very primitive indeed, usually a bit of wire twisted into a hoop or spiral. But the rings of the later period show considerable technical skill, especially in the use of neillo, a bluish black metallic inlay which was used extensively on both gold and silver. There can scarcely be a better description of its nature than that given in an ancient manuscript. Probably the author was one of those earnest monks bent on disseminating knowledge of the arts. Says he:

When you wish to make niello, take equal parts of quick-silver, copper and lead and put them in a vessel that they may cook together. Then take of sulphur, as much as is the total of the metals, mix it with them and stir it. When it has calcined, cast it anywhere, where there is clean water, mix it with borax and paint what you wish in the circles. The ‘circles’ are the design carved on the metal base, thus forming grooves to retain the niello inlay.

One of the finest examples of a ring enriched with niello is the massive Anglo-Saxon ring of the ninth century, now belonging to the Victoria and Albert Museum. It is thought to have been made for Alhstan, Bishop of Sherborne, and is composed of four circular and four lozenge-shaped pieces. The latter are ornamented with conventionalized animals, and on the roundels are the letters of the Bishop’s name. The most famous of all English rings belongs to the same period. It is also decorated with niello and bears the name Ethelwulf.

Often niello, enamel work, and inlaid stones were used in combination on a single piece of jewelry such as a brooch. A magnificent example is the Tara Brooch, found on the seashore about a hundred years ago near Bettystown, Cape Louth, Ireland. Aside from its interest as a beautiful and world-famous jewel, it is a fine example of the goldsmith’s art. The while bronze metal is hammered, chased, engraved and thickly gilded. In addition to niello, granulation and filigree, the brooch is further enriched with glass, amber, and blue and red enamels mounted like gems.

Counted among the most famous relics of England is the Alfred Jewel, believed to have been made under the personal direction of King Alfred himself. It was found at Newton Park near Somerset, in 1693, and was later presented to the Ashmoleon Museum at Oxford. No one is certain what the jewel was intended for. Possibly it formed the central ornament in a crown, or it may have been worn as a pendant. In general shape it is an oval elongated at the lower end, somewhat like a hand glass with a wide handle. The design represents a man, supposed by some to be Christ, holding a scepter in each hand; by others it is thought to be the figure of a saint. Legend has it that St Cuthbert appeared to the Saxon King during his stay on the Isle of Althelney, where, in 878, Alfred sought refuge from the Danes—hence the saint’s effigy on the jewel.

The combined arts of the goldsmith were lavished on that jewel. It is decorated with colorful semi-translucent enamels, filigree, and granular goldworks; and around its sloping sides, in letters of gold, runs the legend: Aelfred Mec Heht Gewyrcan (Alfred ordered me to be made).

The ancient practice of burying weapons and personal ornaments with the dead continued well into the eighth century, and to this custom is due the fact that many beautiful specimens of jewelry of that period are still preserved.

But with the coming of Charlemagne a new attitude toward articles of value was introduced. The Emperor forbade the burying of jewels. He considered it a pagan custom, out of keeping with Christian ideology. Furthermore, it was wasteful.

No doubt Charlemagne’s law was wise in its time, nevertheless jewels kept in circulation have far less chance of survival than those stowed safely underground, and we of today are the losers by reason of that law. A conspicuous dearth of surviving jewels marks the period from the reign of Charlemagne onward for some centuries.

However, we are not entirely without knowledge concerning the methods and techniques of the day because certain meticulous records of the goldsmith’s craft were made at the time and still exist.

Eighteenth Century British Portraiture

(via The Outline of Art) William Orpen writes:

In his discourse to the Academy students in 1778, Reynolds observed that blue should not be massed together in a picture, whereupon Gainsborough proceeded subsequently to paint his famous ‘Blue Boy’ and, by his brilliant success with the boy’s blue dress, put Reynolds in the wrong. It is highly probably that the blues which figure so prominently in his beautiful portrait of ‘Mrs Siddons’ are another expression of Gainsborough’s disapproval of Sir Joshua’s dogmatic teaching. We have only to compare this Gainsborough portrait with Reynolds’s painting of the same actress as ‘The Tragic Muse’ to realize the difference between the two artists. Reynolds painted his picture in 1783, Gainsborough his in 1784, when Mrs Siddons was twenty eight; but, though actually a year younger, everyone will agree that the actress looks years older in Sir Joshua’s picture. Reynolds emphasized the intellectual qualities of the great tragedienne, his endeavor was to show the sublimity of her mind; Gainsborough was content to show the charm and vivacity of her person, and that is why Mrs Siddons looks younger in his portrait. Another temperamental difference between the two artists is shown in their hobbies; while Sir Joshua was interested in literature and delighted in conversing with the learned, Gainsborough’s ruling passion was music. He was not only a good musician himself but was completely carried away by the playing of others. Once when a talented amateur, a Colonel Hamilton, was playing the violin at his house, Gainsborough called out, ‘Go on, go on, and I will give the picture of ‘The Boy at the Stile’ which you have so often wished to buy of me.’ The Colonel ‘went on’ and eventually returned home with the coveted picture of his reward. This love of music makes itself felt in Gainsborough’s pictures, which are lyrical, the paintings of an artist who sings, while those of Reynolds are more philosophical, the pictures of a man who thinks in paint.

Of all the English eighteenth century portraitists Gainsborough is the lightest and airiest, and in freshness of color and in gracefulness without affectation his portraits more than rival those of Reynolds. His ‘Miss Haverfield’ is more of little lady than any of Sir Joshua’s children, and though her gentility may not be accounted of virtue, and while we must admit that Reynold’s ‘Age of Innocence’ has more psychological profundity, ye we cannot find another portrait in the world which excels this Gainsborough in rendering the flower-like charm of childhood.

Though by his portraits Gainsborough acquired so considerable a fortune that he could afford to have country houses at Richmond and in Hampshire as well as his town house, his landscapes rarely found buyers, and remained ‘admired and unsold till they stood ranged in long lines from his hall to his painting room.’ At his death his house was filled with his own landscapes. The end came with some suddenness. A pain in the neck, to which he had paid little attention, turned out to be due to a cancer, and when the physicians pronounced his case hopeless, he settled his affairs with composure and prepared to meet death. He was particularly anxious to be reconciled with Sir Joshua and begged him to visit him on his death bed. When Reynolds came an affecting reconciliation took place: ‘We are all going to heaven,’ said Gainsborough, ‘and Vandyck is of the party.’ Thomas Gainsborough died on August 2, 1788, and by his own desire was buried as privately as possible in Kew Churchyard. Sir Joshua Reynolds was one of the pall-bearers, and in his presidential address to the Academy in the following year he paid an eloquent tribute to the memory of his former rival.

Eighteenth Century British Portraiture (continued)

Travel Updates

I found Schmap with local listings + zoomable city maps interesting + the guides were useful for planning out a day's itinerary + I would also recommend Trip It.

Useful links:
www.schmap.com
www.tripit.com

Battle At Kruger

Watching the Battle At Kruger video (what a lucky shot) is amazing + it's the difference in speed and resolve of predator vs prey + it all happens in the blink of an eye + there is a lesson for all.

Useful links:
Battle At Kruger: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LU8DDYz68kM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_at_Kruger

Barbarians At The Gate

Barbarians At The Gate: The Fall Of RJR Nabisco by Bryan Burrough + John Helyar covers the management buy out of RJR and all the financial moves that took place to get it done + secret deals + stock market manipulation + flouting of laws + surprise plot twists + all of it almost unbelievable, but all of it true + it's well worth your time, effort, and energy.

Here is what the description of Barbarians At The Gate says (via Amazon):

Over six months on the New York Times bestseller list, Barbarians at the Gate is the definitive account of the largest takeover in Wall Street history. Bryan Burrough and John Helyar's gripping record of the frenzy that overtook Wall Street in October and November of 1988 is the story of deal makers and pulicity flaks, of strategy meetings and society dinners, of boardrooms and bedrooms, giving us not only an unprecedentedly detailed look at how financial operations at the highest levels are conducted but also a richly textured social history of wealth at the twilight of the Reagan era. As compelling as a novel, Barbarians at the Gate is must reading for everyone interested in the way today's world really works.

Color Association Of The United States

The Color Association of the United States (CAUS) is an independent color trend forecasting and color consulting service to the business community.

Useful links:
www.colorassociation.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Color_Association_of_the_United_States

Coskata

According to the company officials, Coskata uses existing gasification technology to convert almost any organic material into synthesis gas + rather than fermenting that gas or using thermo-chemical catalysts to produce ethanol, Coskata pumps it into a reactor containing bacteria that consume the gas and excrete ethanol + the process yields 99.7 percent pure ethanol + Coskata's method generates more ethanol per ton of feedstock than corn-based ethanol + requires far less water, heat and pressure + those cost savings allow it to turn, say, two bales of hay into five gallons of ethanol for less than $1 a gallon + I think with proper distribution infrastructure + luck the business venture should succeed.

Useful links:
www.coskataenergy.com
www.ucsusa.org
www.nrdc.org
www.ethanolrfa.org
www.anl.gov

R E M

R E M is an American rock band formed in Athens, Georgia, in 1980 by Michael Stipe (lead vocals) + Peter Buck (guitar) + Mike Mills (bass guitar) + Bill Berry (drums and percussion) + their music is mid-tempo + enigmatic + semi-folk-rock-balladish + experimental + especially, Michael Stipe's distinctive metallic/vitreous voice + they were pivotal in the creation and development of the alternative rock genre + its members have sought to highlight social and political issues + I enjoy their music.

Useful links:
www.remhq.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.E.M._(band)

The Garibaldi Panorama

Brown University is bringing the 19th-century artwork, painted on a 136-foot paper canvas, fragile and large, into the 21st century, putting the painting online so that the Internet-viewing public can view it with a simple mouse click + the project allows historians and others access to a unique art form that was once used to convey current events to the public + according to the experts the watercolor panorama was painted on both sides of the 41/2 foot-tall canvas, and spans 273 feet + painted in either 1860 or 1861 + it chronicles the life of Giuseppe Garibaldi, a patriot regarded as one of modern Italy's founding fathers + at the time, panoramas were a popular art form, particularly in Europe + The Garibaldi Panorama is perceived as a 'moving' artwork.

Useful links:
http://dl.lib.brown.edu/garibaldi
Digital Initiatives: http://dl.lib.brown.edu
http://www.brown.edu/Administration/News_Bureau/2007-08/07-038.html

Lifting Sightholder Suspensions In The Best Interest Of All

Chaim Even Zohar writes about DTC Sightholder issues + DTC's past/present practices + the impact + the importance of good governance + other viewpoints @ http://www.idexonline.com/portal_FullEditorial.asp

Early Jewelry Of The British Isles

(via 5000 Years of Gems and Jewelry) Frances Rogers and Alice Beard writes:

1. Celtic Ornaments

The recorded history of England may be said to begin with the invasions of the Romans, and very little jewelry made before the Roman conquest has come to light. Such specimens as have been found consist of pins, rings, neck ornaments, discs and bracelets, made of bronze or gold, never of silver.

There were also beads. First, last and always there are beads in all ages and among all peoples, civilized or savage. The prehistoric beads of the British Isles were made of bone, amber, jet or glass. The latter probably supplied by Phœnician trading ships, since glass-making was unknown to the early inhabitants of England.

The gold they used was often so pure that it was quite flexible, and a small gold bar would be bent until its two ends all but touched. The ring thus formed was easily opened and a number of them could be linked together to make an ornamental chain. It is supposed that the rings were used as a medium of barter, therefore they are usually called ‘ring money’.

Many of the ancient ornaments were torques. A torque is an inflexible, rather massive ring of twisted gold which was usually worn as a neck ring. Any number of them have been unearthed in Ireland and one of these torques is so huge that it could not have been worn about the throat, but must have been hung over one shoulder to rest diagonally across the chest. It measures more than five feet in length.

The Emerald Isle is famed for the fine collection of ancient relics of pure gold that have been discovered there during the last few centuries. Among them are many dress-fasteners in the form of brooches.

As for the dress-fastener, one of the problems met by the first man who appropriated the pelt of an animal and tried wearing it on his own back, was how to keep if from falling off. A history of the varied inventions of mankind for the fastening of clothes would in itself fill a volume, which might bear the title, From Thorns to Zippers, for the first fun ‘coat’ ever worn by man was very likely pinned together with a thorn. Buttons with buttonholes, hooks and eyes, snappers and zippers were rather a long time coming to our aid.

The pin has been through many stages of evolution. At a very early period it was made of gold wire bent into a form somewhat resembling our safety pin of today. A later development of the simple pin with a catch was the Roman fibula, a two piece brooch consisting of a pin on a hinge and a bow.

The characteristic Celtic brooch was composed of a long pin an an incomplete ring. Untold numbers of these ancient ornaments were, in former years, sold by the men who found them for whatever the yellow metal would fetch.

Archeology is not a science that appeals to the man with a hoe. If the hoe chances to turn up some priceless piece of ancient jewelry the important thing to him is the intrinsic worth of the metal; so into the melting pot it goes, and, losing all those incalculable values given it by the history of its period and the hand of the goldsmith, becomes once again a soulless lump of metal.

However, this sad fate does not always fall to the lot of ancient Celtic ornaments of gold found by accident, as the following instance goes to prove.

One day in the year 1896 (as near to the present as that) a peasant was plowing a field. As the plow cut its way through a furrow of brown earth it met with some slight obstruction which, on examination, turned out to be nothing less than the now-famous Limavaday Treasure. It would be interesting to know what the man thought when first he saw the yellow gleam of gold, but we have only the statement of bald facts. At any rate, from that plowed field in the county of Londonderry, Ireland, was taken a little golden hoard such as one reads of in a romance of buried treasure. There were chains of gold, a torque made of thick twisted strands of rich yellow gold, and there was a collar of remarkable workmanship ornamented with repousśe work, which marks the period of its making as sometime about the first century A.D.

The year following their discovery the ornaments were sold to the British Museum, whereupon Ireland set up a violent protest. She claimed that the relics, having been found in Irish soil were treasure-trove and therefore belonged to Ireland. The British Museum authorities pointed out that the National Museum at Dublin had had a chance to buy them and had failed to do so. And further, they said that nobody could prove that the jewelry was made in Ireland—it might originally have come from England. The Press fanned the flames is dispute, and the matter was taken into the Court of Law. It took some six years before the law got around to deciding which contestant was right. And then, with the wisdom of Solomon, it favored neither one side or the other. Judgment was given that the jewelry was indeed treasure trove and therefore by virtue of the Prerogative Royal belonged to the King. Whereupon His Majesty, after receiving the treasure, tactfully turned about and presented it to the Irish National Museum. Altogether, it seems to have been a merry puss-in-the-corner game played in recent times by ornaments of precious metal that for centuries had lain untouched where they had been hidden in the ground, perhaps by some rich and important owner when the alarm of invasion rang through the land.

Early Jewelry Of The British Isles (continued)

Eighteenth Century British Portraiture

(via The Outline of Art) William Orpen writes:

The Art Of Gainsborough, Romney, Raeburn, Hoppner, And Lawrence

1

Shortly before little Joshua Reynolds celebrated his fourth birthday in the West of England, there was born in the Eastern Counties a babe destined to become his greatest rival in life and death. Thomas Gainsborough was born in 1727 at Sudbury, in Suffolk. He was one of a large family, his father being a wool manufacturer and clothier of moderate means, while his mother was a woman of education, the sister of a schoolmaster and herself a skillful painter of flowers. Thomas inherited his mother’s love of nature and her talent for art, and spend his boyhood rambling about the countryside and sketching the scenery round Sudbery. His gift for catching a likeness revealed itself early. One day, having seen a man robbing an orchard, he made a quick sketch of him, with the result that the robber was recognized from Gainsborough’s drawing and arrested. The boy’s faculty for copying, however, was not always exercised in the interests of law and order; and on another occasion, when he desired to play truant, he forged his father’s handwriting in a letter to the schoolmaster, asking for a day’s holiday. The ruse succeeded, but was subsequently found out, and seeing clearly that the boy would work at nothing but his drawing and sketching, the father wisely sent his son at the age of fifteen to London to study art under the French engraver Henri Gravelot. Young Gainsborough also studied at the St Martin’s Lane Academy, and later became the pupil of the portrait-painter Francis Hayman (1708-76), with whom he continued nearly four years. In 1745 he returned to his native town of Sudbury, where he began practice as a portrait painter and occasionally painted a small landscape for his own pleasure.

Unlike Reynolds, who was ‘wedded to his art,’ Gainsborough married when he was only nineteen. He fell in love with Margaret Burr, a beautiful girl of eighteen, who fortunately possessed an income of £200 a year of her own, and as no obstacles were raised to their wedding the boy-and-girl couple settled down at Ipswich, where Gainsborough soon acquired a considerable local reputation as a portrait painter. Here his two daughters were born and the painter led a happy domestic life, sketching in the country between the intervals of his professional portraiture and spending his evenings playing the violin—for he was devoted to music—either in his own home or in the houses of some of his friends.

In 1760 he was tempted to leave this simple life at Ipswich and moved to Bath, a fashionable center to which everyone who was anyone in London society came sooner of later. From a professional point of view this move was the beginning of Gainsborough’s fortune, for the fashionable world soon flocked to the studio of this ‘new man’ who made his sitters look so august and distinguished, and the modest provincial, who had begun painting three quarter lengths at five guineas apiece, now asked eight guineas, and was soon able to increase his figure to something nearer London prices. But while his fortune waxed, his happiness waned, and having now secured the entry into the fashionable world, Gainsborough began to pay attention to other ladies and so excite his wife’s jealousy. His home life was no longer simple or happy, and as time went on his private troubles increased, for both Mrs Gainsborough and his two daughters became subject to mental derangement. To the world, however, he continued to show a cheerful face, and his sprightly conversation and humor made Gainsborough a welcome favorite in all society.

In time the fame of the Bath painter spread to London, where Gainsborough occasionally exhibited at the Society of Artists, but though in 1768 he was chosen as one of the foundation members of the Royal Academy, he did not immediately leave Bath. He came there when he was thirty three; and it was not till he was forty seven that he was persuaded to move to London. In 1774 he took a part of Schomberg House in Pall Mall, and his success was immediate. ‘The King sent for him and Duchesses besieged his studio.’ Society was rent in twain, divided into a Reynold faction and a Gainsborough faction, and under these circumstances it is not altogether surprising that Sir Joshua’s jealousy did not allow him to be quite fair to his rival, whose power of securing a likeness he once formally denied.

Many stories are told of the rivalry between the two painters, and they have mostly increased with the telling in the course of years. As an example of the growth of legends, we may cite the widely circulated story that Reynolds at an Academy banquet once proposed the health of ‘Mr Gainsborough, the landscape-painter of the day,’ whereupon Richard Wilson is said to have retorted, ‘Ay, and the greatest portrait-painter too.’

The original version of this incident is told by Thomas Wright in his Life of Richard Wilson, published in 1824, and here we learn that the dialogue took place, not at an Academy banquet, but a the Turk’s Head in Gerrard Street, shortly after Gainsborough had arrived in London from Bath. Meeting Richard Wilson there, Reynolds in a bantering spirit said, ‘Have you heard sir, that our greatest landscape-painter has come to town?’

‘Nay, Sir Joshua,’ retorted Wilson, ‘you mean our greatest portrait-painter.’ Thus what was originally a piece of good humored chaff between two great artists has been twisted by inaccurate repetition into a display of maliciousness on both sides.

Nevertheless it must be admitted that there was a decided coolness between Reynolds and Gainsborough, and this was natural enough, for not only were the two men competitors for the patronage of Society, they were also temperamentally too far apart to understand one another completely. ‘With Reynolds,’ Sir Walter Armstrong has said, ‘deliberation counted for much; Gainsborough’s good things are impromptus.’ The seriousness and slight pomposity of Reynolds could not mix easily with the free-and-easy gaiety of Gainsborough. To Gainsborough, Reynolds seemed something of a pedant; to Reynolds, Gainsborough appeared rather a frivolous person. For many years neither missed many opportunities of getting a ‘dig’ at the other.

Eighteenth Century British Portraiture (continued)

Heard On The Street

Timing is everything + cost + market response, especially in business.