Specialized in Object and Library & Archive Conservation
John Rogers Group Sculpture
Report Summary
This project was done in collaboration with Abigail Rodriguez and Allison Kelley.
Owner: Winterthur Museum, Garden & Library
Accession #: 2016.0019.003
Object: Figure group (Neighboring Pews)
Artist/Maker: John Rogers (1829-1904)
Object Date: 1884
Materials: plaster, ferrous alloy armature, paint
Dimensions: 40 L x 30 W x 48 H centimeters (15.75 L x 11.8 W x 18.9 H inches)
Consulted:
Lauren Fair, Objects Conservator and Affiliated Assistant Professor, Winterthur/University of Delaware Program in Art Conservation
Johanna Bernstein, Material Scientist, Rutgers University
Stephanie Delamaire, Associate Curator of Fine Arts, Winterthur Museum
Report Date: 12/18/2020
Treatment Images
Historical Context
This text was abridged from a section of the report written by Abigail Rodriguez.
John Rogers was an American sculptor during the late 19th century who strove to produce affordable art for the masses. His popular sculptures, known as John Rogers Groups, marked an era in American art in which Rogers was attempting to democratize the enjoyment of fine arts. The groups were made in both plaster and bronze as Rogers developed his product and landed on his decision to focus on quantity production for the mass market. The creation of a Rogers Group typically involved at least ten distinct processes beginning with (1) the selection of the subject and the overall design. After choosing a subject, (2) the scene would be roughly sketched. The next step would be to (3) model the group in clay and (4) take a pattern cast from the clay model. After which, (5) a bronze master model would be cast and (6) molds would be prepared for casting replicas. Each replica would then be (7) cast in plaster, (8) finished, (9) colored, and (10) stored or packed for shipment.
After developing an idea and a sketch, Rogers would model his groups in clay. He used live models where possible, employing neighboring, family members, and friends in many of his sculptures. While he was less concerned with perfecting his depiction of the human form, he worked hard to render expressions of his characters. Once the clay model was complete, a single plaster cast was taken as a pattern and finished with fine details by Rogers. Rogers carried out the mass production of plaster copies in house at his factory at 142 Center Street in New York City. Glue molds were used, coating the separated sections of the sculptures. The glue would take up to twelve hours to set, at which point it would be cut and peeled off the bronze and placed within a keyed plaster casing. The casings would be bound together with cords and dowel pins, insuring a tight fit for the final cast. The elasticity of the glue enabled the mold to be drawn off the sculpture even where there were undercuts, saving time and labor in both the production and finishing processes.
Rogers is said to have used a plaster with a composition of “two or three sorts of plaster or ground gypsum with a mixture of siliceous powder to improve its quality”. Multiple casting methods have been recorded over the years by observers in Rogers factory. The finishing process for Rogers Groups including assembly of the separately cast sections. This was done with wires and finished off with “plaster paste”, a thicker plaster material. This process was the most labor intensive within the factory.
After sufficient drying, the casts would spend a week in the coloring room where they would receive their characteristic clay-colored surfaces. Before settling on painting the surfaces of his plaster sculptures, Rogers experimented with both tinting the plaster itself and applying dipped glazes. His eventual formula for the desired surface was to apply a base coat of boiled linseed oil and then two to three coats of “pretty thick” paint. He would later suggest mixing the last coat of paint with turpentine rather than oil in an attempt to reduce the sheen. The clay-color was achieved by mixing burnt umber and zinc white.
Between 1860 and 1893, Rogers published almost 90 groups, producing between 80,000 and 100,000 copies of his works. There were five general categories of his groups: civil war subjects, literary topics, theater scenes, domestic life groups, and historical figures. The group examined for this documentation project falls under the category of domestic life. The imagery in Neighboring Pews (1883) brought together Rogers’ flair for the domestic drama with a recurring subject of love and flirtation. The four figures in the scene range in age from a young boy to an elderly woman, touching on topics of intergenerational dynamics. Additionally, the setting of the group, within a sacred institution, addresses topics of faith in a changing social landscape. The layered stories told in each Rogers group can be unpacked in many ways depending on the lens of the viewer. Rogers, himself, implied that the true story of each is often open for interpretation for the observer.
Praised for its careful balance of humor and dignity, Neighboring Pews, became one of Rogers more popular groups despite its later publication date. Representative of a playful domestic scene, the sculpture speaks now to its audience about Rogers’ understanding of the human condition and the ways in which his work communicates pathos through built forms cast in plaster. In a way, Rogers sculptures are poems of the people.
See full report for citations and sources.
Condition and Description
This text was abridged from sections of the report written by Abigail Rodriguez.
The sculpture was cast in plaster with metal armature on the interior for structural support. The paint layer is a putty-brown color with components of zinc and lithopone. The date of application is unknown. The sculpture depicts a scene with four figures across two church pews. The figures include a young boy sprawled across the front pew, two women in the next pew, and a man standing just behind the second pew, leaning over, between the women. The young boy is depicted playing with a top hat and gloves. The dynamic between the three adult figures is depicted both by the height of the figures and the facial expressions. The man is engaging with the younger of the two women, who is standing, while the older, seated, woman glares upward with disdain. The presumed story of the group is that the male figure is showing the younger woman which hymn in her book they are about to sing, and that the older woman disapproves of this interaction (figure 2). The sculpture has a broad base with both the artist’s signature and the title of the work carved into the plaster. The signature and date are situated below the front pew, on the proper right face of the sculpture. The title of the work is centered on the front-face of the base of the sculpture. The patent date in on the back face of the sculpture on the second pew.
The sculpture is in overall fair condition. The body of the sculpture appears to be structurally sound with variable losses to the plaster, exposing the metal armature. The paint on the surface of the sculpture exhibits areas of active flaking with 25% loss to the entire surface. There are several areas of significant loss across the sculpture, the most noticeable being the partial loss of the male figure’s hands and hymnal and the loss to the gloves in the young boy’s hands. Both areas of loss have exposed the interior armature of the sculpture. There are additional smaller losses scattered across the sculpture. These losses include small sections missing from the edges of the pews, a section of the older woman’s bonnet tie, a corner of the younger woman’s hymnal, a section of the bow on the older woman’s bonnet, and small pits on the top of the man’s head. The armature is a ferrous alloy with evidence of surface corrosion.
There is extensive loss to the paint across the surface of the sculpture. Localized areas exhibit active flaking. In addition to the flaking of the paint, there are areas of staining, some from possible iron sources across the surface of both the plaster and the paint. Some of these discolored areas can be attributed to faded paint, while others may be stained. There are heavy accumulations of dust and debris in the recesses of the sculpture with a surface soiling overall (figure 19). The nature and origin of the dirt is unknown, but there appears to be both small and large particles of debris settled along the base.
Treatment Summary
Recommended Future Treatment Steps
One semester was insufficient time to complete the treatment of the sculpture. We recommended the following treatment steps to the next person(s) to take on this project.
Consolidation
-
Deliver Paraloid B-72 in Shellsol A 100 at a low concentration (10-15% w/v) to the surface using a brush or syringe to apply the adhesive at the edges of paint loss.
-
Health and safety precautions should be taken due to the inhalation risk from the solvent.
-
-
After the solvent has fully evaporated, apply heat via a tacking iron to selectively reactivate the adhesive and relax the paint flakes.
-
This should be done through a barrier of silicone release Mylar at low heat
-
Second Pass at Wet Cleaning
-
Clean the areas that were too fragile to be cleaned prior to consolidation with the same cleaning protocol.
-
Before proceeding to the next step, consult with Stepahnie Delamaire to determine her expectations of the final aesthetic and decide whether further cleaning is warranted.
-
-
For small areas of soiling and grime that were not able to be reduced by the first cleaning protocol, a new cleaning solution should be mixed that is a 1% citric acid in pH 8.5 adjusted water that is buffered with a solution of bicine and sodium hydroxide. To this solution should be added the surfactant Surfynol 61 at a concentration that is between 5-10 times above the critical micelle concentration (CMC).
-
This solution can be applied with a cotton swab. Rinsing with pH 8.5 adjusted water is critical to ensure the removal of any residual surfactant.
-