Wednesday 23 March 2011

William Giles: modern printmaker



It was 1976. I had just bought my first colour woodcut, John Hall Thorpe's bland and beautiful Marigolds, which I was very pleased with untill a friend came round who had done a course in printmaking and damned it with one cruel word 'misregistered'. By that point in the C2oth most printmakers had achieved a professional cleanliness and a sin such as misregistration had been consigned to the dim & dirty past. Fortunately for him, the later work of William Giles (1872 - 1939) like Rainbow, Island of Jura (Hebrides), above, is in some ways, more 1976 than 1922. (I need to credit William P Carl Fine Prints for this one + one of the others). If it weren't for the Arts & Crafts WG, at first glance it would be hard to tell apart from the innumerable colourful nonentites that were churned out from around 1976 onwards. He differs from all that tosh in the claims that he makes: for all the vividness of the colours he employs, this was something he experienced, and that he is presenting us with the facts about the light you can find on the isle of Jura.



It certainly says something about his constant experimentation, first with woodcut in the Japanese manner, then with a combination of etched zinc plates and wood without a keyblock, before he finally left tonality behind and returned to pure woodcut in the mid twenties, that he achieved something that looks both like Romantic watercolour and the iridescence of contemporary etching. His exact titles of course owe a good deal to JMW Turner who also insisted that what he was representing were 'stern facts', albeit not the kind of facts that many of us are used to.

He was born in Reading, studied at the local art school before moving on, first to the Royal College of Art and then Paris. He then came home to Reading to learn the art of the colour woodcut from Frank Morley Fletcher in 1901. His subjects, or rather his excuses, were of the nymphs and shepherds variety, but as you see from Midsummer Night (1919) what he really wanted to do was improve the standards of British printmaking and show exactly how colour prints could convey both light and experience in ways that monochrome could not. This was a man with a mission that led him and his wife, Ada Shrimpton, to give many fine prints to the British Museum.



September Moon from 1901 must be one of his first colour woodcuts and although the sheep and poplar trees and general atmospherics are in line with Fletcher and the French school, and even though in many ways his imagery remains much the same for 25 years, he is already on a bold course of his own that led to he and his wife taking up metal plates from 1912. He wasn't content to find a craft that he could excell in, he wanted to achieve the best effect that he could. I would certainly think that this was the attitude that led an artist with the skill that Ada Collier possessed to go to him for instruction when she wanted to take up woodcut.


The last glow, central Corsica and particularly The last glint of a summer's day, Vejle Fiord, Denmark (1920/21) see him stretching the medium as far as it will go before he returned to colour woodcut, pure and simple, after about 1927. The pink and purple strain our credibilty but only perhaps because we are now so well-used to the outlandishness of so many 1920's colour schemes. But then we have to remind ourselves how far he travelled - to Jura, to Denmark and Corsica - to see just how peculiar light could be. He is no Engelbert Lap with his technicolour Tirol; what we see here is not so much the last glint of a summer's day but a man of very considerable energy and intensity seeing just how far that energy would go.







12 comments:

  1. Wonderful pictures and some very interesting background information. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I tried to avoid what DH Lawrence called 'skinny peacocks with painted feathers'.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Wonderful post Charles, really outstanding. I think the other thing that intrigues me about Giles was that although he was technically proficient with the Japanese techniques, he didn't embrace every part of it and his paper is the most interesting. He rejected the thin japan paper and instead used quite heavy printing paper but I am sure he did that so that the paper was able to hold more ink nd give him more opportunities to play with tone and fading colours. He does it perfectly and as you point out, he pushed the techniques to about as far as you can. To my mind he is the master, and his works outshine Morley Fletcher who is often attributed as the master, but I have always disagreed. The prints you have chosen show his dedication to tonality and lush colours. I cannot think of any other printmaker who did as well and as often, even Shrimpton didn't have the eye. The other thing about Giles, which I find somewhat significant, was that in the day they were sold, buyers could request certain tones, or a certain brightness of the prints, thus personalizing them. Giles would write the requests on the back, e.g." Mrs.E.Warburton yellow not red, pearl over cream, citrus greens not dark" etc. This elevates him even further in my opinion. How wonderfully Edwardian, that you could say to the artist, "I adore "The Sources of the Clitumnus" Mr.Giles, but those luminous colours will simply not suit my Wimbledon sitting room." Misregistered is a wonderful word, and encompasses so much more than just technical execution. I think I shall use it....a lot more.
    As usual, your contributions to the discussion are valuable and food for thought. Many thanks

    ReplyDelete
  4. You mean to say Giles prints didn't decorate bungalows at Dawlish Warren? I was looking at a photograph of the springs at Clitunno the other day and I was struck by how similar it was to the print - what is odd about Giles is that, for all his bravura treatment, he still appears to insist he is being true to nature.

    I suppose the heavier paper he used was like the wove artists used for etching (because of the metal plates). I am vague about what techniques he was actually using for different prints.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think they were a bit pricey for Dawlish bungalows, anyway Hall Thorpe had that market cornered, misregistered and all. He even has the shepard tending his herd in the Clitumnus print. He apparently went there and sketched it, and I recall seeing copies of his sketches and sketchbook from that trip...but I cannot recall where. He and Urushibara shared lots of ideas and I believe studies. The Stonehenge print by Giles was done after Urushibara, and I have to say the Giles print is breathtaking in it's luminosity. I wonder how much bravura there was with Giles. From all accounts he was relatively quiet and quite cerebral.

    ReplyDelete
  6. And even more expert elucidation in the comments department on these great prints. Really enjoyable blog reading. Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  7. Well, Gerrie, we are finding our way around the subject. The only colour woodcutter whose sketchbooks are known to have surfaced is Mabel Royds and I was quite surprised to hear about Giles - even though he must have made sketches as he travelled around.

    ReplyDelete
  8. coincidentally, i first came across giles when i was looking for collier (international studio) and when i came across his image i got him confused with selden gile who was a california painter (society of six) a bit later in the 20th century. also, that image (which i'll email) is not nearly as spectacular as these, charles; wow! and thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This is what they call a personal selection, Lily. Giles was prolific so it was easy to do.

    Are you saying Giles is new to you?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I have only just discovered Giles - and trying to research his methods in more detail. Thanks for this post

    ReplyDelete
  11. I'm glad it was of some use. There isn't much about the Giles method online and what does exist, is complicated.

    ReplyDelete