Lucas Museum Sargent on Loan to Met

John Singer Sargent, Las Meninas, after Velázquez, 1879 

A painting bought by the Lucas Museum of Narrative Art is making its debut at the Metropolitan Museum. The latter's exhibition "Sargent and Paris" includes the artist's spirited copy of Velázquez's Las Meninas, purchased for the Lucas in 2019. It is one of at least nine copies of Velázquez paintings that Sargent made at the Prado in fall 1879.

The Met show connects the engagement with Las Meninas to subsequent Sargent portraits such as The Daughters of Edward Darley Boit. Rather than striking a conventional pose, the girls stand and sit randomly at the threshold of a dark room. A mirror (reflecting a window) is visible in the gloom.

This isn't the first time a Lucas painting has been shown at the Met. In 2022 the New York museum displayed Robert Colescott's George Washington Carver Crossing the Delaware: Page from an American History Textbook in a special installation near its model, Emmanuel Leutze's Washington Crossing the Delaware.

The Lucas Museum is to open in 2026.

John Singer Sargent, The Daughters of Edward Darley Boit, 1882. Museum of Fine Arts Boston
Installation view, "Sargent and Paris," with the Hammer Museum's Dr. Pozzi at Home

Comments

Ooooo. I cannot wait to see it.
One of the thunderstrike characteristics of the original is its monumentality: Its dimensions are 318 cm × 276 cm (125.2 in × 108.7 in). But Sargent's copy is 113.7 × 100.3 cm (44 3/4 × 39 1/2 in).
Anonymous said…
Sargent is both technically and creatively in a league of his own. Although Pre-Raphaelites have his technical skill, they somehow lack his creative skill---or sophistication. Meanwhile, certain artists into the style of hip or contemporary seem to lack both.

The Lucas museum is going to be straddling those two worlds. So will "treacle" necessarily be worse than or as bad as (or even less bad than) avant garde for avant-garde's sake is?
Re your "Sargent is both technically and creatively in a league of his own.":
Say more. He was disfavored forever, although not lately.
Why do you think so?
Anonymous said…
Disfavored? How so?

"John Singer Sargent was a very popular and influential artist...widely regarded as the most successful portrait painter of his time...His work was frequently displayed in prominent galleries and private homes, further solidifying his celebrity status."

Apr 22, 2024 — John Singer Sargent (1856 – 1925) was considered the most important portrait painter of his generation. His speciality...
Letters from Athens

John Singer Sargent
(January 12, 1856 – April 14, 1925) John Singer Sargent (January 12, 1856 – April 14, 1925) was the most successful portrait paint...
John Singer Sargent.org
10 Epic Paintings by John Singer Sargent - Singulart
Oct 30, 2023 — John Singer Sargent, the ultimate rock star of the art world from the late 19th to early 20th century, wowed everyone ...

Per Wiki:
Foremost of Sargent's detractors was the influential English art critic Roger Fry, of the Bloomsbury Group, who at the 1926 Sargent retrospective in London dismissed Sargent's work as lacking aesthetic quality: "Wonderful indeed, but most wonderful that this wonderful performance should ever have been confused with that of an artist."[110] In the 1930s, Lewis Mumford led a chorus of the severest critics: "Sargent remained to the end an illustrator ... the most adroit appearance of workmanship, the most dashing eye for effect, cannot conceal the essential emptiness of Sargent's mind, or the contemptuous and cynical superficiality of a certain part of his execution."
Anonymous said…
Sargent is NOT technically and creatively in a league of his own.
Portrait painters never achieve that status.
The anti-woke art critic knows nothing about art.
Anonymous said…
> "Wonderful indeed, but most
> wonderful that this wonderful
> performance should ever have
> been confused with that of
> an artist."

Huh? Methinks he doth protest too much.

> The anti-woke art critic
> knows nothing about art.

LOL. If I look up the word "troll" will I see your picture?
Anonymous said…
The anti-woke art critic thinks he's a "gatekeeper."
The anti-woke art critic is a hypocrite.