“ you will notice that my frames i have designed as carefully as my pictures,” wrote the painter and aesthete James mcneill whistler in 1872. “and thus they form as important a part as any of the rest of the work—carrying on the particular harmony throughout.” despite whistler’s observation, remarkably “ scant attention was paid to picture frames during much of the 20th century. and whether their taste ran to rubens or rothko, relatively few connoisseurs concerned themselves with the artistic value of frames. during the past decade or more, however, this attitude has changed radically—and with it the market. “the levels of sophistication and interest in “ antique frames and their proper usage has increased exponentially,” says lawrence shar, president of the celebrated new york framers and restorers lowy. the firm, which produced frames for local galleries in the twilight of america’s belle epoque and had relationships with such prominent american artists as Childe hassam and george bellows, is marking its centenary this year with the publication of a lavishly illustrated book, The Secret Lives of Frames: One Hundred Years of Art and Artistry »

mere fraction of the entirety, the aesthetic value is immense,” wilner says. northern renaissance artists such as Jan van eyck and robert Campin frequently made and gilded their own frames; they painted on panels with integrated frames, whose moldings were not just firmly attached but were carved out of the thick edges of the panel itself. in some cases, such as van eyck’s famous 1433 portrait of a man in a turban (a possible self-portrait), now in london’s national gallery, the artist fashioned the frame before applying his first brushstroke, then inscribed his name, the date and a motto on it. during the renaissance, the switch from painting on panels to painting on canvas allowed frames to be attached after the work was complete. as detachable frames became the norm, frame-making increasingly became the province not of the artists themselves but of specialist craftsmen skilled at wood carving and gilding. frames were often conceived as part of the overall

decoration of a room, with moldings and carving inspired by the carved motifs of the paneling, and with styles closely following the progress of fashion. wealthy collectors began to see frames themselves as works of art, and according to the frame historian Claus grimm, leonardo da vinci was obliged to wait to begin one of his Madonna of the Rock paintings until the master woodcarver giacomo del maino had finished carving the frame intended for it. the language of frames has regional dialects, from the pomp and circumstance of 17th- and 18th-century spanish carving to the handsome sobriety of 17th-century flemish and dutch frames of ebony, walnut and other dark woods, to the delectable gilded fantasy of french frames during the successive eras of louis Xiv, louis Xv and louis Xvi. the 19th century, with its mingling of historical revival styles and consummate showmanship, produced its own legacy, among them whistler’s delicate creations, the frames designed by Pre-raphaelite painters like dante gabriel rossetti for their own works, the restrained designs of hassam and the elaborate procenium-like surrounds created for the oversized masterpieces of albert bierstadt, frederic edwin Church and other exponents of the hudson river school. in the wave of modernism that followed world war i, however, heavy, gilded frames were derided along with everything else representing the victorian era. this lamentable situation only worsened with time. simon edsor, director of london’s venerable fine art society, says that during the first half of the 20th century, it was typical for almost every painting passing through dealers’ hands to be reframed. thus “a common sight through the end of the 1960s was the old gold man, who regularly visited picture dealers collecting old gilt

says. (degas had a mania about frames, filling notebooks with designs in unusual colors and, on one occasion, angrily taking back a work of his from a collector who had replaced the artist’s own painted frame with an elaborate gilt one.) after viewing degas’s notebooks firsthand at the bibliothèque nationale de france, in Paris, and examining some of the few extant degas frames at the metropolitan museum of art, in new york, and the musée d’orsay, in Paris, bark frameworks began creating examples from his sketches, some of which had never before been translated into three-dimensional objects. since then the firm has made several frames for pictures by degas, monet, berthe morisot and gustave Caillebotte, mostly for the brooklyn museum. Carrie rebora barratt, curator of american Paintings and sculpture at the metropolitan museum, offers a prime example of the power of the right frame. “after the met purchased John singer sargent’s Madame X, in 1916, it arrived from europe without sargent’s own magnificent frame, which was documented in archival photographs. so for nearly eight decades, it languished on our walls in a very slender, underwhelming frame,” she says. “during the 1990s, we were able to match it to a wonderful american 1890s frame similar in drama to sargent’s original and from our own collection.” because the opening wasn’t an exact match with sargent’s canvas, the museum engaged wilner’s firm to make necessary alterations. “we very rarely expand a frame because that affects its value,” notes wilner. “but in this instance we had to expand the Madame X frame along the vertical sides and reduce it along the horizontal.” frames have even inspired some collectors to acquire them for their own sake. one wilner client, Justine simoni, of Pensacola, florida, has assembled a collection of around 200 period frames, which she displays mainly empty, some nested one within another, on the walls and ceilings of her home.

“each is a vessel of intrinsic beauty able to command attention to itself,” she says. “like a vase in a showcase, there is no notion of emptiness.” although period frames often enhance paintings from their own epochs, mixing and matching also has benefits. “seventeenth- and 18th-century frames complement not only old master paintings but Picassos, dalís and even dubuffets as well,” notes shar. auguste renoir himself felt that 18th-century rococo frames best suited his art. “an inappropriate frame, however expensive, could reduce the salability of any work of art,” says edsor. “however, to spend $5,000—not a particularly expensive frame—on a $2,000 picture may raise the selling price by only $1,000. an ideal would be to add at least 200 to 300 percent of the cost of the frame to the selling price of the picture.” with such considerations now in play, matching antique frames to works of art has evolved into something of a science. style, color, gilding, size and texture of the carved, painted or molded ornament all play a part, and leading dealers offer consulting services that include computer imagery, allowing clients to view a painting in many frames to help them choose the perfect one. as with all fine antiques, condition is of tremendous importance. a rare hand-carved piece in pristine shape will command far more money than a similar one that has been resized, regilded or altered in some other way. frames by artists like whistler, degas and hassam, by designers such as architect stanford white or by such 18th-century makers as Chérin and etienne-louis infroit carry their own premiums. so it is with the utmost seriousness that wilner says, “it’s never ok to cut a signed frame.” frames have taken on a life of their own that even the debonair edouard manet could not have envisioned when he observed that, “without the proper frame, the artist loses all.”