Talk:Christopher Whall works in Gloucester Cathedral

Items removed from the article

This is interesting background information, but it appears that much of this needs to be substantially trimmed to meet the measure of encyclopedic content. You may want to look at the following:

• Wikipedia:Wikipedia is an encyclopedia
• Wikipedia:Tutorial/Keep in mind

I debated about adding synthesis, neutral point of view and original research links, too, but that can be overwhelming to get so many links to look at.

It's definitely interesting information - but this information has a couple of issues:

• You will likely lose readers who have to work through a lot of material. I was told early on that readers like short articles and the more concise the information the better. If the articles are too long, people will leave.
• It seems that the content gets away from key guidelines about writing encyclopedic content.

If you want to run this by an oversight group, though, there's a visual arts group that can review this and determine, through consensus generally, what the right approach should be.--CaroleHenson (talk) 02:16, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Background and extracts from Christopher Whall’s notes held at the National Art Library

The stained glass windows by Christopher Whall in the Lady Chapel of Gloucester Cathedral are regarded by many as the finest series of stained glass windows of the 20th century. It is interesting therefore to record some of the history of the making of these windows as whilst in the event they were to help make Whall’s reputation they could have brought about his financial ruin. We are fortunate in having access to various papers at the National Art Library, written by both Whall and his daughter Veronica, that not only give us a clear indication of what Whall was intending to portray in the windows’ iconography but also details of the additional problems and stresses that the commission was to bring.

According to Whall’s notes, it was in 1897 that he was approached about the new windows which it was intended to install in the Cathedral’s Lady Chapel and he met with Dean Spence, Canon Bazeley and William St John Hope, the architectural historian and Secretary of the Society of Antiquaries and following these discussions the Cathedral Chapter proposed that he should do a small “trial” window, the intention being that if this was to prove acceptable then he would assist them in preparing a scheme for the iconography of the six large windows involved. At this time the existing windows in the Lady Chapel were in a poor state.

The “trial” window was accepted and Whall was invited to enter into a contract but only for the four windows in the North and South Nave. The North and South Chancel windows were excluded, at least for the time being.

Whall should of course have been delighted to have received such a prestigious commission but there was a major draw-back in that the rate of remuneration offered by the Cathedral was thirty shillings per square foot. To put this rate into perspective, Whall points out that at that time Clayton & Bell and James Powell & Sons were charging fifty to sixty shillings per foot and Kempe’s, the market leaders, were charging sixty to seventy shillings per foot. According to Whall, St John Hope and others implored him to accept the rate offered as by doing so he would “Save the Chapel”.

Although Whall knew that it would cost him more than thirty shillings in wages and materials even if he were to work himself for nothing, he desperately wanted to take on the Gloucester commission so he gathered all his pupils together, put the situation to them, and they all agreed to take a substantial cut in wages when working on the Gloucester commission. In his notes he wrote:

“ I gathered my staff of painters together and explained the situation. I told them that at that price I expected to make nothing at all myself, and I asked them whether- for the sake of the building- they cared to make any sacrifice. (My staff was not like the ordinary staff of workmen, hired in the open market of industry, but pupils of my own- mostly trained from boyhood who owed their career to me, knew the whole of their “Craft” and knew that it only depended on their own industry and skill to become Masters in their turn, for which I gave them every facility, and which most of them have since become.) The response was unanimous, spontaneous and enthusiastic. A reduction in wages of twopence per hour on that job as long as it might last was agreed upon. And adhered to till the four windows were complete.”

Whall also wrote:

“I think it right to place on record the names of these Ladies and Gentlemen:- J.Brett, (Mrs.) Brett, A.E.Child, P.R.Edwards, (Miss) M.Hutchinson, Karl Parsons, J.H.Stanley, J.E.Tarbox, E.A.Woore and Messrs Lowdnes and Drury in whose workshop their work was carried out and who made their own arrangements with their own cutters and glaziers.”

The immediate financial problem having at least for the moment been overcome, Whall was to receive a further blow when he learned that the Cathedral had received an offer from a Lady Lee to donate one of the Chancel windows. The Chancel windows had been excluded from Whall’s initial contract. Lady Lee’s offer had one major condition that was to cause great stress to Whall and that was that the commission be given to the firm of Heaton, Butler and Bayne. They had it seems done work for Lady Lee before. According to David Welander, the Dean had given permission to the family of Sir Joseph Lee to erect a memorial window to him on the south side of the sanctuary at the time of the first discussions with Whall.

We must remember how important it would have been for Whall to complete the whole series of six windows given the overall iconography he had planned and how unhappy he would have been at the intrusion of another’s work into that vision.

Whall’s notes continued:

“Messrs. Bazely and St John Hope placed the matter before me at the Dean’s request and I think both but most certainly St John Hope (and several of my brother artists also) urged me to throw up the job. But I saw Mr.Waller about it, and dear old man said, -“Mr.Whall- its no use to kick against the pricks- take it from me that the Dean means to have this window- If you withdraw it will only mean that the rest of the Chapel windows will be finished off by the same hand as that one”.

Whall decided to complete the four nave windows but did get an undertaking from Dean Spence :

“that Messrs. Heaton should come to me, examine the work done, assimilate their own treatment to it and, above all, do nothing to break through the scheme of iconography set forth by the Dean and Chapter and their advisers."

It seems that Whall did have a visit from Mr.Butler but noted:

“Mr.Butler called to see my work in progress. (There is no Heaton in the firm- the two sons, Noel and Clement Heaton, having broken with the firm after the death of the founder) Mr.Butler measured the height of one of my figures to get the right scale, waived all discussion of style and treatment and went on his way. The window was done as it now stands. There was no further consultation. I forbear to comment on the result but I think it right to express my surprise that not only the treatment and style of the work but the scheme of iconography should have been allowed by the Authorities to be broken through- in the case of the lights and in the range of “Angels” where portraits of the Donor’s family are introduced. The “Angel” range was to be devoted to the Choir of Cherubim which should have six wings, and blue, as in old art.”

Whall’s notes continue to explain another change made to the lay-out of the windows

“When the sixth window came to be done it was a question whether the scheme originally set forth should be modified. The Dean and his advisers thought that, after the great subjects of the “Annunciation”, “”Nativity” &c., it was an anti-climax to have rows of single figures only as at first proposed and it was mooted to me that the subject of the “Virgin in Glory” on the North or Gospel side, and that of the “Virgin in Sorrow” on the South side would be a more fitting completion and crown of the work.” Whall subsequently agreed to do the north Chancel window and at the same time, according to his notes, sketched out a design for the South window “on these lines tho’ the window which is now there had already been long “in situ”.”

Whall also added to his note.

“As regards questions of cost. I think it right to mention that after some of the work was done the price was by agreement raised to 33/-a foot as it was found quite impossible at the original price to do the work except at an actual loss. In the case of the North Chancel window (on which no contract had been made) I insisted on double the original price and charged 60/- a foot. I should also like to note that tho’ the Scarlet Rubies (of which not much have been used) are coloured with copper, in all the rosy and crimson and purple glass which has been so much liked and all the warmer amethystine blues the colouring pigment is gold (gold dust)-a comparatively recent invention and (of course) costly. These tints are never used by the ordinary stained glass firms.”

As far as the actual windows are concerned we are fortunate to have access to Whall’s own notes explaining the meaning of what he chose to depict in the windows.

Whall starts his notes by explaining that- “The general idea illustrated is the dignity to which Human Nature has been raised by the Incarnation of Christ through the Virgin Mary.”

The four main windows that follow, two on the North Nave side and two on the South Nave side, have as their central image episodes from the Virgin Mary’s life. Thus in the first window on the North Nave side we have Mary being taught to read by her mother Anne and in the next window the Annunciation is the subject. In the first large window on the South Nave side Mary visits her cousin Elizabeth to tell her the news of her pregnancy and in the next window Whall depicts the Nativity.   The fifth window is positioned in the Chancel at the far end of the Chapel and to the left of the altar. In the window Whall depicts Christ enthroned and the Virgin Mary crowned, Mary Magdalene and Adam and Eve in one tier and in the tier below St John, St Paul, St Peter, St Andrew and St James. At the base of the window Whall’s vignettes this time depicts scenes from the Blessed Virgin Mary’s life. His plan for each of the windows was that there would be an Archangel in the top single light. Then, in the top range of five lights he would depict one or more of the nine Angel Choirs. In the second and next range he would depict an incident in the history of the Incarnation, this in one or more of the centre lights with figures of Saints appearing in the remaining lights to the left and right. For the third range of lights, Whall planned depictions of British Saints who were “more or less” connected with the province of which Gloucester was a part. On the North side of the Chapel he would depict Northern Saints and Southern Saints on the South side. Whall noted that the sequence of the windows would be: In the Ante-Chapel: a)The Fall and deprivation of Paradise and b) The Restoration in the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Window a) is on the North side and b) the South side. Then in the Chapel itself would be the six main windows, three on the North side and three on the South side.

References

Another section of notes

Whall wrote some additional notes on window 4 and the Nativity.

“ Before the work was taken in hand, the head-tracery of most of the windows was already filled with old glass. When the order of the windows was being arranged, it was suggested that The Nativity should occupy this position; when it was found that there was already a star in the old glass; so this has been brought into the picture. ”

On window 2 Whall wrote regarding the depictions in the bottom row-“ Notice the little stained glass windows in these lights, a window in a window. ”

Whall also pointed out that in the small window over the North Transept (or Chantry Chapel) in memory of Sir John Dorington of Lypiatt Park, Stroud , the Child Angels were designed by Miss Veronica Whall. This window is rather too high to get a proper view (In Whall’s notes he does recommend that visitors to the Lady Chapel take opera glasses.).

Veronica Whall notes “The Tragedy of the 6th Window"

“It would perhaps be wiser to call it a comedy of errors as it has been freely admitted a mistake by almost all concerned. It is difficult for me to put the matter clearly, I feel myself on delicate ground for it will become evident to anyone who reads this that I am too much an interested party to be talking about it at all. But it has been bursting its bonds within me for many years. So by your leave I will take the stage, and risk the comments.”

She then writes about her memories of the time when her father was first given the commission-

“I was a child of ten when my father was first approached on the subject of fitting the six great windows with stained glass. I can well remember his enthusiasm over the very idea, and my own childish awe at the romance in the very name, “Gloucester Cathedral”! It rolls round the tongue. I used to repeat it for more pleasure in the sound until it came to mean to me all that was grand and beautiful; something linked irrevocably with my father. As years went on and the work became part of our lives, and I myself was drawn into it and allowed to help, I never lost the first sense of the magic of its coming. (It is with me yet after 35 years) ”

She then writes of the hurdles her father had to overcome in regard to the economics of the commission and the intervention of Lady Lee-

“I thought little of my father’s difficulties though I heard enough to know they were almost insurmountable. Later, as I was taken more and more into his confidence and realised the true state of affairs, I felt a sense of courage and elation rise in me to meet these qualities in him, for surely it was a brave undertaking, supported by his own untiring, faithful industry and the enthusiasm he inspired in others.”

Her comments on the 30/- per square foot are revealing-

“Then loomed the first high fence and he gathered himself to clear it. It was proposed that he should enter into a contract for the first four windows in the chapel, excluding for the time being the north and south windows in the chancel and thirty shillings a square foot was all that was forthcoming for the work. It would cost him more than that in wages and material to produce the stained glass, even if he gave his own work gratis! He argued that his wife and four children were being fed and clothed without Gloucester- could he not, by working extra hard, throw Gloucester in as a sort of “make-weight”? A make-weight of 1,120 square feet! With only a small back bedroom to do the cartoons in, and badly equipped rooms in a house in Chelsea (33, Park Walk) in which to carry out the cutting, painting, and glazing of this enormous area of glass! Did I say he had courage? Nay, it was the madness of faith. He was at that time a master in the first L.C.C. Technical School of Arts and Crafts and his class was composed of those boys and girls who have since become masters in their turn and have lately been spoken of as “The Whall School”. They were his “staff” and worked for him, not as the ordinary staff of workmen, hired in the open market of industry, but as pupils who would owe their future careers to him, who laboured to know the whole of their craft and who loved it for the great adventure that it was under their spirited master. He called them round him and explained the situation: not demanding a sacrifice but telling of the wonderful work that was waiting to be done, and that he was prepared to make nothing himself if they would care to make the enterprise at least possible by agreeing to a reduction of 2d per hour in wages on that job only as long as it might last. The response was unanimous, spontaneous and enthusiastic; and the terms were adhered to till the four windows were complete."

She also describes her father’s moods during the time.

“During this time he fell into a mood which was rare but which we all knew well. One could see so clearly the habit of work fighting with the pre-occupation of his mind. He would perhaps call you to sit to him, and the old russet coloured longcloth “Greek” dress would be put on and bound round you with scarlet braid; jerked and tweaked into folds, and you would climb carefully on to the kitchen-table “model’s throne in the corner of the “back bedroom” studio”. Then, when all was ready the pre-occupation stepped in and he would ruffle his hair round and round his head with a circular motion and say “I’m sorry, you must wait a bit”, and down he would go into the garden and you would see him “stumping” the grass with a block of wood fixed to the end of a long pole. ( This instrument was most diligently used on our garden plot in lieu of a garden roller, which he did not possess). Bye and bye he would come back and set to work and forget his troubles.”

She does make some comment on the 6th window.

“The window was done as it now stands. I forbare to comment on it, as a work of art. The question of what is beautiful is a vexed one, but the question of what is fit is another matter. A sardine may be very good with other sardines on toast, but it would not be pleasant to come upon one by itself in an apple pie! The iconography of the North and South chancel windows was to have been “The Virgin in glory” on the North or Gospel side, and “The Virgin in Sorrow” on the South. When the four nave windows were done my father agreed to do the North Chancel window, at the same time making a sketch for the South window of the subject chosen; though the window which is now there was already in site. The Dean has now been dead for many years and it is only fair to his memory to say that he was most generously open to my father about the whole matter afterwards, calling himself a “penitent” and often, as time went on, speaking of his own hope that some day the window might be changed. He rather went out of his way upon one occasion to relate to my father how, when he was showing King Edward round the Chapel, His Majesty had remarked that it was “a pity” Mr, Whall had not completed the series. I do not know whether the original donor of the sixth window is still living or what her views, or those of her family may be; but I imagine that they must have heard some comments, because a member of the family, who called on my father some years after the work was finished alluded to the matter as “a culpable affair”. If this is any indication of their feeling something eventually may be done. My father’s beautiful sketch, glowing and inspired as all his work for Gloucester is, hangs opposite to me as I write and I think to myself; “I have done all I can for the moment”. And so I suppose I have for during the time I was carrying out the window in the musicians gallery, in memory of Sir Herbert Brewer, I spoke to the present Dean, telling him that I should be willing at any time to carry out the South Chancel window for the bare cost. If I am ever rich enough I shall offer to do it for nothing."

She continues-

"A gift which has been dedicated to God is in sanctuary and cannot be touched. It can only be moved in exceptional circumstances and with the concurrence of all the people concerned. If such exceptional circumstances ever arrange themselves and I find myself in the midst of them I shall at least know why I was here.”

Veronica finishes her notes-

“Yes; You think I am too interested a party to be talking about it. I am not capable of passing judgement on my own feelings where Gloucester is concerned, for I cannot eliminate the vivid impressions of my childhood and view the matter, shorn of its glamour, in a sane and decorous manner. Note: I think it right to mention that some time after the work was started and when some had been paid for the price was by agreement raised to 33/- per foot as it was found that the original price resulted in an actual loss. In the case of the North Chancel window the price was raised to 60/- a foot.”