Today I had the opportunity to visit the National Gallery.  I really enjoyed my earlier visit to the Hugh Lane and today to the National Galleries.  The art in this city is amazing.  Dublin had a huge boom in the arts at the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th.  This is my very favorite time period for all artistic mediums, so there is a lot here for me to enjoy.  Both the art galleries that we have visited have had on display some amazing pieces by Irish painters.  I have especially liked the works of Jack Yeats, W.B. Yeats’ younger brother, and Paul Henry, a post-impressionist landscape artist.

There is an interesting balance in the galleries between Irish works and other european artists.  There is certainly an emphasis on painters from Ireland that I have found refreshing and that is sometimes not found in other galleries in other cities.  However, I also find interesting the pride the gallery takes in its other european works.  For example, the National Gallery has a nice collection of paintings from the Dutch school, including a Vermeer.  In the gift shop, I found a lovely bookmark with “Irish National Gallery” printed on it, along with a reproduction of the Vermeer painting.  The Dutch school of painting has a very distinct look and is linked to a distinct place.  I find it interesting, then, that they chose this piece of art to include on the bookmark.  Of course a Vermeer would be expensive, and for a gallery to own one is something to advertise.  But it seems strange to me that this would be a greater point of pride for the gallery than the excellent work done by Dubliners and Irish painters.  Which is more impressive for a National Gallery, owning an expensive piece of art that has no connection to the nation or an exquisite but under appreciated artist from that place?

Paul Henry from national gallery.ie

Jack B Yeats, image from nationalgallery.ie

Vermeer, Lady Writing a Letter, image from national gallery.ie