info about boat in this painting?

<< First  < Prev   1   2   Next >  Last >> 
  • 21 Jan 2020 09:20
    Reply # 8638707 on 8604194

    In the JRA Library, we have a copy of

    Chinese Junks and Other Native Craft (well illustrated) by Ivan A Donnelly

    Kelly & Walsh Ltd. - Shanghai - 1924 (Reprint 1988)

    It seems to me that this would be a good candidate for digitising.

    I've just spotted a copy for sale in the UK, and have bought it, quick, before anyone else does! I'll see if I can scan it. It claims to be from 1920, printed in Shanghai and in very good condition. Browning to endpapers - otherwise clean and unmarked. Card boards encased in paper jacket in good order with age related wear to edges and spine.

  • 20 Jan 2020 20:55
    Reply # 8633216 on 8604194

    I know nothing at all about painting, but the one that you showed reminds me more of Ivon A Donelly than anybody else, and I'd guess at a Wenchow Fisher, except that in 'your' painting, there only seem to be two masts.  I don't have time to scan that one, but here is a file of one of Donnelly's paintings.

    1 file
  • 18 Jan 2020 09:02
    Reply # 8608934 on 8604194
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Good point about the reflection.

    I would be interested now to see the provenance of this painting - and would be especially interested to know the date when it was made.

    It may seem a little impressionistic, but there is enough correct technical detail [relating to the junk rig] in it to make it somewhat unusual if it really is 1880s. 


    Last modified: 21 Jan 2020 15:33 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
  • 18 Jan 2020 08:30
    Reply # 8608742 on 8604194

    The most telling point that I can see is that in the genuine Marshall Johnson paintings, there is a reflection of the ship in the water consistent with the sea state, and the aim is to make a work of art, and on the painting of the junk, there is not even an attempt at it.

    Looking at one of the better known UK pierhead artists, Reuben Chappell, I see something similar: the rigging is captured in precise detail, with the aim of selling the painting to the ship's owner, without paying too much regard to capturing the sea accurately.

    On the junk painting, the rigging is not captured in precise detail, it's all a bit impressionistic, and the sea state and reflection are not depicted accurately. I conclude, with absolutely no expertise at all in this field, that the junk painting is a rip-off by someone who might have been a pierhead artist, but not a very good one, trying to cash in on the Johnson name.

    All of which doesn't help in identifying the junk.

    Last modified: 18 Jan 2020 12:38 | Anonymous member
  • 18 Jan 2020 04:29
    Reply # 8607208 on 8604194
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    One or two things puzzle me. As mentioned, the details in the painting suggest it was done by someone who at least had some understanding of junks and their rigging etc, which is not common in 1880 though it is consistent with Marshall Johnson Jnr having been a sailor in his youth.

    From here on, questions are raised. If you look carefully through the portfolio of 150 Johnson paintings (link given in previous post) it becomes immediately apparent that your friend’s painting is atypical. For a start, nearly all of the 150 paintings in the portfolio are oil on canvas. There are one or two exceptions – a pencil, a serigraph, a couple of watercolours and the odd oil on board. This looks like a water colour.

    But the most striking thing is the style. I have no expertise in art (absolutely none) so would be interested in your friend’s comments, or someone who does have expertise in art. Marshall Johnson Jnr’s paintings seem to have a depth and professionalism about them which is entirely lacking in the painting of your friend’s. Especially his lovely skies, and his depiction of water which, if it is not flat calm, is usually a lively depiction of tiny whitecaps or even seas. Your friend’s picture is quaint and lovely, with sails correctly proportioned, balanced and believable – but somewhat flat, rustic, and nothing like those in the portfolio of 150. [edit: it strikes me as an illustration in a modern children's story book, but I guess that is partly because of the eye.]

    Above: compare the junk painting with a  rare Marshall Johnson Jnr. watercolour.

    Evidently Marshall Johnson Jnr. normally signed his pictures “Marshall Johnson” on the lower left, or sometimes "Marshall Johnson Jnr" as in the picture of the sailing ship above, but there are some recorded without the "Jnr" and which are on the lower right. 

    I can't get enough resolution to properly compare the signatures, but I am wondering ...


    I am out of my depth here.

    Last modified: 25 Jan 2020 04:03 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
  • 18 Jan 2020 02:13
    Reply # 8606311 on 8604194
    Anonymous

    Thank you, Graeme! What a great collection of thoughts and observations. I've sent the link for this discussion off to Carolie, who sent in the question, with an invitation to join the JRA if she might like to participate in the conversation.

    It would be so interesting to hear if another junk was in the USA between Keying and Amoy.

    Shemaya

  • 17 Jan 2020 22:45
    Reply # 8604949 on 8604194
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    I don’t know, but I’ll put my neck out here.

    Keying arrived in New York in 1847, went on to Boston in February 1848 and departed for the UK a month later. During this time in the States she was on display to the public (and also the subject of a law suit) so no doubt stirred some interest in this type of vessel. The vessel depicted can not have been Keying. Perhaps someone can say if a Chinese junk was seen in American waters between Keying, and 1920 with the arrival of the Amoy - I don't know of any.

    I suppose the presence of a junk in America around the 1880s is possible, but a West-East Pacific crossing is no mean feat, and if one did, especially such a large vessel as this, it seems likely there would be some record of it. It seems more likely that the image was brought across from China, rather than the vessel. The artist had been a sailor in his youth, and may have been in the East and in a position to observe and make sketches of Chinese junks. After surviving a fire at sea, Johnson then trained to be an artist - and then later still, in the late 1880s, he travelled to Europe to study further - perhaps he stopped in Hong Kong on the way. Another possibility is that he could have had access to early photographs. Very few early photographs of Chinese junks seem to give the name of the junk - and even if the name of the junk is displayed on the vessel it is going to be unintelligble to the western painter and likely indistinguishable from the slogans and lucky charms which were typically painted on transoms (in Chinese characters.)

    Unlike some early marine artists, Johnson appears to have known what he was looking at when he looked at a junk. This is suggested by the externally rounded planks, the mast parrels, and the sheeting system which shows clearly on the foresail. It is quite a lot more realistic and correct than the renditions which were made of Keying when she was publicised in the UK in the 1850s.

    It is not quite right though – the large vertical bow transom seems unreal and somewhat impressionistic-  and the exaggerated freeboard is typical of the way artists tended to render junks. On a more detailed level: There appears to be a confusion between a running backstay, and an aft lift/lazyjack, and it is interesting to note that although the main is hoisted to what looks like full height, the bottom panel is reefed, evidently not in the junk way, or by lifting the boom (which was sometimes done) but by brailing up the bottom panel to make it look a bit more like a western reef -  which looks suspiciously like a figment of the Western imagination. Standing rigging was, of course, often seen on junks of that period.

    All in all though, it does look like a surprisingly realistic painting of a junk, for those times when most western people knew little about them technically. It will be very interesting indeed if anyone actually knows the vessel.

    A portfolio of Marshall Jonhson Jnr.'s paintings here shows that his style was romantic but also realistic and generally accurate, from small pleasure boats to large ships, some of which are valued at up to $US 7,000. Of 150 paintings the portfolio lists just two of junks (both in oils - this one appears to be watercolour).


    For comparison: Victorian marine artist impression of Keying 1850s. Quite ridiculous.


    Photograph of Amoy in the USA 1920s showing a bow transom.

    Last modified: 18 Jan 2020 05:01 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
  • 17 Jan 2020 20:49
    Message # 8604194
    Anonymous

    Is this boat familiar to anybody? An email came in recently – holding the position of Chair is fascinating for receiving messages from a wide variety of people – wondering if we might have more information on the boat shown in this painting. Here's what this person knows already:

    "painted about 1880…done by Boston American artist, Marshall Johnson, Jr.  (born 1850- died 1921).  He painted mostly marine pictures of American ships…. In 1880’s and 90’s  This one seemed unusual to us with the picturing looking more like a Chinese junk. I thought maybe there were some that navigated in American waters.  He did travel to Holland and England at some point to develop his marine art painting skills. Most of his work is of grand sailing ships, often in rough waters."

    Thanks so much for any thoughts, which I will pass on!

    Shemaya 

    1 file
<< First  < Prev   1   2   Next >  Last >> 
       " ...there is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing about in junk-rigged boats" 
                                                               - the Chinese Water Rat

                                                              Site contents © the Junk Rig Association and/or individual authors

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software