Why the impressionists were drawn to London

By Joe Lloyd

Seldom has an exhibition’s title been so at odds with its contents as “Impressionists in London: French Artists in Exile 1870-1904” at Tate Britain in London. Although it features two of the genre’s greatest exponents – Claude Monet and Camille Pissarro (as well as notable fellow traveller Alfred Sisley) – the vast majority of the show is devoted to artists who would deny they were impressionists. The society painter James Tissot, the classically inspired sculptors Jean-Bapiste Carpeaux and Jules Dalou: whatever the merits of these practitioners, they belong to a more traditionally representational stream in French art, one long overshadowed by impressionism’s spontaneous, movement-filled scenes of everyday life.

The exhibition’s idea of exile, too, is something of a misnomer. Although some of this work was made after artists like Monet sought refuge across the Channel from the catastrophic Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71, followed by the fall of the Second Empire and the economic devastation of France, much of it stems from holidays spent in Britain during calmer times. There is a scintillating story to be told about the relationship between impressionism and British art, as well as French artists in exile. By trying to tell both, this show tells neither.