RKD STUDIES

The fact that the Belgian government approved these huge canvases needs to be related to the renaissance of the debate on monumental art in Belgium, which had started already in 1898.¹ Belgium was lacking monumental painting, and the government set up several initiatives to fill this gap, for example by commissioning copies of Italian masters. The aim was to decorate public buildings in the country. More interested in reproductions than in new works, the government did not so much to encourage or support contemporary artists. On the other hand, international exhibitions with national pavilions would provide a opportunity to give these artists, especially painters with monumental ambitions who admired the Italian Renaissance, to show their talent. An Italian exhibition was an more than ideal stage for symbolist monumental paintings, since the memory of renaissance frescos and allegorical subjects would play a key role there. It was therefore of the utmost importance that the country now showed its ‘team’ of new artists on an international stage.² The painters who produced these symbolist works had already been looking for recognition in their own country for more than ten years. Nevertheless, they were now promoted by Fierens-Gevaert and publicly acknowledged as representatives of a new aesthetic. As a consequence of the competitive international context of the exhibition, this aesthetic was claimed as a Belgian national achievement, tellingly by Fierens-Gevaert who in other occasions had been rather reserved towards idealist art.³

The four paintings themselves were also of a highly political nature. Fabry’s work was renamed L’effort (The Struggle) in the 1960s,⁴ but the original title L’expansion coloniale shows its instrumental nature at a time when Belgian imperialist expansionism reached a peak. Although symbolist images were always polysemantic, it is tempting to see the upstanding female figure in the yellow drape (added by Fabry only in the final version of his work) as a personification of Belgium. Therefore, the painting represents the Belgian nation not only because of its selection for the exhibition, but also in its iconography.

Imperialist motives had been at the heart of Belgian state involvement in international exhibitions since 1897, when the decision was taken to include, from then on, colonial pavilions in the Belgian sections of the exhibition sites.⁵ In spite of their differences, the four paintings all reflect this colonial and imperialist discourse, both individually and as a series. In this case, idealist art needs to be read in an ideological key as well. All four paintings show naked bodies as expression of purity, perfection and power. Through Montald’s work, symbolizing the struggle, they move to a calm life exhibited in Ciamberlani’s canvas, and finally build up to the justification of Belgian superiority and expansionism in Fabry’s canvas and a philosophical ideal of purity in Delville’s.

Ideological motives and new ideas on monumental art and a new aesthetic also made a major contribution to the rise of new museographic practices. Symbolist works were shown on big surfaces with ‘air passing through’ [25], and in an accurate contrast of colours. Thanks to Horta’s abilities, these huge canvases could be perceived in an appropriate context. In the hall of honor, the space was big enough to ensure ‘convenient isolation useful to an artwork’s clear meaning’.⁶ Although there were complaints about the narrowness in the monumental paintings hall,⁷ the general impression was positive and of a perfect harmony, as Pica explained.⁸

The success of this new monumental art and museographic practices at the service of national ideology would soon be confirmed. A year after the exhibition in Milan, in 1907, Fierens-Gevaert was called on by the major of Venice, Filippo Grimani, to organize the Belgian section in the forthcoming Biennale (1907). This resulted in a new, permanent building, and it is significant that Belgium would be the first foreign nation to build such a national pavilion on the exhibition grounds at the Giardini Napoleonici.

Meanwhile, the success of the Belgian pavilion in Milan also contributed to the personal careers of the four artists discussed here. Also in 1907, they were welcomed at the Triennale Salon of Brussels: Fabry with L’expansion coloniale [26], Montald with La barque de l’idéal [27] and Fontaine de l’inspiration [28] ‒ two new canvases especially realized for Brussel’s Museum of Art ‒ and Delville with a new painting, Prométhée [29], now at Brussels’ Francophone University (ULB). Eventually, in 1920, Ciamberlani, Delville, Fabry and Montald would retroactively reinforce their role as pioneers by signing a manifesto for a new Society for Monumental Art.⁹

25
Anonymous, View of the hall of honor of the Belgian Pavilion of Decorative Arts at the 1906 International Exhibition in Milan Plan of the Belgian Pavilion of Decorative Arts at the 1906 International Exhibition in Milan

26
Émile Fabry,
L’effort (Expansion colonial), ca. 1905,
oil on canvas, 438 x 684 cm,
©Administration communale de Woluwe-Saint-Pierre / Gemeentearchief van Sint-Pieters-Woluwe

27
Constant Montald,
La barque de l’idéal, 1907,
oil on canvas, 400 x 505 cm,
Royal Museums of Fine Arts of Belgium, Brussels (temporary loan), inv. no. 694-49/B483

28
Constant Montald,
La fontaine de l’inspiration, 1907,
oil on canvas, 393 x 490 cm,
Royal Museums of Fine Arts of Belgium, Brussels, inv. no. 12105. Photo J. Geleyns Art Photography

29
Jean Delville,
Prométhée, 1907,
oil on canvas, 500 x 250 cm.
Bibliothèque des Sciences humaines, Université Libre de Bruxelles, photo Brendan Cole