Szilágyi András (szerk.): Ars Decorativa 24. (Budapest, 2006)
Magdolna LICHNER: The reception of electroplates in Hungary I. - Electroplates in the collection of the Museum of Applied Arts 1873-1884
beneficial results of industrial expansion and to the optimism of the Enlightenment period. 24 On the basis of his experiences during the study tour, Mudrony drew the consequence that the dark prospects for the future and the one-sided domination of utilitarianism can be avoided, provided that the principles of art are extended over industry. In his most convincing account, he pointed out the three pillars of the artistic direction of industry from a historical point of view. The first pillar is applied arts supported by the state or the monarch, instruction in industrial drawing and industrial exhibitions (the latter includes the most influential world exhibitions). 25 In case of all institutions, he made a specific mention of the role of reproductions, in particular of producing photographs and plaster reproductions. In the case of the South Kensington Museum, he made a reference to the collection 'electroplate' reproductions. 26 Reproductions played an important role in the emerging science of art history, which was illustrated by the choice of subject of the fifth section of the I 5 ' congress in art history in Vienna (1873): Reproductions and their spreading for the sake of museums and artistic education. Ferenc Pulszky, Imre Henszlmann and Flóris Römer participated in the congress. Although it focussed on photography and plaster reproductions, the issue of electroplating was also touched upon. 27 However, it should be noted that Ferenc Pulszky, director of the Hungarian National Museum, in an article on museums (published in 1875 in the Vasárnapi Újság and the Szemle) did not mention electroplating; however, he discussed the importance of reproductions, plaster reproductions and 'photographia' in detail. 2 * Electroplates did not appear in the 1873 purchase recommendation. The author of the recommendation, when talking of reproductions, mentions but photographs, plaster reproductions and drawings; nevertheless, the greater part of the sum was spent for the products of the Elkington company and a collection of the socalled "Salviati glass" (a historizing collection that renewed the technology of Murano glassware). The Milton Shield, a famous electroplate of the company's, was among the artefacts purchased at the Vienna world exhibition. Presumably, it was Károly Pulszky who selected the ornamental shield, which was displayed at the first exhibition. Undoubtedly, he was the person, who described the technology in the Kalauz 11 *: 'With the invention of electroplating, modern times have gained a mighty device for reproducing metalware; it can he used for copying any metal artefact with outmost accuracy. The original of the cassette No. 131 is Donatella's work, which he made for the Medici family. The plates No. 132 and 133. as well as the shield No. 134 come from the Elkington factory; the latter is the so-called Milton Shield.' (Picture 3.). Most probably, he did not appreciate the artistic achievement of the latter: when naming the producer, he referred to the factory, not to the maker of the original work, albeit the shield is marked with signature (Morel-Ladeuil fecit 1866). The shield is marked not only with the signet of the Elkington Company (which authenticates the reproduction) but also with that of the South Kensington Museum. The description in the first inventory of the Vienna purchase is still more deceiving: it says that the artefact is an electroplated imitation of the Milton Shield. The factory is not indicated. As a matter of fact, the shield is named after the subject of its repoussé work, Milton's Paradise Lost. It is quite certain that Károly Pulszky had the necessary information; most probably, in the course of the purchase he read the company's catalogue published in Vienna. 10 The catalogue dealt with the artefact, its subject matter and maker in a whole page and pointed out that the original work was rewarded with a gold medal at the Paris world exhibition in 1867; a full-page illustration showed the shield. The original was purchased by the South Kensington Museum for francs 70,000. 31 Pulszky must have heard of the maker of the work. On the occasion of the world exhibition, the Vienna Academy of Fine Arts, in recognition of his latest work (the Helicon vase) elected Léonard Morel-Ladeuil a corresponding member (Picture 2.)T- Why is it that Károly Pulszky attached importance to the introduction of the technology yet neglected - in fact, ignored - the appreciation
