Patricia Cornwell – Portrait Of A Killer Jack The Ripper

Other accounts suggest that Sickert “ran into” Whistler somewhere or followed him into a shop or met him at a party or through the Cobden daughters. Sickert was never accused of being shy or reticent about what­ever it was he wanted at the moment. Whistler supposedly persuaded Sickert to stop wasting his time with art school and come to work in a real studio with him. The young man left the Slade School and became Whistler’s apprentice. He worked side by side with the Master, but what his days with Ellen were like is a blank.

Available references to the early years of Ellen and Walter’s marriage do not indicate an attraction to each other or the slightest fragrant scent of romance. In Jacques-Emile Blanche’s memoirs, he refers to Ellen as so much older than Sickert that she “might have been taken for his elder sis­ter.” He thought the couple were well matched “intellectually” and ob­served that they allowed each other “perfect freedom.” During visits to Blanche in Dieppe, Sickert paid little attention to Ellen, but would disappear in the narrow streets and courtyards, and into his rented “mys­terious rooms in harbour quarters, sheds from which all were excluded.”

The divorce decree cites that Sickert was guilty of “adultery coupled with desertion for the space of 2 years 6c upwards without reasonable excuse.” Yet it was really Ellen who eventually refused to live with Sick­ert. And there is no evidence he had even one sexual transgression. Ellen’s divorce petition states that Sickert deserted her on September 29, 1896, and that on or about April 21, 1898, he committed adultery with a woman whose name was “unknown” to Ellen. This alleged tryst sup­posedly occurred at the Midland Grand Hotel in London. Then, on May 4, 1899, Sickert supposedly committed adultery again with a woman whose name also was “unknown” to Ellen.

Various biographers explain that the reason the couple separated on September 29th is that on this day Sickert admitted to Ellen that he wasn’t faithful to her and never had been. If so, it would appear that his affairs – assuming he had more than the two mentioned in the divorce decree – were with “unknown” women. Nothing I have read would in­dicate that he was amorous toward women or given to inappropriate touching or invitations – even if he did use vulgar language. Fellow artist Nina Hamnett, a notorious bohemian who rarely turned down liquor or sex, writes in her autobiography that Sickert would walk her home when she was drunk; she stayed with him in France. The kiss-and-tell Nina says not a word about Sickert ever so much as flirting with her.

Ellen may really have believed Sickert was a womanizer, or her claims may have been something of a red herring if the humiliating truth was that they never consummated their marriage. In the late nineteenth cen­tury, a woman had no legal grounds to leave her husband unless he was unfaithful and cruel or deserted her. She and Sickert agreed to these claims. He did not fight her. One would assume she knew about his dam­aged penis, but it is possible the brotherly and sisterly couple never un­dressed around each other or attempted sex.

During their divorce proceedings, Ellen wrote that Sickert promised if she would “give him one more chance he [would] be a different man, that I am the only person he has ever really cared for – that he has no longer those relations with [unknown].” Ellen’s lawyer, she wrote, felt certain Sickert was “sincere – but that taking into consideration his previous life – & judging as far as he could of his character from his face & man­ner he does not believe he is capable of keeping any resolve that he made, and his deliberate advice to me is to go on with the divorce.

“I am dreadfully upset &t have hardly done anything but cry ever since,” Ellen wrote Janie. “I see how far from dead is my affection for him.”

CHAPTER TWENTY-SEVEN

THE DARKEST NIGHT IN THE DAY

Sickert’s roles changed like the light and shadow he painted on his canvases.

A shape should not have lines because nature doesn’t, and forms re­veal themselves in tones, shades, and the way light holds them. Sickert’s life had no lines or boundaries, and his shape changed with every tilt and touch of his enigmatic moods and hidden purposes.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163

Leave a Reply 0

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *