Chapter 8: A Survey of Picasso’s Prints, Continued,
1955-1967, Jacqueline et al.

Fig. 37. Femme au Corsage a Fleurs (Bloch 847)

Another muse, another style.  Or several.  Picasso met Jacqueline Roque in 1953, and she became his main squeeze the following year, after Francoise had left him.  Jacqueline remained with Picasso for the last 20 years of his life, became his second wife, and was the subject of more of his works than any other woman.  In printmaking, Picasso applied his full panoply of tricks to his new muse, including etchings, aquatints and lithographs, and developed his mastery of linoleum cuts, finally delivering a measure of color to his color-starved audience.

Table 25. 1955-1956

Bloch #	780	782	788	789	791	794	795	800	801	804
Beauty	*	**	*	**	**	*	**	*	*	***
Significance	*				**
Rarity	***	***	*****	***	***				***	*
Size	*****	*	**	*****	****	****	****	*	****	*
Visibility at a distance	*****		*	***	*****	**	***		**	**
Color						***	**
Fading						*****	*
Cost	***	*	?	**	**	*	*	*	*	*
Desirability to cost ratio										***
Signature	Y	N	?	Y	Y	P	N	N	Y	Y/N

Fig. 37a. Buste de Femme au
Corsage Blanc (Bloch 848)

This lithograph, one of the three best of Jacqueline, most tenderly depicts her countenance and, with a few bold brushstrokes, brings out her sensitivity and intelligence so convincingly that the viewer feels he almost knows this woman.

Interestingly, Picasso returned to this same zinc twice over the next twelve months.  He presumably was dissatisfied with the appearance of these last two states, because they were not editioned.  (Mourlot and Cantz say that the second state was not printed at all, though somehow a photo of it is shown in Cantz. The third state is illustrated in Mourlot.) One must be thankful, therefore, that Picasso saw fit to print the edition of this lithograph before he irrevocably altered it and became dissatisfied with his results.  How often one wishes that he had done so with earlier states of other prints, when one or more of those earlier states seem superior to the final, editioned state.  In this rare instance, we are grateful that Picasso perceived the beauty of the first outpouring of his vision onto the zinc and memorialized it on paper. Just as this is one of Picasso's loveliest prints, at almost 70 cm it is one of his largest.

Table 26. 1956-1957

Bloch #	826	827	830	833	834	835	836	846	847	848
Beauty	*	***	**	*	*	**	**	*	*****	****
Significance	*	**	*	*		*	*	*	*****	****
Rarity	***	***		***	***	***	***	***	***	***
Size	****	****	****		*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****
Visibility at a distance	**	***	***	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****
Color	*	*	*/N
Fading	*	*	*/N
Cost	**	**	*	**	*	*	*	***	****	***
Desirability to cost ratio		*	*			*	*			*
Signature	Y	Y	P/Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y

Table 27. 1957-1959

Bloch #	849	850	852	853	854	859	871	898	901	907
Beauty	*	**	***	*	***	****	*	*	*	***
Significance	*	**	***	*	***	*****		*		***
Rarity	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***
Size	****	****	****	****	****	*****	*****	****	****	*****
Visibility at a distance	***	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	***	**	*****
Color						****				***
Fading						***				**
Cost	**	***	***	***	***	*****	*	*	*	***
Desirability to cost ratio
Signature	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y

At this point in time we start getting into Picasso's linoleum cuts, aka linocuts.  The technique Picasso employed to create them deserves special mention. As you can see, I have deliberately avoided bogging you down in the technical details of printmaking. I envisioned your eyes glazing over, and then your head slumping forward onto the “Buy this now!” key. Though many of the complexities of Picasso’s printmaking techniques remain unknown, his linocuts are rather well understood. But to understand the technique is certainly not to demean his accomplishments. On the contrary, this understanding only serves to increase our awe of his artistic abilities. Here’s a brief explanation of the technique, so you can see what I mean.

The first linocut in colors that Picasso created is the impressive, but overpriced, Buste de Femme d’apres Cranach (Bloch 859, 1958). He gouged a different linoleum plate for each color and came up with a rather masterful print, albeit one with a bit of misaligned registry between the several plates. Rather than improve his registry skills, he undertook the greater challenge of using the same piece of linoleum for each successive color. Linocuts are a reductionist technique much like woodcuts, though the medium is softer and therefore easier to gouge. You gouge out the parts you don’t wish to be inked. What’s left in relief on the plate is what gets the ink. (This is the opposite of so-called intaglio prints such as etching, drypoint, and aquatint, in that the depressions on the copper plate trap the ink and transfer it onto paper.) In Picasso’s case, unprecedented in the history of printmaking, the final print was created from only one plate, regardless how many colors he used. Here’s how he did it. He first carved the plate, and then the entire edition was printed with the first color. (In many cases, the paper had been first printed with a background color prior to any cutting of the linoleum.) Then Picasso reworked the plate, and what was left still standing in relief was inked with another color and printed yet again onto the entire edition. This process was repeated as many times as the number of colors. Picasso’s genius was the ability to maintain the finished design in his mind throughout the process, because each successive reduction obliterated details of the design from the plate. Accordingly, the final states of the plates, which still exist, often bear little discernable resemblance to the overall design.

Table 28. 1959, Linocuts

Bloch #	908	909	910	911	915	922	923	928	930	931
Beauty	****	****	*****	****	*	*****	*	**	****	*****
Significance	*****	****	*****	****	*	*****	****	**	****	*****
Rarity	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***
Size	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****
Visibility at a distance	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	***	*****	*****	*****
Color	*****	***	***	***	****	****	****	**	****	*****
Fading	****	***	***	***	*	*	*	**	**	**
Cost	***	***	***	***	***	****	****	***	***	***
Desirability to cost ratio										*
Signature	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y

Table 29. 1959-1960, mostly linocuts

Bloch #	932	934	935	936	938	939	949	979	982	983
Beauty	*	***	*	**	***	***	***	***	*
Significance	*	***	**	**	***	***	**	*	*
Rarity	***	***	***	***	***	***	***/-	***	****	***
Size	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	**	**	*	*
Visibility at a distance	****	*****	*****	****	***	*****
Color	***	****	****	**	*	*	*
Fading	*	**	**	*	*	*	*
Cost	**	***	***	**	***	***	*/*	*	*	*
Desirability to cost ratio				*			***	***
Signature	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y/N	ES	ES	ES

Table 30. 1960-1961

Bloch #	984	985	995	1003	1004	1005	1006	1007	1009	1020
Beauty	*	*	**	*			***	*	*	**
Significance							**			*
Rarity	*****	***	***			*	***	***	**	***
Size	**	**	**	****	****	***	*****	**	*****	**
Visibility at a distance				*****	*****	**	****	*	****	***
Color										***
Fading										**
Cost	*	*	*	*	*	*	**	*	*	*
Desirability to cost ratio				*			*			**
Signature	N	ES	ES	N	N	N/Y	Y	Y	P	Y

Table 31. Linocuts, 1961-1962

Bloch #	1023	1026	1027	1028	1063	1064	1065	1066	1067	1068
Beauty	*	*	*	*	*	***	****	****	****	***
Significance	*		***	**	***	***	***	***	***	****
Rarity	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***
Size	*****	***	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	****	***
Visibility at a distance	****	****	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	****
Color			*****	***	**	**	***	****	****	**
Fading			*****	***	**	**	***	*****	****	**
Cost	**	*	****	****	****	****	****	****	****	***
Desirability to cost ratio
Signature	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y

Table 32, Linocuts, 1962

Bloch #	1069	1070	1071	1072	1073	1074	1075	1076	1077	1078
Beauty	**	****	***	*	***	***	**	*	*****	***
Significance	***	***	***	****	****	****	***	**	*****	***
Rarity	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***
Size	*****	***	***	*****	***	***	***	***	*****	*****
Visibility at a distance	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	*****	****	*****	*****
Color	**	**	****	*****	*****	*****	**	*	*	**
Fading	**	**	****	*****	*****	*****	**	*	*	**
Cost	***	***	***	*****	***	***	***	**	****	***
Desirability to cost ratio									*
Signature	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y

 

Fig. 38. Danae(Bloch 1084)

There is no more colorful Picasso print than masterwork, which represent's Picasso's interpretation of an ancient Greek myth. In Greek mythology, Danae was the daughter of Acrisius, the king of Argos. An oracle had foretold that Danae's future son would slay his grandfather. In order to prevent this event from taking place, King Acrisius locked his daughter in an inaccessible tower, thereby removing her from contact with any potential suitors. Or so he thought…. The god Zeus, who always had an eye for female charms, was struck by the beauty of Danae, and desired her. Zeus therefore transformed himself into a shower of gold, and in this form impregnated Danae. The result of this union of human and divine was the great Greek hero Perseus. The myth of Danae has interested artists through the ages, including Caravaggio, Rembrandt, and Klimt. A joke of presumably similar vintage about the moral of this story, unfortunately told at the expense of the fairer gender, is that a sure-fire way to get to a woman is through gold:)....

Table 33, Linocuts, 1962

Bloch #	1079	1080	1081	1082	1083	1084	1085	1086	1087	1088
Beauty	***	***	****	****	*	*****	*****	**	*	****
Significance	***	***	***	***	**	*****	****	**	**	***
Rarity	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***
Size	***	***	***	***	***	***	*****	***	***	***
Visibility at a distance	*****	*****	*****	*****	****	*****	*****	***	*****	*****
Color	***	***	**	**	**	*****	**	***	**	**
Fading	***	***	**	**	**	****	**	***	**	**
Cost	***	***	***	***	**	****	***	**	***	***
Desirability to cost ratio						*	**			*
Signature	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y

        
Fig. 39. Grand Nu de Femme (Bloch 1085)             Fig. 40. Femme au Cheveux Flous (B1079)      Fig. 41. Femme nue... (Bloch 1092)   

In the words of John Richardson, arguably Picasso’s premier biographer, “Before he died, Picasso endeavored to cannibalize as much as he could of European art. He sent for slides of old and not-so-old masters, and had Jacqueline project them on one of his studio walls. And they would all spend evenings dissecting Rembrandt’s Night Watch or van Gogh’s Self-Portrait in a Straw Hat. Rembrandt inspired a whole new cast of characters, cavaliers and musketeers. And van Gogh’s self-portrait inspired some of Picasso’s self-portraits (J. Richardson, Picasso: Magic, Sex, Death, lectures on DVD, 2003, 2nd DVD). Even more so, Manet’s Le Déjeuner sur l’Herbe (Luncheon on the Grass), is one of those famous paintings that seemed to have taken up a lot of Picasso’s thought. In fact, Manet’s painting seems to have preoccupied him for 2 ½ years, between 1960 and 1962, with numerous resultant drawings, some paintings, several prints, and even a ceramic. One of these prints, Bloch 1027 (March 13, 1962) is very colorful and rather celebrated, having broken the six figure mark already in 1999, but I don’t favor it, especially in comparison to some of the accompanying ones in shades of brown. In fact, I’m not so fond of most of the results of this series in any medium. I would hold up three prints as exceptions to the rule, and of these I’m exceedingly fond. They are somewhat more loosely related to the theme than most, being portraits just of the bather in the background of Manet’s painting. Whereas I find the full-blown depictions of all four picnickers to be rather tedious and lacking in harmony, the portraits of the bather strike me as very charming. Though she’s not exactly bathing in most of Picasso’s works. She may not even have been in Manet’s, but she certainly wasn’t pissing, as she is in some of Picasso’s drawings. Nor was she picking flowers, as in Femme Nue Cuiellant des Fleurs (Fig. 41, Bloch 1092, April 20, 1962), which Brigitte Baer calls a variation of the Manet. Though Baer does not mention that the next two prints in her catalogue are related to this series, they are of course. These two include Femme a la Source, a bather at a spring (Bloch 1093, also dating from April 20), and Femme Nue Pechant des Truites a la Main (April 22, Baer 1327; not in Bloch or Kramer; see our catalogue), which shows a woman quixotically pushing her luck by trying to catch fish by hand. I guess he must have figured her to be bored of her company. A wonder he got off this jag—next he would have had her jumping rope or something….

These three prints are beautiful and very accomplished works. They depict a female form, bending over in each case, in a wonderfully colossal fashion, looser yet reminiscent of his gargantuan women of the early ‘twenties. In the print at hand, she’s picking flowers (note the garden snail). Two days later she’s in a similar pose, but bathing at a spring (Bloch 1093). The fish cavorting at the base of the waterfall in this print may have inspired the presumably subsequent print that day (Baer 1327), in which she’s turned on the trout.

Table 34, Linocuts, 1962

Bloch #	1089	1090	1092	1093	1095	1096	1097	1098	1101	1102
Beauty	***	*	****	****	*	*	*	**	***	****
Significance	***	*	***	****	*	***	***	***	*****	*****
Rarity	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***	***
Size	***	***	***	*****	***	***	*****	****	*****	*****
Visibility at a distance	*****	****	***	****	****	***	****	*****	*****	****
Color	****	**	**	**	**	**	**	****	****	****
Fading	**	**	**	**	**	**	**	***	****	****
Cost	***	**	***	***	***	**	***	***	*****	*****
Desirability to cost ratio			*	*
Signature	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y

Table 35, 1963

Bloch #	1111	1117	1118	1121	1139	1141	1142	1143	1144	1145
Beauty	**	*	***	**	**	*	**	*	*	*****
Significance			**							*****
Rarity	***	***	***	***	**	***	***	***	***	***
Size	****	****	****	****	**	****	**	***	***	****
Visibility at a distance	*	*	*			***		***	****	*****
Color										*****
Fading										****
Cost	**	*	*	*	*	*	*	**	*	****
Desirability to cost ratio			***	*	*		*			*
Signature	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y

Table 36, 1963-1964

Bloch #	1147	1148	1149	1155	1157	1158	1159	1181	1185	1189
Beauty	***	***	****	*	*	*	**	*	*	***
Significance	***	***	****					***