Perpustakaan Digital ITB

A number of features make a comparison between these two beautifully designed and ambitious books enlightening. One is that Joachim Pissarro, recently appointed curator of paintings at the Museum of Modern Art, has generously acknowledged John House as his teacher, even though most of us in North America think of Pissarro as the former student of Richard Shift (University of Texas, Austin). House, who is professor at the Courtauld Institute of Art in London, very much fulfills his role as teacher, mounting the podium particularly in the last chapter of his book to pass judgment on previous Impressionist scholarship. Another feature of the comparison is that both books are related to exhibitions. House's originated at least partly in an exhibition he organized in 1995, Landscapes of France/Impressions of France (Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, and Hayward Gallery, London), although this current book goes well beyond it. (The exhibition had its own catalog.) Pissarro's book served as the catalog to last summer's exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art in New York. I want to make clear that the present comparison does not consider either exhibition itself in any detail, both of which have been extensively reviewed. I approach the books as independent publications, because underlying the connections I have cited is something more profound. Both studies claim as their basis close looking and visual analysis of the works of art themselves, an exercise fundamental to art history and yet one that has sometimes been lost in the stratosphere of theoretical and contextual studies. House's book has far greater pretensions, claiming that it will finally make coherent sense of Impressionism after so many recent studies have, as he asserts, fragmented it. Although Pissarro's essay does not aim so high--indeed, focusing on just a piece of Impressionist history--it is nonetheless fraught with consequences for interpretation that are every bit the measure of his erstwhile teacher. After reading these two books, in fact, one might argue that Impressionist art history has come full circle. How useful the results are is a question I shall keep in mind.