UNIVERSITY of GLASGOW

Home > The Catalogue > Browse > Subjects > Etchings > Etching

C. L. Drouet, Sculptor

Impression: Freer Gallery of Art
Freer Gallery of Art
(1889.27)
Number: 35
Date: 1859
Medium: etching and drypoint
Size: 226 x 152 mm
Signed: 'Whistler' at lower right, 'Whistler Maitre Eaufortier' at upper right
Inscribed: '1859.' at lower right; 'Drouet. Sculpteur.' at lower centre
Set/Publication: 'Cancelled Plates', 1879
No. of States: 2
Known impressions: 73
Catalogues: K.55; M.55; T.55; W.53
Impressions taken from this plate  (73)
The plate has not been located. It was close in size to Bibi Lalouette 033, Jo 087, Jo's Bent Head 088 and Ratcliffe Highway 065, and a little smaller than Soupe ą trois sous 064 and Bibi Valentin 034.
In 1872 nine portraits by Whistler were exhibited in J.A. Rose's exhibition of engraved portraits at the opening of the Guildhall Library and Museum (cat. nos. 960-68) described as 'Nine portraits etched in copper - very rare - plates destroyed'. Candidates for these nine portraits include Auguste Delātre, Printer 028, Whistler with a hat 044, C. L. Drouet, Sculptor 035, Finette 061, Z. Astruc, Editor of 'L'Artiste' 036, Arthur Haden 066, Mr Mann 073, Riault (The Wood Engraver) 069 and Axenfeld 068. Other possibilities include Greenwich Pensioner 040, Bibi Valentin 034, Bibi Lalouette 033 and Fumette standing 059.
In 1897 Whistler told E. G. Kennedy, 'The "Drouet" I believe to be destroyed though at this moment cannot absolutely remember - ' 15

The plate was in fact cancelled lightly, and then slightly more positively, before publication in the 'Cancelled Set'. It was then restored and printed in America. According to Edward Guthrie Kennedy (1849-1932),

15: [21 May 1897], GUW #09767.

'The plate was among those cancelled by Whistler in 1879. It finally fell into the hands of some one who had the lines of cancellation, which were light, erased, and the original lines drawn together again. Impressions from the plate in this state are deceptive, but can be detected upon close comparison with an early print. They may be recognized by a slight mark on the nose.' 16