The first thing I noticed as I had finally made my way to the museum was certainly the size. An enormously square building, it stood four stories high with chimneys jutting from a rustic roof; fitting for what could only be an Italian villa. But around the back side of the building, modernity infuses with antiquity. Glass walls and steel beams create a contemporary portion of the museum used as a buffer between the outside world and the museum itself. At viewing this, I understood that this museum was unique in that it thrives on preserving not only the art inside it, but the museum itself, as it itself is art. Thus begun my interest in the person who established it.
Isabella Stewart Gardner was a woman ahead of her time by all standards. She was an exquisite patron of the arts and leading collector of the arts, competing among such heavyweights as John. D Rockefeller, according to the museum tour guide. She was seen as an eccentric and lively woman who was not afraid to cause panic. In fact, a famous story told by Gardner Museum archivist Kristin Parker tells of her attending a concert in 1912 with a Red Sox headband. It might not seem exciting, but as a woman in 1912 openly sporting such an odd garb, it sparked discomfort and panic within the stadium, naturally. Additionally, in her will she claimed any persons wearing any Red Sox attire shall receive a discount. As a bleeding Red Sox fan in my own right, I unsurprisingly took a liking to Mrs. Gardner, and even more of a liking to her self-portrait.
Like the Red Sox headband, her self-portrait caused controversy in its own right. Her husband, Jack Gardner, is claimed to have told Isabella to never publicly show the portrait again while he was alive; it was that good. The piece was painted by her good friend John Singer Sargent in 1888, and Mrs. Gardner had rejected eight rendering of the painting until she was satisfied. When I first glanced at the artwork, I only saw a simple portrait. A woman stood with her face looking straight forward, hands crossed upon her hips, with her hair tied behind her head to give her the appearance of having short hair. She wore a short sleeved midnight black dress accented by a ruby necklace around her neck and plunging pearls among her hips. The background radiated behind her; ripples of red designs on a golden surface that seemed to reflect light. It seemed to me to be a normal portrait, but at the time of its release the world was much different than the one we live in now. After explanation, I understood what the problem was.
In the 19th century, it was not custom for a woman to stand in her portrait, nor was it custom for woman to be looking forward, instead it was common for the female subject to look off to the side, sitting down of course. Her dress plunged low among her neckline, but the biggest issue was the lack of dress over her arms, leading some to believe that the sensuous display of flesh deliberately echoed a scandalous attitude. The jewelry she wore was complained as being too flashy towards her wealth. And what was the most interesting to me was the rejection of the portrait’s background. Those ripples on a gold background were actually flowing from around her head. It made it seem like there was a religious glow, or a halo, that surrounded her. And in the top center of the circle, which happened to be on top of her head, was what seemed like the Florence coat of arms placed upon her head like a crown.
What made this even more interesting to me was how, after Mrs. Gardner’s death and will, the portrait was placed in the Gothic room of the museum. In this gallery, the portrait would become surrounded by altarpieces, stained glass, and religious statuary. The sacramental quality seemed to intentionally be more pronounced within the room.
All in all, the museum was a fascinating and intellectual experience. Isabella Gardner is truly a saint for how she went about her business collecting art and preserving her museum even in death. She certainly went through life as a woman well beyond her time in regards to how she thought and how she acted as an individual. We are lucky as people today that she allows us even in death to walk through her halls and experience those pieces or art the way she wanted us to view them.
