Art Chowder March | April, Issue 20 | Page 43

“He put the picture on an easel in north light and demonstrated his method. With a large cotton swab wrapped around a chopstick and a simple mixture of acetone and mineral spirits, he proceeded to remove varnish evenly, in overlapping circular movements, without persisting in any one area. He moved continuously, paying equal attention to the darks and lights, and never followed contours, which he said would make them ‘…look like cutouts.’ He never broke through the discolored coating to make a ‘window,’ a practice he condemned as an expression of the restorer’s vanity, done only to produce a dramatic photograph. Like most restorers, John could tell when the painting’s entire surface was evenly cleaned by the feel of the paint when the slippery varnish is gone. When this state was reached, he brushed on a temporary varnish. The painting as an image could then be evaluated and discussed.” One of Brealey’s central concerns was that the authority of “science” was supplanting a fundamentally humanistic approach to art conservation. Recognizing that artworks inevitably change with time (pigments altering their hue and fading, oil paint becoming more transparent), he invited discussion over how to preserve what remains of the essence of a masterpiece. In 1984 John Brealey was chosen directly by the Prado Museum in Madrid (criticized for bypassing the protocol of a “select committee” of experts) to clean one of the great monuments of Spanish painting: Las Meninas by Diego Velazquez. Before he even set foot in the place, antagonism that a mere Englishman would dare such a thing was ferocious. Except for a few hardliners, opinion rests that he succeeded. Please note the correction from an error made in the previous issue of Art Chowder to appear in the March/April issue. The name printed as “Rachel Farrell” should have read “Rachel Ferreli”. i Dianne Dwyer Modestini. “John Brealey and the Cleaning of Paintings,” Metropolitan Museum Journal, v. 40 Essays in Memory of John Brealey (2005) https://www.metmuseum.org/art/metpublications/john_brealey_and_the_clean- ing_of_paintings_the_metropolitan_museum_journal_v_40_2005 ii M. Kirby Talley Jr. “An Old Fiddle on a Green Lawn: The Perverse Infatuation with Dirty Pictures”: Metropolitan Museum Journal, v. 40 Essays in Memory of John Brealey (2005) iii The elder Pliny’s chapters on the history of art; tr. by K. Jex-Blake p. 135 https://archive.org/stream/cu31924031053550/cu31924031053550_djvu.txt iv Sheldon Keck. “Some Picture Cleaning Controversies: Past and Present,” Journal of the American Institute for Conservation 1984, Volume 23, Number 2, Article 1 (pp. 73-87) http://cool.conservation-us.org/jaic/articles/jaic23-02- 001.html Sheldon Keck was one of the real Monuments Men during WWII and, together with his wife Caroline, was a leading pioneer in the field of paintings conservation. His concise survey of hisoric cleaning controversies has been very helpful in putting the issues into historical perspective. v A very interesting and thorough “History of Condition and Treatment” can be found in Arthur Lucas and Joyce Plesters. “Titian’s ‘Bacchus and Ariadne’” Na- tional Gallery Technical Bulletin Volume 2, which can be found at https://www. nationalgallery.org.uk/research/technical-bulletin/technical-bulletin-volume-2 March | April 2019 43