A BS T RAC T

In 2002 the Art Institute of Chicago received forty-oneworks on paper by Paul Gauguin representing imageryfrom Gauguin’s life in the South Pacific. A recent exami-nation and conservation campaign included infraredr e flectography (IRR) study of a watercolor sketch, Ta h i t i a nHut, and two finished works in watercolor and gouache,Tahitian Landscape: Design for a Fan and Eve. In each workmedia beneath the surface were observed under magnifi-cation prior to carrying out IRR examination. Informationin the IRR images varies in character and generates differ-ent interpretations and conclusions about the making ofeach piece. IRR revealed a cursory sketch for Tahitian Hut,a detailed preliminary drawing for Tahitian La n d s c a p e :Design for a Fan, and a stylistic modification in Eve linkingthe work to representations of the artist’s mother. For eachwork, the infrared reflectographs provide clear images ofeither preliminary sketches or the earliest painting stages.IRR discoveries inform authenticity, chronology,Gauguin’s working methods, artwork function, visualinterpretation, and the relationships of these works to oth-ers in Gauguin’s oeuvre.

I N T R O D U C T I O N

In 1891 Paul Gauguin embarked on the first of twovoyages to Tahiti in search of cultural purity he found lack-ing in modern France. His second voyage, begun in 1895,ended with his death in November 1903 on the island ofHiva Oa in the Marquesas. To commemorate the onehundred-year anniversary of Gauguin’s death, EdwardMcCormick Blair gave the Art Institute of Chicago forty-one Gauguin works on paper. This generous gift included

five watercolor and gouache paintings, seven drawings, sixmonotypes, twenty woodcuts, and three zincographs rep-resenting imagery primarily from Gauguin’s life in theSouth Pa c i fic. Conservation of the forty-one works pro-vided an opportunity for technical examination includinginfrared reflectography studies of three watercolor andgouache paintings: Eve, 1889–90 (fig. 1), Tahitian Hut,1893–94 (fig. 2), and Tahitian Landscape: Design for a Fa n,1900–1903 (fig. 3).

Paul Gauguin’s Paintings on Pa p e r :

Infrared Investigations and Their Implications

for Three Works from the Art Institute of Chicago Collection

K R I S T I DA H M

The Book and Paper Group Annual 23 (2004) 13

Presented at the Book & Paper Group Session, AIC 32nd AnnualMeeting, June 9–14, 2004, Portland, Oregon. Received for pub-lication Fall 2004. Color images for this paper are availableonline at http://aic.stanford.edu/bpg/annual/.

Fig. 1. Paul Gauguin, Eve, 1889–90. Gouache on millboard, 170x 130 mm. The Art Institute of Chicago (2002.224).

Media visible beneath the surface of each artwork indi-cated that infrared examination might be fruitful. Fa i n tblack lines seen to the left of center in Eve suggest under-drawing or changes from a previous design. Graphite linesvisible under magnification indicate a sketch presentbeneath the watercolor washes in Tahitian Hut. Graphiteoutlines visible to the unaided eye in portions of TahitianLandscape, such as the sky and clouds, hint at the presenceof a complete compositional drawing. Indeed, the infraredimages provide clear views of underdrawings and a pre-liminary painting stage last seen by Gauguin prior tocompleting his works. When the infrared images are com-pared with the finished works new conclusions may bedrawn relating to authenticity, chronology, interpretation,Gauguin’s working methods, and the relationship of theseworks to others in Gauguin’s oeuvre.

T E C H N I C A L B AC K G R O U N D

Infrared reflectography is most often con-sidered a painting conservator’s tool despitethe fact that many artworks classified as draw-ings are truly paintings on paper and may bestudied as such using similar technologies. Inthe past infrared studies have been carried outon a variety of works on paper with superiorresults. For example, underdrawings have beenrecorded in Indian miniatures (Real 1985) andilluminated manuscripts (Butler and vanAsperen de Boer 1987). Despite these success-es, infrared examination is rarely consideredroutine in paper conservation.

One reason may be cost. For years infraredequipment has been prohibitively expensivefor many conservators in smaller institutionsand private practice. To d a y, digital still camerassensitive in the visible and near infrared rangeout to 1.1 microns are available for less than athousand dollars, such as the Sony CybershotF717. As prices for sophisticated equipmentdecrease, infrared examination becomes a real-istic option for many more conservators. Whilethis study was not conducted using a digitalstill camera, it is important to note new, lessexpensive equipment options.

The infrared camera employed for thisstudy was an Inframetrics InfraCAM that has aplatinum silicide detector with practical sensi-tivity from 1.1–2.5 microns. A filter was usedto narrow the infrared range to 1.5–1.73microns. Tests with different filters indicatedthat the watercolor and gouache layersappeared most transparent in this range, there-by optimizing underdrawing detection. Thecamera was connected to EPIX SVIP image

capture software on a PC platform. Multiple frames wereneeded to record the entire surface of each artwork. Overallimages were assembled from the individual frames usingAdobe Photoshop. Two tungsten lamps with high infraredoutput illuminated the works. To protect the artworks fromheat the lamps were placed at least eight feet away.

I N F RA R E D S T U D I E S

In the years prior to his departure for Tahiti, Gauguinresided in Brittany where he painted a small gouache, Eve,on an irregular piece of gray, textured millboard, which heprepared with a white ground. Unfortunately its presentcondition is compromised. Poor adhesion between thedense gouache and the millboard has led to flaking.Microscopic examination reveals paint loss across the sur-

14 The Book and Paper Group Annual 23 (2004)

Fig. 2. Paul Gauguin, Tahitian Hut. Watercolor over graphite on tan wove paper,165 x 245 mm. The Art Institute of Chicago (2002.226).

Fig. 3. Paul Gauguin, Tahitian Landscape: Design for a Fan. Gouache and watercol-or over graphite on laid Japan paper, laid down on off-white wove paper, 208 x 417mm. The Art Institute of Chicago (2002.225).

face. Retouching throughout, now discolored (particular-ly in the blue area to the lower left and right) betraysGauguin’s original surface. His subtle yellow and greenflesh tone modulations are now barely perceptible, evenwith the aid of a microscope. Regrettably, retouching wascarried out with an aqueous medium making it impossibleto safely reverse.

E v e’s compromised appearance has led scholars todoubt Gauguin’s authorship despite formal similaritieswith contemporary and later works by Gauguin. Pe t e rZegers, Art Institute of Chicago Research Curator ofPrints and Drawings, points to a precedent for Gauguin’stwo-color, curving background in the 1889 painting, SelfPortrait with Halo, in the National Gallery of Art,Washington, D.C. A precedent for a waving banner isfound in the 1890 polychrome wood relief, S o y e zM y s t e r i o u s , in the Musée d’Orsay. It was hoped infraredexamination might yield clues to the gouache’s appearancebefore deterioration and restoration and thereby informthe attribution question.

In the infrared image of Eve (fig. 4) retouching appearsas dark marks in the face and arm. A curving line extendsacross the background suggesting an alternate position forthe banner. By far the most significant revelation is the dif-ferent hairstyle. Note the wavy contours, the highlights on

the top and side of the head, and the hairline across theforehead indicated with discrete brushstrokes. Thesedetails recall Gauguin’s depiction of his mother, AlineGauguin, in an 1890 oil painting, Portrait of the Artist’sMother (fig. 5), in the Staatsgalerie, Stuttgart. The portraitis based on a photograph of Gauguin’s mother showingthe same hairstyle, now in a private collection.

Comparing the normal light and infrared images of E v ewith Portrait of Artist’s Mother clearly illustrates that E v e w a soriginally based on an image of Aline Gauguin. An exam-ination report for the oil portrait indicates the two worksoriginally appeared even more similar. Painting conserva-tor Christine Lister examined the painting and observed ared background through cracks in the yellow paint. Hintsof red paint are still visible in the upper right.

Re-creations of preliminary states of each work (fig. 6)made using Adobe Photoshop underscore the similarities.Eve is depicted with the earlier hairstyle, and Portrait of theArtist’s Mother with the former red background. Side byside comparison strongly suggests Gauguin based thesmall gouache on his oil portrait of his mother.Incorporating a curved background division and a flo a t i n gbanner, Gauguin transformed his mother into Eve. Thisconnection allows a general date of 1889–90 to be assignedto Eve, since the same date is widely accepted for the relat-ed oil.

Dahm Paul Gauguin’s Paintings on Paper: Infrared Investigations 15

Fig. 4. Eve. Infrared reflectograph composite, 1.5–1.73 microns.Fig. 5. Paul Gauguin, Portrait of the Artist’s Mother. Oil on canvas,41 x 33 cm. Staatsgalerie, Stuttgart (W 385).

The question remains whether it was Gauguin whoaltered the hairstyle in the gouache. Ultraviolet light exam-ination is inconclusive. It reveals patterns of retouchingthat do not correspond with changes to the hair, indicatingthe compositional adjustments were made earlier, beforerestoration.

Comparing related works shows that over timeGauguin’s Eve-type figures evolved away from the proto-type based on his mother. In another painting also dated to1890 (fig. 7), location unknown, Gauguin again based Eve’shead on his mother’s image, but he adopted her pose fromphotographs of archaeological statues in Borobudur. Later,during his Tahitian periods, Gauguin further transformedthe Eve figure with a South Pacific physiognomy in workssuch as the 1894 watercolor monotype, Te Nave Nave Fe n u a ,in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. In a three-colorwoodcut of the same title and date in the Art Institute ofChicago (fig. 8), Gauguin’s off-register ink layers producean abstract and anonymous figure. Perhaps after movingaway from an Eve-type based on his mother, Gauguinrevisited the gouache and transformed the figure into amore generalized Eve, biblical mother of all. It may neverbe definitively determined who carried out the changes,but infrared evidence proves Gauguin originally paintedEve.

Gauguin departed from Marseille on April 1, 1891, andarrived in Tahiti in mid-May. During the first five monthsof his two-year visit Gauguin only produced drawings. Hewrote home to a friend, Daniel de Monfried, “I am work-ing harder and harder, but so far only on studies, or rather,‘documents,’ which are piling up” (Joly-Segalen 1950, III).It was through sketching from life that Gauguin, like an

anthropologist, observed and strove to under-stand the Tahitian culture. These“documents,” as he called them, would alsoserve him later as source material for paintings.

One such “document” produced between1891 and 1892 is Tahitian Hut executed inwatercolor over graphite on wove paper. In thewatercolor study Gauguin did not clearly ren-der the structure of the hut. Instead heemphasized its organic nature by representingit merging with the surrounding foliage. Thistype of “document” could have served as amodel for the indigenous dwellings that appearfrequently in Gauguin’s paintings from bothSouth Pacific voyages such as an 1896 canvas,Why Are You Angry?, in the Art Institute ofChicago.

16 The Book and Paper Group Annual 23 (2004)

Fig. 7. Paul Gauguin, Eve Exotique, 1890. Gouache (est.) on mill-board transferred to fabric. Location unknown.

Fig. 6. Recreation of earlier states for Eve and Portrait of the Artist’s Mother

Some scholars have doubted this drawing’sa u t h e n t i c i t y, generally claiming the sheet lacksthe visual character they perceive in autographworks. As was the case with Eve, it was hopedinfrared examination might inform the truenature and function of this watercolor. Wi t hthe exception of a few brushstrokes in thefoliage, all watercolor became transparentunder infrared light clearly revealing a prelim-inary sketch (fig. 9). Rather than a belaboredstudy of forms, the sketch is visual short-hand––a few lines quickly dashed off to placethe compositional elements before beginningto paint. Gauguin indicates a palm leaf withtwo parallel lines. He anchors the figure witha few brief strokes. A tangled squiggle signifie sa banana leaf and a rapid zigzag the tree trunk.These dashes and scribbles have a spontaneousquality that counters any suggestion that this

work is a copy or forgery. The meaning of certain markssuch as the parallel dashes in the upper right is ambiguouseven when compared with the finished work. Only some-one drawing from life could have understood theirmeaning. Looking at the initial sketch in the infraredimage one can imagine Gauguin happening upon some-one sitting outside a hut and rapidly capturing the scene onpaper.

During the last years of his life, between 1900 and 1903,Gauguin painted Tahitian Landscape: Design for a Fa n, one ofseveral fan-shaped works on paper he created throughouthis career. Gauguin employed watercolor and gouacheover graphite on a support he prepared by pasting threesheets of Japanese paper to a single sheet of wove, We s t e r npaper.1 His adhesive has darkened, causing irregular dis-coloration in the background.

The composition derives directly from Gauguin’s mas-terpiece, Where do we come from? What are we? Where are wegoing? in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. In this monu-mental painting Gauguin combined themes from Ta h i t i a nand Judeo-Christian mythologies in a local landscape.Gauguin assembled the figures and animals from eightearlier paintings, which in turn were stylistically based onphotographs Gauguin owned of statuary in Borobudur.Here Gauguin uses the fan shape on a diminutive scale torevisit his life’s masterpiece in an intimate and decorativerendering. He eliminates all figures from the previous ver-sion except for a small yellow bather seated on a riverbankto the left of center. He introduces a man on horsebackand a bird into the landscape dominated by a statue ofHina, the Tahitian goddess of regeneration. Gauguindescribed the landscape in another letter to Daniel deMonfried, referring to the Boston painting but relevanthere as well, “It is all on the bank of a river in the woods.

Dahm Paul Gauguin’s Paintings on Paper: Infrared Investigations 17

Fig. 8. Paul Gauguin, Te Nave Nave Fenua, 1893–94. Wo o d c u tprinted in black ink, over ochre, over yellow, with red ink onivory Japanese paper.

Fig. 9. Tahitian Hut. Infrared reflectograph composite, 1.5–1.73 microns.

In the background, the ocean, then the mountains of aneighboring island” (Gauguin 1992, 62).

In the infrared image (fig. 10) most watercolor andgouache appears transparent revealing an extensive,detailed preliminary graphite drawing. Unlike the sponta-neous underdrawing seen in Tahitian Hut this design wasdeliberately planned and carefully executed. Aside fromworking out the top of the statue and the position of thehorse legs directly on the sheet, Gauguin rarely strayedfrom his intended forms. The underdrawing of the largetree on the right (fig. 11) shows how closely Gauguin fol-lowed the graphite outlines with his brush and bluew a t e r c o l o r. The underdrawing also indicates the shadowlying across the long branch, the boundary where thefoliage meets the ground, and a cluster of what are proba-bly leaves, executed in red gouache. Underdrawing in thelower left (fig. 12) illustrates how Gauguin planned the

seemingly random transitions from one colorto the next in advance. Graphite lines map theboundary between the mauve patch and thelavender wash. Farther left a delicate curvedline delineates a discrete patch of warm gray.Such forethought indicates representationalintent for this otherwise abstract passage.

It is interesting to consider the underdraw-ing as a transitional phase between the Bostonpainting and Tahitian Landscape. Scholars haveinterpreted the fan-shaped landscape as a secu-larized version of Boston’s painting. Thisinterpretation is supported by evidence in theunderdrawing, which clearly shows circles inthe tree to the right of Hina (fig. 11) indicatingGauguin originally conceived it as a fruit tree.

Although set in the background this tree is in the same rel-ative position as the foreground figure picking fruit in theBoston painting. The reference to Eden is clear. Gauguineven wrote on the subject years earlier in another letter toMonfried describing his 1896 painting, The Noble Woman,in the Pushkin Museum. Gauguin writes, “A naked queenreclining on a carpet of green, A female servant gatheringfruit, two old men, near the big tree, discussing the Tree ofKnowledge” (Joly-Segalen 1950, XXI). This detail in theunderdrawing betrays Gauguin’s decision, late in the pro-duction process, to exclude fruit from the tree, thuseliminating any reference to the Edenic Tree of Knowledgeand the Judeo-Christian tradition in general.

C O N C LU D I N G R E M A R K S

Infrared reflectography discoveries have enriched thescholarship for E v e, Tahitian Hut, and Tahitian La n d s c a p e.They illuminated Gauguin’s working methods and the

18 The Book and Paper Group Annual 23 (2004)

Fig. 10. Tahitian Landscape: Design for a Fan. Infrared reflectograph composite,1.5–1.73 microns.

Fig. 11. Tahitian Landscape: Design for a Fan, detail of right side.Infrared reflectograph composite, 1.5 – 1.73 microns.

Fig. 12. Tahitian Landscape: Design for a Fan, detail of lower leftside. Infrared reflectograph composite, 1.5 – 1.73 microns.

relationships between his works on paper and paintings.Viewing the preliminary states familiarized us withGauguin’s strategies when modeling one artwork aftera n o t h e r, as in Eve and Tahitian La n d s c a p e. Informationgleaned helped place E v e chronologically in Gauguin’soeuvre and definitively settle attribution debates for E v eand Tahitian Hut. It is hoped that these studies will moti-vate further infrared investigations of works on paper––forhidden beneath their surfaces, there is a wealth of infor-mation waiting to be revealed.

AC K N O W L E D G M E N T S

I would like to acknowledge the Andrew W. MellonFoundation and the Christa Gaehde Fund for their sup-port of this research. Thanks also to Francesca Casadio,Andrew W. Mellon conservation scientist, the Art Instituteof Chicago, for conducting the FTIR analysis, and AllisonLangley, assistant painting conservator, the Art Institute ofChicago, for her assistance collecting the infrared images.

N O T E

1. The material used to adhere the Japanese paper to the

Western paper was analyzed non-destructively and in-situ by

FTIR spectrophotometry. A micro-ATR (attenuated total refle c-

tion) objective with a germanium crystal was used to probe the

surface in an area where a build-up of product was evident. The

material was identified as a gum of vegetable origin. Although it

was not possible to precisely match the spectrum with available

references, the use of the most common gums such as gum tra-

gacanth or gum arabic can be excluded with certainty.

R E F E R E N C E S

B u t l e r, Marigene H., and J. R. J. van Asperen de Boer.1987. The examination of the Milan-Turin Hours withinfrared reflectography: A preliminary report. Le DessinSous-Jacent Dans La Pienture Colloque VII: 17–19.

Gauguin, Paul. 1992. Gauguin’s letters from the South Seas.Trans. Ruth Pielkovo. New York: Dover.

J o l y-Segalen, A., ed. 1950. Lettres de Paul Gauguin à Georges-Daniel de Monfried. Paris: Plon.

Real, William A. 1985. Infrared reflectography at theCleveland Museum of Art: Paintings, objects,m a n u s c r i p t s . AIC preprints, 13th Annual Meeting,Washington. Washington, D.C.: American Institute forConservation.

KRISTI DA H M

Assistant Conservator of Prints and DrawingsThe Art Institute of ChicagoChicago, Illinoiskdahm@artic.edu

Dahm Paul Gauguin’s Paintings on Paper: Infrared Investigations 19