 In
Russia there would be nothing to write about, were it not
for the court jeweller, Mr Faberge, who brings a most ingenious
and artistic bole. It is not so much in jewellery strictly
speaking, in the diadems, sparkling and lavish, in the stomachers
and symbolic pendants that Faberge shows the original talent
of an innovator. It is mainly in his jewels of a more special
nature, which are less made for personal adornment, and more
for an intimate use, that he shows the rarest qualities of
the inventor. Much admired at the World's Fair were, for instance,
the exquisite objects made by Faberge for members of the Imperial
Family, and which, according to the custom of this land, are
given at Easter: there are numerous little chefs d'oeuvre,
of perfect execution and taste, which rejoiced the connoisseurs:
Amongst these objects, one will gladly remember a certain
nephrite Easter egg, which, opened by a spring, displays a
mobile easel, in gold, enamel and diamonds: it is a present
given by Tsar Nicholas to his mother the Dowager Empress.
On the easel is placed a heart of enamel, and on this heart,
between the design of a diamond-set cypher of the Empress,
there appear other little enamelled hearts, each marked with
an initial, which is that of the children and grandchildren
of the widow of Alexander III. The idea is delightful, of
great feeling, and is rendered with all imaginable charm.
Two or three other presents of a similar nature are exhibited
in the showcase of Mr Faberge, and seemed to me of equal merit
to this one.
Louis Houillon regretted that there -was but little worthy
of note to report in the field of enamelled objects, which
had not progressed since the 1889 exhibition. However, 'those
exhibited in the showcase of Mr Faberge, the great Imperial
jeweller of Russia, should be mentioned. Boxes, bonbonnieres
and eggs covered in opalescent pink enamel, are beautiful
and their milky hues harmonise well with the precious stones
to which they are the background'.
Jewellers and goldsmiths showing their works at the World's
Fair belonged to one of two strongly opposed factions: traditional
and modern. A few traditionalists continued in the vein of
the period associated with Napoleon III, with flower sprays
set with numerous diamonds. Boucheron exhibited objects of
vertu not unlike those of Faberge, in Louis XV and Louis XVI
styles. Chaumet's widely admired, heavy diamond jewellery
was reminiscent of Agathon Faberge's designs.
Faberge's historicist styles were very much at odds with
the general trend in Paris around 1900. The vast majority
of craftsmen had designed their exhibits in the Art Nouveau
style, which had made its appearance in France around 1895.
Its main exponent, Rene Lalique, was celebrated by the French
as the greatest jeweller of all time and awarded a Gold Medal
and the Cross of the Legion d'honneur. The Lalique's showcase,
with its winged, bat-like female figures, was one of the highlights
of the World's Fair. E. Feuillatre, Georges Fouquet, Henri
Vever, and lesser jewellers, such as G. Falguieres and Henri
Teterger, followed his lead. The Exposition Universelle was
the crowning of the French Art Nouveau style. Rare were the
foreigners deemed worthy of mention by critics. Those who
were included Tiffany and Gorham of New York, the Worshipful
Company of Gold-and Silversmiths of London, Andersen of Norway,
Shaper of Germany, and Ovchinnikov and Faberge of Russia.
Hitherto it has been generally accepted that Faberge was
unconditionally feted, that his objects were acclaimed without
criticism, and that he was hailed as the greatest goldsmith
of his time and duly decorated with the Legion d'honneur.
However, to the devout champions of Art Nouveau, Faberge's
historicist works of art seemed backward. Indeed, the use
of earlier French historical styles had been tacitly banned
by all exponents of this new style. Faberge's own acceptance
of this idiom is first visible in the Lilies-of-the-Valley
egg of 1898 . It is interesting to note that the foundation
of the Mir Iskusstva (World of Art) movement, a union of artists
and writers similar to the Arts and Crafts movement in Britain,
occurred in the same year.11 In Faberge's oeuvre, Art Nouveau
had but a short life span in St. Petersburg (further examples
are the Pansy egg of 1899 and the Clover egg of 1902), while
in Moscow its existence is evident much longer, particularly
in the field of silver.
Coming from the camp of the exponents of Art Nouveau, the
most incisive discussion by far of Faberge's exhibits is provided
by Rene Chanteclair, obviously a champion of the style moderne.
'Mr Faberge of St. Petersburg shows a collection of bibelots
worthy of interest: for instance a series of Easter eggs of
gold and enamel, princely presents, without determined use,
hiding their qualities in lavish showcases'.
Chanteclair admired the leaves and blooms of the Lilies-of-the-Valley
egg as being 'of delicate taste', but criticised them as 'too
closely adhering to the egg'. He would have preferred 'three
feet, instead of four, leaves not terminated by banal scrolls,
and that the egg should be set in assymetrical sprays'. The
critic lauded the workmanship of the Lilies-of-the-Valley
basket but considered it 'without artistic or decorative feeling.
We have before us a colour photograph of nature, without the
artist having impressed his own style upon it'.
" The Pamiat Azova egg" received the strictest
verdict. We do not like its patina, the exterior ornamentation
of the egg, a , little overdone, nor the rose-cut diamonds
set in midst of the scrolls. Since Mr Faberge remains a faithful
admirer of French styles, we think that he could have easily
chosen in each one of them, ornaments less obvious and more
felicitous.
The surprise in the Pansy egg, a heart-shaped frame is described
as
charming, its mechanism ingenious, but, much like the other
jewels,it has the characteristics and aspect of a toy, rather
than a work of art, which is all the more to be regretted,
since its execution, even though complicated, is irreproachable.
Chanteclair selected only an oyster-coloured carnet de bal
in Louis XVI style painted with dendritic motifs 'or unrestricted
praise. 'Its heather sprays [are] so dainty and exquisite,
that one "would attribute them to Fairy fingers'. But
n the next breath Faberge's flowers are described as being
'too aithfully copied from nature, not imparting any feeling
of art wr taste: they are objects for a showcase, well crafted,
but their ise remains obscure'. A kokoshnik-shaped diadem16
brought lim pleasure only because of its ethnic connotations
as a haracteristic example of the Russian national style.
'It is egrettable that such specimens are not to be found
in all ountries, which are unfortunately losing all their
originality', 'inally, the components of the miniature Regalia
were lauded for their workmanship and their settings.
Faberge's attempts at Art Nouveau were deemed 'mediocre'
y Chanteclair, who thought
Russian craftsman acquires, through patience and perseverance,
a raiseworthy quality of execution, but, as he is still imbued
with itional traditions, he hitherto ignores the principles
of a new creation, so that his ingenuity remains confined
in reminiscences.... Te regret that such perfection in craftsmanship
was not employed in the creation of more original works of
art, of a large daring piece.
These disparaging comments stand in stark contrast to ainbridge's
oft-cited remarks that he allegedly attributed to rench goldsmiths
when he praised Faberge. '"Louis XIV, ouis XV, Louis
XVI! Where are they now?" they said, and .emselves replied:
"In St. Petersburg, for we now call them aberge'. You
are now all with Faberge in St. Petersburg'". In spite
of the negative criticism coming from an Art Nouveau advocate,
there is no doubt that Faberge -in his first major showing
in the West, which earned him a Gold Medal and the Cross of
the Legion d'honneur, his son Eugene the rank and badge of
an Officer of the Academic, and head workinaster Mikhail Perkhin
a Bronze Medal18 -deeply influenced the art of his more traditionally
minded competitors. Up until the eve of the First World War,
Faberge cast a long shadow over the production ofobjets d'art
of such important firms as Cartier and Boucheron in Paris,
Friedlander in Berlin, Collingwood in London, and Kochert
in Vienna.
|
