 |
|
Because Nancy died in 1855, she was not photographed for a carte de visite in 1859 or 1862 as the others
were, so we have no image of her. This close-up of Rose's picture Divided Attention possibly
shows Nancy at work, sitting here in fancy dress, which was very popular in the 1850s.The man at her back could have been more than composition: she was known in the family for attracting young men - hence the title of the painting! [For a fuller view of the painting see Rose's page.] The painting itself is dated 1856, the year after Nancy died, but Rose could have been painting from a sketch made when her sister was still alive. Ellen Clayton begins her brief section on Nancy as follows: Nancy Rayner, daughter of the well-known water-colour painter, was the eldest of a large family, which has produced five sister artists – Nancy, Rose, Louise, Frances, and Margaret. Nancy was born in London in 1825 or more probably 1826 (though Clayton gives 1827), when the family was living at 11 Blandford Street, Portman Square, Marylebone. She was christened Ann Ingram Rayner, but was apparently always known as Nancy, the diminutive version of "Ann". This would also have saved confusion with her mother's name, of course. She was Ann Rayner's second child, but as the first (William) died at birth or in infancy, she was always referred to as the eldest. Soon after she was born, the family moved to Derby, and her early years were spent there. |
 Her
studies commenced at the age of ten, and even so early her drawings and sketches showed a precocious genius, which
rapidly developed. Like her sisters, she was under the general direction of her father, but she owed much to the advice
and friendship of such men as [George] Cattermole, [Octavius] Oakley, David Cox, Samuel Prout, Frank Stone. David
Roberts took an especial interest in the gifted young girl. Her figure work included portraiture and she also
studied clay sculpture.(The Rayner family was friendly with David Roberts from about the 1830's to his death in 1864. He was widely travelled abroad and gave Nancy one of his original 'pencil' sketches from his Spanish trip - not signed but instead with his own hand nicely drawn on the reverse.) Being the eldest, she was the first to make her appearance in the profession, becoming an associate of the Old Watercolour Society (later Royal Watercolour Society) and exhibiting for the first time in 1848 at the Royal Academy. Of all her sisters, she most closely copied her father's style (with its own inheritance from George Catternole) and his practice of using a heavy admixture of bodycolour. Right, Nancy's signed watercolour study in preparation for her painting The Savoyard. The final painting was exhibited at the Old Watercolour Society in 1850 and sold to George Hanbury, Esq., Brewery. The picture below is a study she made either for The Gleaners or for A Weary Traveller. The latter (completed painting) was exhibited the following year at the OWS, along with two watercolours of Knole. Her talent was varied, and though generally known as a painter of picturesque and rustic figures, her interiors were considered to be equal in delicate realisation to some of the works of the Dutch painters. At the age of twenty-one she was elected a member of the Society of Painters in Water Colours [i.e. the Old Water-Colour Society], and she was unusually successful in securing fame and high patronage as soon as her works were brought before the public. 
The elevation from
Associate to Member was not quite what it seemed. The male stranglehold of the Society had soon come to offend
her as it did the other lady associates. Whereas male associates could graduate to full membership and a share
of the profits and administration, this transition was prohibited for women. And when the four women associates -
Maria Harrison, Eliza Sharp, Nancy Rayner and Mary Ann Criddle - put them under pressure, the Society was
reorganised in 1850 and assigned them honorary Lady Member status (to still prevent them gaining profit-sharing
full Member status). Roget's A History of the Old Water-Colour Society (1891) happily notes that 'The
Lady Member elected on the 11th of February was Miss NANCY RAYNER' and goes on to laud her talent, but it was a
defeat for her and her three colleagues against the other 26 male members and 17 male associates. Thereafter, the
Society kept its female membership numbers low to minimise any future risk. Sadly, it was academic for Nancy anyway. Roget adds: 'Her works are not numerous, owing to the shortness of her mortal career... In the six years of her connexion with the Society, from 1850 to 1855, she exhibited only thirteen drawings[*]. Among her four in 1852 were two interiors of Knole. After that she had but one a year, the last of which was quaintly called "An Equestrian Portrait of an Officer in her Majesty's Service, taken at St. Martin's-le-Grand".' [*but others elsewhere.]  Left,
George Hepburn recently acquired this painting of two children playing - Summer
Pastimes - through Art Pictures Gallery. It is signed and dated 1850 and carries
"ordered by the Duchess of Gloucester" on the back. Princess Mary, Duchess of Gloucester was known to be a patron of Nancy's,
and she also commissioned a painting of the Eldest sons of the Hon. Lt. Col. Liddell
which was exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1852. Through the window in the picture here you can see what appears to be a flag
flying over a castle tower, so the possibility exists that these were the Duchess's children or grandchildren.A comment from Andy King on this painting suggests that there may be quite a few pointers in it. Possibilities include: it may be Windsor Castle framed in the window; there is an 'Eton Boater' straw hat and a white case on the window seat; the boy (in the red dress) has one knee on the 17th Century 'Barons' chair (a suggestion that he is next in line to a title); he appears to be pointing to a boat in the girl's hand (which might be a Naval connection); and there is probably some significance in the costumes the children are wearing.  
The above image (and the detail at lower left) was provided courtesy of Peter Swanne of New Zealand, who owns
this painting by Nancy. On the back of the frame it is labelled Conway Church, N. Wales,
but we don't know more than that. However, we do know that Nancy's professional career spanned only 1848-55, and since
this painting was sold, it was probably produced in that period.Given her health problems and her limited opportunity for painting expeditions, she was probably with friends, or on a family outing, or most likely with her father (whose style this painting strongly follows). Of her siblings, only Rose and Louise were old enough and active enough to have gone with her as adults - though we know that Louise did go to Conway at some point. She lived in Brighton for a few years around 1850, but became ill in 1851 - the year of her father's court case - and thereafter declined slowly at her parents' home in London. Her career was prematurely closed by a lingering consumption [a wasting disease such as tuberculosis], of which she died at the age of twenty-eight [actually 29], in the year 1855 [on 14th August]. Her family, who have never ceased to mourn her loss, and who admired her artistic powers, do not care for any lengthened biography being given. [vol.1 p383-4]. That understandable sensitivity (even if 20 years on) has also meant that no further details of her life and skills were subsequently recorded. 
Despite its obvious quality, this is one of Nancy's earliest professional paintings - The
Hurdygurdy Man - dated 1848 and signed A.J. Rayner. As noted above, she was known as Nancy but christened
Ann Ingram Rayner. The 'J' in the signature may be a misread 'I', but Louise had the same middle name and she
adopted 'J' as her middle initial on her paintings, so both may have done it for the same reason. The painting
recently went through the hands of Leicester Galleries, but we don't have
a sale price for it.Before we pass on from Nancy, however, there is a point to highlight. During that brief 8-year period of public visibility, she had 24 paintings exhibited in London, a total well ahead of her other sisters apart from Louise. Had she lived, and had she continued at that rate, she might well have overtaken the rest of the family. Whether the quantity would have had the same quality and appeal to be found in Louise's work is perhaps a different consideration (and few of her paintings pass through sale rooms to testify), but the precocious genius, unusual success and high patronage reported above suggest that had she lived longer, she might have eclipsed both Louise and their father. Following her death, Roget notes finally that: 'On the 30th of November, 1855, at her mother's solicitation, a sum of 20l. [£20] was voted by the Society, by way of help to her surviving sisters.' This is only a single straw in the wind, but it might indicate a continued financial stress in the family, following Samuel's disgrace of 1851. SALES No prices known to us. PLACES TO LOOK No location known to us.
Please take note: we claim no art expertise, and in no way do we offer provenance for any paintings. What you see here was compiled out of interest in Louise Rayner's paintings and those by her family, but is based on sometimes very fragmentary evidence. As such, it is inevitable that there will be errors, though we naturally hope to reduce these over time. We would gratefully receive any information or corrections that will help us to fill the gaps and resolve unproved links - for example confirmation of dates of birth, death, etc., and details of other addresses the family lived at (and roughly when). Images of any of the family's paintings would also be very welcome. Thank you! |
 |
|