A new exhibition at Tate Britain celebrates the overlooked and unknown women artists in Britain including a selection of remarkable women botanical illustrators and floral artists
The Tate Britain’s new exhibition, Now You See Us: Women Artists in Britain 1520 – 1920, could have come earlier. The show’s curator, Tabitha Barber, explains it was proposed a while back, but the meticulous planning that goes into an exhibition on this scale, along with Covid and lockdowns, meant that it took longer to open than had hoped. That, however, has worked in the show’s favour, insists Barber: “There has been a shift in the way people look at art history, which has a lot to do with the #MeToo movement. There is real momentum and determination on the part of museums, not just in Britain but across the world, to make sure women are a part of the story and aren’t always forgotten.”
You may also like
- Top female gardeners leading the way
- Inspiring female garden designers throughout history
- There are brilliant women in gardening, why don’t we see enough of them?
There are 150 works exhibited within the show, which offer an illuminating perspective on how women navigated their way along a narrow line of being professional or amateur in an art world which frowned upon women being too commercial, and restricted access to their training. With an entire room in the exhibition dedicated to botanical and floral pieces, Barber said they didn’t want to shy away from the fact that painting flowers, particularly in watercolour, was one of the more acceptable genres of art for women to pursue.
“Some art historians say: ‘if you go down the route of flower painting, it feeds into this stereotype of women as amateurs’, but actually we just wanted to confront it, because women did paint flowers and they were really good at it and they made commercial careers out of it,” she explains.
Artists such as Augusta Withers and Mary Delany are examples of just how significant women were in the field of botanical art. Botanical publishers sought out Augusta Withers, and she was one of the Horticultural Society‘s official painters of fruit (in the days before the RHS gained its Royal mark). Mary Delany’s work in botanical paper collage is astonishing – meticulous, botanically accurate and inspired and fuelled by some remarkable plant collections from the gardens of her friends – including the Duchess of Portland’s exotic garden.
Despite the fact that most of these women were creating their artworks without training, and coming up against a world hostile to the idea of women making money, they all persisted. Below are six remarkable examples from the exhibition of women botanical artists you probably haven’t heard of, but you really should have.
The following extracts are edited versions of the catalogue from Now You See Us, Women Artists in Britain 1520-1920. The extracts were written by Tabitha Barber (TEB), Kate Retford (KR) and Tim Batchelor (TJB).
Now You See us: Women Artists in Britain 1520-1920 runs at Tate Britain until October 13
Discover seven remarkable women botanical artists
Mary Moser (1744–1819)
Despite Mary Moser being one of the first two women Royal Academicians, more should be known and written about her than is currently. Precisely none of her subject pictures survive, and surprisingly few of her flower paintings. In 1789, it was said that ‘Mary Moser paints Flowers transcendently. She should paint nothing else’. It is impossible to know whether this was a fair comment or a condescending response to a woman artist straying from the expected path of imitation. TEB
Mary Delany (1700–88)
Mary Delany worked across an extraordinary range of artistic and decorative mediums over her long life, from drawing and painting to needlework, shellwork and featherwork. It was in her early seventies, however, having been widowed for a second time, that she turned her attention to creating the botanical collages for which she is now famed. To create each of her ‘paper mosaicks’, she intricately cut coloured pieces of paper with small scissors – probably also using a knife, bodkin and tweezers – and pasted these delicate pieces onto solid black backgrounds, setting the plants depicted off to excellent effect. KR
Clara Maria Pope (1768–1838)
Clara Maria Pope exists in museum records under many guises. Her changes of name have served to obscure her career, during which she exhibited miniatures, genre works and landscape watercolours, and above all, ornamental flower paintings. Pope made a big impact as a flower illustrator. She worked for the leading botanical publisher, Samuel Curtis, producing plates for his lavish 1820 reissue of The Beauties of Flora, and her boldly composed, scientifically accurate peonies (one of a set of eleven) were likely intended for another publication. TEB
Augusta Withers Withers (1792–1877)
The stereotype of women as amateur painters of flowers has damaged the legacies of those who pursued the genre professionally. Artists such as Augusta Innes Withers (1792–1877) enjoyed royal patronage, tutored and combined art with serious science. There was nothing amateur about Augusta Withers. Employed by the Horticultural Society to make official ‘portraits’ of fruit, her high fees were accepted due to the excellence of her work. Her skill was sought for many publication projects, including James Bateman’s The Orchidaceae of Mexico and Guatemala 1837–43, one of the most ostentatious flower books of the era, for which Withers was principal illustrator with Sarah Drake. In 1830, Withers was appointed Flower Painter in Ordinary to Queen Adelaide, a title of which she was intensely proud. TEB
Martha Mutrie, Annie Mutrie
The sisters Martha Darley Mutrie (1824–1885) and Annie Feray Mutrie (1826–1893) were leading practitioners of the genre of flower painting. They trained at the Manchester School of Design as well as privately with George Wallis and over their long careers, they exhibited at the Royal Academy, the Society of Female Artists and other London venues and continued to show regionally in Manchester and Birmingham. In 1861, it was said that all other flower painters should ‘give way’ to them. Despite their popularity and success at exhibitions, research has shown that their works lingered as dealer stock for far longer than the work of male artists. TJB
Rosa Brett or ‘Rosarius’?
In an attempt to avoid inevitable discrimination, women artists sometimes took measures to hide their gender. One way was to submit works for exhibition using initials rather than forenames. Rosa Brett went further. From 1858–62, she signed her works and submitted them for exhibition at the Royal Academy under the pseudonym ‘Rosarius’. As well as allowing Brett to avoid the automatic prejudice of the male members of the exhibition selection committee, the pseudonym helped distinguish her from her brother, the artist John Brett. An Art Journal reviewer of the Royal Academy’s exhibition in 1861 noted Brett’s Thistles, ‘painted by Rosarius, whoever he may be’. TJB