Harrington, Sarah, Mrs (SCC Newsletter March 1999)

Mrs. Sarah Harrington

and Mrs. SARAH HARR INGTON.

Hollow-cuts are relatively rare in this country, but strangely enough it is not so in the United States of America. Our greatest exponent of this genre was Mrs. Sarah Harrington, who was working at the end of the eighteenth century. Her name will be familiar to all serious silhouette collectors. There were others such as Mrs. Collins, a partner of Mrs. Harrington for a time, Abraham Jones (fl.c.1779-1810), Steell (fl.c.1781) & Henry Herve (c.1800-1820) In the case of the first three we know of no signed or definitely attributable examples of their work. For the purposes of this article I will concentrate on the work of Mrs. Harrington, as well as briefly mentioning the work of some of the other hollow-cut artists known & unknown. However, before embarking on this I will very briefly give some account of the work of hollow-cut artists in the U.S.A.

HOLLOW-CUTS IN THE U.S.A.

Hollow-cuts are the commonest type of silhouette in the U.S.A. Why is this? It has been suggested that the simple & restrained image produced by this type of cutting appealed to the Quaker influence, which was strong in the latter part of the eighteenth & early nineteenth centuries. Mrs. Jackson in her Dictionary states that "silhouette portraits are of great importance, however elementary the process; as pictorial records of this period are so comparatively rare in the States. "So that the humblest in technique had an important part to play in this record! Although most hollow-cuts were unadorned some exponents added indian ink outside the main body to show hair & clothing detail. Sometimes hair was shown by cut-slits in the white paper. This kind of embellishment is quite absent on English hollow-cuts - so it can help to attribute U.S.A. examples.

Methods.99% of these cutters would have used machines to reduce the size of the image. The outline would be drawn on the white paper prior to cutting with a sharp knife or possibly 'flexible' scissors. It is often possible to see traces of the lead around the cut edge. Silhouettes were backed with paper, silk, satin, velvet or even painted glass-usually black in colour but sometimes 'full blue'. The white heads that were cut as a result of this 'method' were sometimes mounted in their own right & were known as ‘the hole in the doughnut type’.

Labels & signatures. Attribution in the U.S.A. is much easier than in England - as most artists either stamped their work or put a written or printed signature on the obverse. The style of the bust-line termination often helped to attribute the work also. It has been stated that each had their own style & "the style is the man himself" (note that women do not seem to feature!)

Artists. The main exponents of the art were Peale 1741-1826; Williams 1787-1830; Doyle 1769-1828; W. King c.1805; &William Bache 1771-1845.Many of these artists had other strings to their bows but all were well known for their hollow-cut work. Below I have photocopied 5 works from left to right 1.It is of George Washington by his daughter - an amateur - it was life-size. 2. A work by Mr. Peale showing the hair-slit at the front. 3.& 4.Works by W. Bache - he is said to have brought his hollow-cuts to a high point with their highlighted backgrounds as well as bows & ringlets added with indian ink. 5. A work by W. Doyle signed by him -his indian ink details are somewhat cursory. Some of these artists were very prolific e.g. William King claimed to have cut 1,000's - but his works are difficult to find nevertheless!"

Holiow-cuts s Mrs. Harrington – 2

Mrs. SARAH HARRINGTON (f1.1774-1787)

Apparently Mrs. Harrington was a much talented & versatile lady. Mrs. McKechnie has a large entry on the artist in her Book (pages 223-230) - where she goes into much detail on Mrs. Harrington's background. She describes her as being a woman of considerable education & intellect - who spoke & taught French. She was the author of "A New Introduction to the Knowledge & the Use of Maps" (Brit. Museum) &”New & Elegant Amusements for Ladies of Great Britain by a Lady.” She was a career woman and came to silhouette cutting in her mature years! She started cutting silhouettes in 1774.There is no evidence that she used any other ‘method' but the hollow-cut. She used the camera obscura & patented her own method for reducing the size in 1775 (this pentagraph had been used by her previously for reducing maps & plans). She was granted H.M's Royal Letters Patent for this invention. At some point she was appointed profilist to the King (i.e. George II)

Her Travels. She travelled & advertised quite extensively - visiting many areas of the country to 'perform' her art. She visited Bath 1774; Bristol, Oxford, Gloucester &Worcester 1775; Cambridge 1776 (said to have cut the whole University!); Norfolk & Herefordshire 1778; London &Oxford1779; Leeds 1780. Her only permanent address is the one shown on her rare trade label (i.e.131,New Bond St.) - she was using this address by 1782.This label is illustrated above on a silhouette of an officer in the Andrew’s Collection at Stoner House, which is also illustrated above. The little girl on the right (ex. Pollak Collection) also has a label. The lady beneath her has appeared recently in the Salerooms.

HOLLOW-CUTS & Mrs. HARRINGTON-3

Mrs. Harrington went into partnership with Mrs. Collins, but this only lasted for a short time & was broken up by 1777. Mrs. Harrington herself is known to have worked until 1785.

Her advertising. She advertised that she could take "the most striking likenesses in a minute." She also mentioned that she had taken profiles of the Royal Family. In addition to bust-lengths she also advertised that she could out full-length figures and conversation pieces. No work of this type has been attributed to her. She was in the habit of leaving examples of her work at various shops in the different towns she visited.

Her label. Only one label is known and it seems that she did not start using this until the end of her career. It is neat & devoid of extravagant claims! As one of the earliest of professional silhouette artists it is unlikely that she would have had much competition initially. Therefore Mrs. McKechnie suggests that she perhaps did not think a label was necessary. No signed works by Mrs. Harrington have been seen.

Her 'methods'. It has been suggested that Mrs. Harrington found it easier to cut the white paper to make the silhouette than the rough blackened paper. To hand blacken more suitable paper so that this could be easily cut would have been time consuming. Smoother paper was produced as the century proceeded but Mrs. Harrington continued doing what she knew best! With the help of her 'machine' she drew a pencil outline (this can sometimes be seen, but I have not seen it myself!) She is likely to have used a sharp knife for the cutting, as suitable scissors would not have been available. She did not stick the black paper to the white - it is always loose. Mrs. McKechnie states that she incised the paper and that the point of entry is visible. I have only seen this once on a silhouette by her. Mr. Woodiwiss in his Book suggests that she "cut from the centre" - I think this was possible, but perhaps she was not consistent. She showed eyelashes by making a nick in the paper & pushing the edges apart.

Her style. Her bust-lines varied according to Mrs. McKechnie. In my view I think there is little variation in those works attributed to her - except between men & women. The bust-lines of the women are shallower & those of the men more solid. This is shown to some extent in the man & woman illustrated at the bottom of this page. These two works have many other characteristics of her style. The details of clothing would 'reflect' dress worn at

HOLLOW-CUTS & Mrs. Harrington - 4

the time-i.e. if she showed a woman wearing a bow at the neck she would have been dressed like that. Bows at the neck are not necessarily grounds for attributing a work to Mrs. Harrington according to Mrs. McKechnie! She was skillful at the cutting of men’s queues and often showed a neat scalloped edge for a shirt frill or hat decoration on a lady. She would make a cut in the black paper behind men’s queues to show the division of the hair. This can be seen on three of the photographs in this article.

Her frames. She used oval ebonised wood frames with a crenulated gilt inner surround. The size varied slightly - 4"X 3" or 4"X 3½”. These frames were plain & appropriate. The glass was flat. She is said to have used rectangular leather frames at a later date in her career but I have not seen these. A work in one of her frames helps to make the attribution to her.

Her standing as an artist. She was clearly a skilled cutter - her works are generally crisp with a clear outline. Also she has style & panache in my view. Mrs. Jackson in her Dictionary considered her works to be "pure & lovely in restraint". She did not consider that she showed the rigid defects of the machine cutter & that her "work had a delicacy & chic”. Some hollow-cuts attributed to her over the years have seemed rather dull and somewhat lifeless but perhaps these are not by her or were cut on an off day! The silhouette of the lady above in in grand hat housed in a pearwood frame is well cut but more in the style of a work by Walter Jorden - although it is hollow-cut. I am not sure she is by Mrs. Harrington. What do you think? The photocopies illustrated on the right are of works that have appeared in recent Sales & have been attributed to Mrs. Harrington.

over/

HOLLOW—CUTS & Mrs. Harrington — 5

The man on the right is ex . Mrs. McKechnie Collection.(see p.313 illus.437) It is backed with a blue paper & housed in a papier mache frame with a wooden inset. It is a very nice work & the cutting is fine and delicate. However, I am not convinced that it is by Mrs. Harrington - there is just something different about it from her attributable works. Mrs. McKechnie was certain that it was by Mrs.Harrington -what do you think?

Below in the centre I have photographed a bonnetted woman, who has a similar blue paper backing. She is clearly not by Mrs. Harrington. She is also well cut & has an American 'feel' about her.(her blue backing has been hand coloured & is not stuck to the white cutting). On the left below is a gentleman backed with a black shiny paper, which is stuck to the cutting. He is neatly cut & is the only silhouette on this page that has an eyelash. I cannot attribute him. Finally the little girl photographed on the right below is cut in very thick card.Her pencil outline can be seen. She has two points of entry at the bottom of her bust-line. She is dated 1842 & is unattributable. She could have been cut by an amateur, but nevertheless she is quite a feat with such thick card!

Mrs. Collins (f1.1774-80)

- she was Mrs. Harrington's partner for a short time but was working on her own by1777. It has been suggested that she did not continue to cut silhouettes for very long on her own and diversified into other 'skills'. In her advertisements she stated that it took her 3 minutes to cut a work in contrast to Mrs. Harrington's one minute! Over the years attempts have been made to distinguish the work of the two ladies - but this has been especially difficult without a silhouette definitely attributable to Mrs. Collins. Plainer hollow-cuts have tended to be attributed to Mrs. Collins but Mrs. McKechnie maintains that it is impossible to make this assumption. The Duchess of Newcastle in the possession of the Victoria & Albert Museum has variously been attributed to both artists! It is a plain work & is illustrated on the next page. Mr. Mayne in his Book states that

HOLLOW-CUTS & Mrs. Harrington - 6

it is definitely by Mrs. Collins as it do combine sophistication & a flowing line!

There are two other artists who are known to have produced hollow-cuts - Abraham Jones (1779 - 1810) & Steell (f1.1781) Like Mrs. Collins

no extant examples of their works can be attributed. This is unfortunate and the assumption must be made that they did not use labels & did not always sign their works. Finally, I come to Henry Herve(f1.1800-1820) -see Mrs. McKechnie's entry on page 234. It seems that he produced a large number of hollow-cuts & Mrs.McKechnie states that these are "competently cut" and resemble in general the design of the artist's work on paper & glass. These works are often 'found' in oval pearwood frames -I have illustrated two works below in this type of (frame which have been attributed to H. Herve. The style of these works would confirm Mrs. McKechnie's view. (My apologies for the discolouration of the paper, which has darkened the photograph). He used trade labels - Mrs. McKechnie illustrates a hollow-cut with such a label (p.317 illus.456). This is very similar to the gentleman below. His style is rather plain with the minimum of 'frills'. No eyelash

is painted or cut. Henry Herve was also a great copyist -so it is likely that he did hollow-cuts in the style of other artist's work - these could easily not be recognised as hollow-cuts but assumed to be cut-outs. It is necessary to look very carefully at some works to 'discover' how they have been cut. Similarly it can be just as difficult to know whether a work has been painted or cut unless examined out of the

HOLLOW-CUTS & Mrs. Harrington - 7

frame - so look out! I have photographed above two further works that I think are by Henry Herve. These were found stuck to a pair of coasters at a car boot sale. They are now in my scrapbook! The backing paper has been hand blackened. There is no point of entry on the white paper - so have presumably been cut from the centre. They are plain but well cut works - an eyelash is shown. It is difficult to know why H. Herve 'adopted' the hollow-cut method when he was able to paint both on paper & glass. Cutting the white paper would appear to be a more difficult task in many ways then cutting the black paper. The cutter would appear less 'slick' in the process if he or she were appearing in public. Thinnish paper would tend to tear easily & thick paper would be difficult to 'handle'. No doubt practice helps!

Prices for hollow-cuts. These have not been especially encouraging in the Salerooms over recent years. If anything I think Mrs. Harrington's work has tended to loose ground. Having a label clearly makes a difference. Two works by Mrs. Harrington sold at the Morgan May Sale in 1985 both had labels - lot 84 of a gent made £396 (est.100-150) & lot 85 of a lady made £484 (est.100-150).1 have photocopied both these below. I doubt if either would have made any more today. At the Willcok’s Sale in November,1998 3 works by her (all unlabelled but nice) made £320 (lot 16 est.250-350). At the same sale a single lady (lot 18 est.80-120) only made £140.I have photocopied 2 of these below. I hope you will have no difficulty in future in recognising a Mrs. Harrington at least! I hope in this article that I have whetted your appetite to some extent for hollow-cuts. I think these are generally undervalued by Collectors -these are period pieces & have often not been out of their frames for over 210 years. In regard to Mrs. Harrington she is an important contributor to the art of silhouette in this country. All serious collectors should have at least one of her works in their collection!