The Vancouver Art Gallery revisits and resolves J.E.H. Macdonald wrongful attribution scandal with new exhibition

The Vancouver Art Gallery (VAG) has recently unveiled the art exhibition J.E.H. MacDonald? A Tangled Garden. The journey to this exhibition has been long and winding, stemming from the 2015 discovery of 10 sketches allegedly painted by J.E.H. MacDonald.

As MacDonald was one of the founding members of the Group of 7 (seven influential Canadian landscape painters), the works drew much interest from art connoisseurs. However, concerns were eventually raised regarding the true creator of the sketches, leading to an investigation to ascertain their true origins. This new exhibition leads viewers through VAG’s partnership with the Canadian Conservation Institute (CCI) to uncover the truth.

The exhibition is the brainchild of Richard Hill, current Smith Jarislowsky senior curator of Canadian art at the gallery. He worked together with Kate Helwig, senior conservation scientist at the CCI, who provided scientific analysis that ascertains the validity of the works. The exhibit spans three aspects: visual/stylistic analysis, forensic handwriting analysis and scientific analysis. Viewers are also led through the exhibit in this specific order.

The exhibit will be on display from Dec. 16 2023 to May 12 2024.

Types of analysis that verified sketches’ origins

Upon entering, one sees a row of paintings neatly divided into pairs – one of them being an alleged J.E.H. MacDonald sketch and the other a sketch that has been accurately attributed to J.E.H. MacDonald. Viewers can scan QR codes situated next to the sketches that inform them whether their guess was right.

Curator Richard Hill discusses a supposed sketch of Macdonald’s classic work, The Elements at the exhibit. | Photo by Cherie Tay.

For this visual analysis portion, the VAG partnered with fellow Canadian curator Charles Hill (no relation) to analyze the painting techniques used in the sketches versus accurately attributed paintings. They found that the sketches’ brushstrokes were made with less variety and definition than Macdonald’s own brushstrokes. Richard Hill does acknowledge the potential for dispute regarding stylistic analysis.

“In most cases, stylistic analysis is not terribly hard, but in these kinds of limited cases, when something is deliberately trying to look like something else, this is the theory of analysis that’s most prone to controversy and dispute,” he states.

Yet, other discrepancies between the original paintings and the sketches abound. For example, a sketch for The Elements shows a heavily brightened sky that mirrors a revised version of the painting, suggesting that said sketch could not have been produced before the first copy of the painting.

Forensic handwriting analysis further disproves the initial attribution to MacDonald.

“On the back of three of these works, MacDonald is misspelled in three different ways. On the back of [these] work[s], the ‘c’ is missing, the ‘o’ is missing from his signature and MacDonald [is spelled] with a lowercase ‘d,’” Richard Hill notes.

As for the CCI’s contributions, the final portion of the exhibition features their scientific analysis of the works. Helwig found that the sketches’ boards were of different lengths compared to authentic MacDonald paintings’ boards in the CCI’s database. She also notes the usage of pigments within eight of the ten sketches that were not available during MacDonald’s lifetime.

All these methods helped to verify that Macdonald was not the true creator of the works and are portrayed extensively through this exhibition. The VAG’s CEO Anthony Kiendl acknowledges how common inaccurate attributions are within the art scene and is excited to show how institutions work behind the scenes.

“It provides a unique opportunity for us to open the doors and reveal how institutions work because, as Richard Hill said, they are run by human beings. It’s the human aspect that makes it so interesting,” says Kiendl.

In regards to potential reputational fallout from the initial wrongful attribution, he is also quick to assert otherwise.

“The important thing is that we are transparent and open and that we move forward in an authentic way. I’m not embarrassed. I’m very proud of this exhibition. I’m very proud of this team and the knowledge and work they’ve put into this,” says Kiendl. “It’s a fascinating public conversation, one that we really embrace with excitement and look forward to sharing with the wider world.”

For more information about the exhibit, visit: www.vanartgallery.bc.ca