Born July 11, 1834, Lowell, Massachusetts
Died July 17, 1903, London

A few notes as concern Whistler’s etchings; for a good biography see the last paragraph below.

The etching line was truly Whistler’s medium. His etchings, like his paintings were “produced out of magnificently disinterested passion for beauty” (Royal Cortissoz, 1910).

In 1843 his half sister, Deborah, married Seymour Haden in London. At that time Haden had accumulated a collection of old master etchings which young Whistler had an opportunity to study. The awakening interest in art was certainly furthered by this review, especially of the Rembrandts. Haden was shortly, to take up the etching needlle himself and was to become quite an accomplished etcher by the time Whistler took up the medium.

Whistler produced a total of 442 plates, per the Kennedy Catalogue of 1910, with another 4 listed in an addenda as possibly his. He dated his early plates intermittently in the the 1850s and 1860s and not at all after 1870. Dates given in catalogues are therefore sometimes educated guesses. He usually trimmed the margins down to the plate mark, except in the later works when he used the butterfly signature. Then he usually left a small tab for it untrimmed. There can be slight size differences between actual prints of the same plate depending on the paper used. He usually used Japan paper or old Dutch paper, the Japan being more flexible and subject to slight enlargement when dampened and put through the press. He searched diligently for these old papers. Whistler’s opinion was that the plate could only be printed well by the aritst himself.

In 1859 Whistler joined the Junior Etching Club, London. He was already in conflict with Haden, who was a member of the Etching Club (which is why Whistler joined the “Junior”, so they would not be in the same club.) Whistler took affront at the acclaim given to Haden for his etchings. After all Haden was only an “amateur” while he, Whistler, was the professional artist. Haden made some attempts to patch up these differeces including agreeing with Whistler that they would produce and market a four folio set (48 prints total) of the river Thames, from it’s source to the sea, each contributing half the number of plates. The venture was never concluded.

Among the many controversies Whistler was party to in England here are three.

First: Whistler’s use, particularly in his later etchings, of leaving a little ink on the wiped plate in certain areas to create shading and atmospheric effects was scoffed at by many, but not all, of the critics.  They referred to it as “artistic printing”, the argument being that it put emphasis on printing instead of the drawing the line. The critics included Haden and P. G. Hamerton.

Second: In July 1877, Whistler filed a libel suit against John Ruskin for disparaging remarks made about his work being exhibited at the time at the new Grosvenor Gallery. Whistler won the suit in principle, but his 1,000 pound claim plus costs was reduced to an award of one farthing.

Third: He joined the lawsuit filed by Joseph Pennell against another writer in regards the originality of prints. See the bio on Pennell for a discussion of that.

A complete account of the Ruskin affair can be found in Stanley Weintraub’s biography, “Whistler”, 1974 and 2001, along with details of a later case brought against Whistler by Sir William Eden, which involved a matter of artist copyright. Is it any wonder that Whistler once remarked that to live in London one needed a lawyer!