OFFICIALLY REGISTERED AS: GREGOIRE BOONZAIER ART INVESTMENTS CC
DIRECTOR MEMBERS: ANTON BOONZAIER / EMILE BOONZAIER / SYBRAND SMIT
Copyright © 2009 A.L. BOONZAIER. (ALL RIGHTS RESERVED)
Gregoire was nearly 96 when he died. Now, only 4 years on, 2009 marks both the centenary of his birth (31 July 1909) and a decade since the establishment of his gallery (February 1999). We wish to celebrate this concurrence with a tribute – a commemorative exhibition (of albeit only a few of the countless choice works in private collections) from 31 July to 31 December 2009.
Our original intentions were various. One, the public of art enthusiasts would be afforded the privilege of sharing in what is a daily viewing experience for discerning owners. Two, visitors would be able to witness for themselves in one venue much of Gregoire’s remarkable versatility in subject matter, treated from dissimilar perspectives, using various media, all with astonishing technical diversity that rendered him a “virtuoso” and secured his status among our country’s pre-eminent artists. Three, a selection of specific portrayals of the world as we perceive it by the mature Gregoire (from the late 1940’s onwards) would reveal something of the master illusionist he became: apparent simplicity hiding great complexity. And four, hopefully certain superficial (and hence false) notions about Gregoire’s work still held by some who ought to, but really do not know it well enough would be debunked.
While still in the planning stage, we had to concede that our intentions were too ambitious to realise fully. Unfortunately, confined hanging space precludes the display of many more works required. Next, there is the logistical difficulty of sourcing works appropriate for our purposes. Gregoire’s extensive oeuvre itself also imposes its own constraints. We have therefore had to compromise by limiting our choice of themes and the many fascinating variations on these in favour of focusing rather on the artistic skills, evident in both works selected and not. Despite the restrictions, we know that some owners of fine works might nevertheless feel slighted for not being approached. We ask for their understanding.
Our original intentions were various. One, the public of art enthusiasts would be afforded the privilege of sharing in what is a daily viewing experience for discerning owners. Two, visitors would be able to witness for themselves in one venue much of Gregoire’s remarkable versatility in subject matter, treated from dissimilar perspectives, using various media, all with astonishing technical diversity that rendered him a “virtuoso” and secured his status among our country’s pre-
While still in the planning stage, we had to concede that our intentions were too ambitious to realise fully. Unfortunately, confined hanging space precludes the display of many more works required. Next, there is the logistical difficulty of sourcing works appropriate for our purposes. Gregoire’s extensive oeuvre itself also imposes its own constraints. We have therefore had to compromise by limiting our choice of themes and the many fascinating variations on these in favour of focusing rather on the artistic skills, evident in both works selected and not. Despite the restrictions, we know that some owners of fine works might nevertheless feel slighted for not being approached. We ask for their understanding.
Article 1, Pg 1
We expect censure and would welcome constructive suggestions. An obvious criticism would be that too few works of the first years (1925 to 1945) are on display. Mention was made of concentrating on those by the established Gregoire. There are indeed many gems from the early period. These certainly reveal the prodigious flair that in the next six decades he would apply with increasing subtlety, with the calculated method of a craftsman in sure control. Some antiquated books and articles of spurious influence when published give the impression that Gregoire produced little or nothing “new” beyond WWII, which is absurd. Recently a number of works from deceased estates and belonging to his “developmental” phase have featured in auction catalogues, viz. Sotheby’s. These, by comparison to those of the mature years, reveal the tentative (even predictable) approach of one still in the process of integrating influences. Flirtations with the HAGUE SCHOOL (Wenning’s main inspiration), with POST-IMPRESSIONISM and with the unconventional MODERNISM of Christopher Wood and Utrillo are often patently evident. The above needs emphasizing, but so too that this exhibition is commemorative, not retrospective (a vague label anyhow).
Gregoire had strong opinions about art, but rarely spoke of his own work. He would have decried the lack of authority and of commitment to specifics in POSTMODERNISM. He regarded artists with theories as charlatans who resort to word gimmicks because their visual creations cannot communicate. Gregoire had both fans and detractors. Any “silly” bias in favour of or against him was imparted with equanimity, but only to those allowed to be close: “Have you ever heard such bull?”. The knowledgeable Prof. Trûmplemann once remarked, “You have to know Gregoire to know him.” The reserve in his person is also evident in his work that keeps the viewer at a distance. No wonder much nonsense has been written and said about Gregoire: the influence of Wenning; so-called Cape Impressionism; brown, blue and best periods according to date; the typical Gregoire; etc. Those with a modicum of faith in their own observations and who carefully examine the works on this exhibition should realise how futile it is to try to pigeon-hole it – all of it is Gregoire; none more so or less! Read the astute Frieda Harmsen’s LOOKING AT SOUTH AFRICAN ART. She encourages viewers to look at how differently Wenning and young Gregoire (only twelve when the former died) applied HAGUE SCHOOL influence, how much more “complex” the latter’s work became and how, systematically, he “rang the changes” via various routes towards his distinctive style. She comments on his “sound” and “uncomplicated” painting, but hesitates to explain the deceptive wizardry of it during the last six decades.
Once established, Gregoire did not desist from “borrowing”, as long as he could render this as his own. Not yet ingested are Rembrandt and Delacroix (his heroes) in the slight-of-hand line; the FAUVES in juxtaposing unusual colours, the undercoat often
Gregoire had strong opinions about art, but rarely spoke of his own work. He would have decried the lack of authority and of commitment to specifics in POSTMODERNISM. He regarded artists with theories as charlatans who resort to word gimmicks because their visual creations cannot communicate. Gregoire had both fans and detractors. Any “silly” bias in favour of or against him was imparted with equanimity, but only to those allowed to be close: “Have you ever heard such bull?”. The knowledgeable Prof. Trûmplemann once remarked, “You have to know Gregoire to know him.” The reserve in his person is also evident in his work that keeps the viewer at a distance. No wonder much nonsense has been written and said about Gregoire: the influence of Wenning; so-
Once established, Gregoire did not desist from “borrowing”, as long as he could render this as his own. Not yet ingested are Rembrandt and Delacroix (his heroes) in the slight-
