Examining a painting for traces of a lost pigment or for an artist’s identifying marks that could distinguish a fake from a masterpiece are the kind of tasks chemists are performing in institutions like the Art Institute of Chicago, the second-largest American museum in floor space terms after the Metropolitan in New York. In the interview below with the Aspen Italia website team, Francesca Casadio, who established and heads the Institute’s art conservation science laboratory, describes her role as an art detective and explains how the marriage between art and new technologies is not only bringing to light some interesting discoveries in the field of art, but is also helping to enhance the presentation of works, in the process making them more accessible to a larger audience.
So what is a chemist doing in a museum?
Well, given that I apply similar investigative techniques to works of art as those used in forensic chemistry, I see myself acting as an art detective. In an institution like the Art Institute of Chicago, this line of work essentially fulfills three purposes: gauging and understanding an artist’s intention, by retracing the genesis of a work; assisting restorers in their work by analyzing materials; and establishing the authenticity of a work. In fact, when we examine a painting, we are able to determine the manner in which the artist executed the work, as characterized by tentative efforts and perhaps even uncertainties. The total absence of such markers, along with the identification of materials or processes not yet invented during the artist’s lifetime, can lead us to cast doubt on its authenticity.
What technologies are used to carry out such investigations?
One of the more interesting tools we use is a technique developed in conjunction with the Northwestern University. This enables the materials and coloring agents in a painting to be analyzed. It’s called Surface-Enhanced Raman Spectroscopy and uses lasers and nanoparticles. This technique allows us to very easily detect a material or pigment we are looking for, even if present in infinitesimally small quantities, and extract a sort of fingerprint from it. This information enables the original colors of a work to be rediscovered, thereby also assisting in its restoration. Recently, our museum visitors were able to share in the experience of seeing a restored version of a Renoir: the portrait of Madame Léon Clapisson. Removing the work from its original frame, we discovered materials that showed the painting originally featured much brighter colors. This has allowed us to exhibit the picture side-by-side with a digitally “re-colorized” version, thus enabling visitors to see how the work would have looked in its day.
What has been the public’s reaction?
The reaction has been very positive and the exhibition has proved a success precisely because it showcases the effectiveness of combining art and technology. For a museum, this is not only very exciting, but it also helps a lot to engage visitors, bringing works of art alive for them. Apart from anything else, this is a very salient issue in the United States, where the arts are perceived as elitist.
Basically, to engage a broader audience, you need to construct narratives in which artworks take center stage. This is an approach that I think should also be considered in Italy – not so much by the more famous museums, but by collections seeking to raise their profile and attract new visitors.
Who is funding all this?
In the United States, academic research in this area is federally funded, whilst private sponsorship of American museums is very much alive and well. From the moment I got here, I learnt that it is essential in fundraising to engage funders and get them enthused about any project you want to see happen. This guarantees a lot of freedom once you’ve secured the funding. But engaging the public is just as key. This is in part why a debate has emerged in the United States over the failure to optimize access to archaeological works returned to Italy, which have often been dispatched to little-visited museums.
I am convinced that works of art are capable of being exploited to advantage. Without question, there must be specific safeguards regarding their conservation, as well as the allocation of funding for their commercial exploitation. Indeed, the possible uses to which works might actually be put should be assessed by both restorers and conservators, with full regard for the preservation of the works’ structural integrity and of historical collections.
Yet we should not forget in Italy that there are numerous opportunities for optimizing such exploitation. For instance, why not enter into agreements with foreign universities engaged in archaeological research to lend out works that have been unearthed for a limited period of time in return for a fee? Even here at the Art Institute, the loan of a collection helped fund the restoration of a floor of the museum. A country like Italy, jam-packed as it is with treasures, should not let such opportunities pass it by.
Francesca Casadio is Andrew W. Mellon Senior Conservation Scientist at the Art Institute of Chicago, where in 2003 she established an art conservation science laboratory that she continues to head. She received a Ph.D. in Chemistry from the University of Milan. Her main field of scientific interest is the application of advanced techniques (including Synchrotron Analysis and Surface-Enhanced Raman Spectroscopy) to the study and conservation of works of art.
