 It was one of Graves's complaints when assembling his Dictionary that the artistic responsibility for paintings exhibited was very poorly recorded by the galleries, and he had marked difficulties in separating different families with the same names. Both artists were based in London at this time, which matches Samuel's residency in the same period. But though we might assume that the coincidence was too great and all were the work of Rose, the Rayner name was sufficiently common that we cannot safely do that.
Rose is the most elusive of the Rayner sisters, and even Ellen Clayton notes only that: Rose, who draws figures, has withdrawn from the exhibitions, her time being fully occupied in teaching, and in colouring fine photographs. From the age of fourteen to twenty, she studied modelling only.
As can be seen here, Rose's style was very different from that of her sisters. The subject and title is Miss Catty, i.e. one of the daughters in the Catty family. Rose's sister Grace Rayner - the one non-artist of the Rayner sisters - married Frederick Henry Bovil Catty in 1869. Painted in 1854
As Ellen Clayton notes, Rose soon took up teaching as a career. Although the Education Act became law in 1870 and ensured for the first time that all levels of society gained some learning, it is more likely that Rose was doing private tuition for families of substance. Evidence of this lies in the fact that she travelled very widely on the Continent, including Russia in 1880, which would have demanded a substantial income unless travelling as part of a family's retinue. What is not clear is what she taught, but since she would not have had formal schooling herself, the obvious area would be clay, sculpture and painting - and in some cases her pupils might have been adults.
 The census for 1881 has her living at 103 Dalberg Road, Lambeth, Surrey, giving her occupation as artist figure painter, and with her is Frances's daughter (Rose's niece) Annetta Copinger, aged 13 and listed as scholar. As Frances was then lodging in New Windsor, Annetta was probably with her aunt on a visit.
She is thought to have had one further exhibit at the Royal Academy in 1885, and if so, it would confirm she was still practising as an artist from time to time. The longest-lived of all her sisters, in a generally long-living female line, she died on 12 January 1921 at Orpington.
Rose's Divided Attention, painted in 1856. The subjects are thought to be Nancy with one of her series of male friends. The painting is signed at bottom right as "R.Rayner"
On the point of colouring photographs (as submitted to Ellen Clayton), it is worth remembering that the earlier part of Rose's life coincided with the fledgling years of photography. Daguerre's pioneering process had only recently lost ground to Fox Talbot's more practical one of 1838-40, and for a number of years photographs were seen merely as an artist's aid to producing a 'real' picture on canvas. Gradually photography developed its own character and the right to be seen as artistic on its own merits (and the explosion of interest in cartes de visite after 1855 would have assisted it). But it still suffered from slowness of exposure (especially the fine-grain film used for portraiture), and hence motion-blur if the subject moved.
Colour photography arrived much earlier than most people realise but it made the film slower still, so it was largely ignored. Instead, the art of photo-colouring developed. Rose would not have been out of work in her lifetime; practical amateur colour film did not appear until the 1930s, largely disappeared during World War II, and stayed a rarity for some years after. Many of our older generations in Britain will recall the photographer at wedding and other 'official' occasions making a note of dress, shirt and tie colours in the 1950s so that monochrome pictures could have colour brushed into them even at that late date.
In 1858, the family moved to Brighton, living in various rented apartments there until 1864. One of these, c.1859, was at 24 Montpelier St. This image is from her sketch pad. Water jugs and vases were a common feature in her paintings because of her own interest in modelling in clay.
SALES
No prices known to us.
PLACES TO LOOK
No location known to us.
| |
Harry Drummond, November 2003. |
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!
|
