Featured Madonna and Child painting on wood panel

Hi, I purchased this painting yesterday at a local consignment shop. It is oil on panel, I think the wood of the panel is oak. The panel measures about 10 1/2" by 9 1/2". The wood for the frame is something lighter and does not have a pronounced grain. There is some writing on the back of the frame. The decoration seems to be applied like you would apply slip on pottery. There are places where the decoration has fallen off and you can see the wood of the frame. The painting had a card attached to the back and it appears at one time it was owned by Katherine Roche ( may be penciled on the back of the frame?). Katherine Roche had a radio show on WGN in Chicago. The note seems to imply that it was purchased from her estate. I am not sure what the comment about the Chicago Art Institute has to do with the painting. I am guessing it was painted maybe mid 19th century. I don't really have an idea of what country it was painted in. I do believe that it is a copy of a painting by Raphael. Hopefully someone will have some insight as to it's origin.

 

Madonna della seggiola looks to be a match:

 

K Roche ?

 

I think this may be the Katherine that owned your piece:

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/127379420/katherine-gould-roche

1886 - 1974

"Never married, no children. Known as "Kaki". For many years she had a talk show on Chicago radio station WGN under the name June Baker. She was one of five children of Edmund and Anna Roche."

 

I think she'd fall easily into the folk art category. Somebody with some talent but zippo formal training, painting on whatever came handy. The frame may have already existed.

 

Yes, it looks like it's on oak.

 

It looks like a piece leftover from 1890s-1910s furniture.

 

It desperately needs a good clean but I think its charming.

 

I'm put off by the craquelure that seems to be too even and varnished over. It looks forced.

 

I agree, it seems a bit strange. I think you are right that it has been varnished again at some point. I gave it a good examination with a loop and UV light. Nothing jumped out at me as being out of sorts. I am wondering if it is just the result of surface prep by a novice artist?

 

Of course, I may be wrong but... I don't think it's meant to deceive. A decorative piece owned by a local celebrity artist.

Debora

 

You have to ask yourself: How does craquelure happen? It can be caused by a number of factors, but it comes down to shrinkage of the drying pigments. On this painting you have every pigment in every color drying and shrinking to the same degree over the entire surface. That seems unlikely. Since craquelure is considered a defect, I can't imagine a 19th C painter, even an amateur, wanting it in their image. If the craquelure is forced, that would indicate to me that it was done for decorative effect and/or artificial aging, suggest the painting is actually newer than it looks. But I readily admit this is all conjecture.

 

Conjecture, of course, but I would think done for decorative effect. The work is more "inspired by" rather than a copy. And as such does, combined with well chosen frame, has naive charm. But I doubt a serious artist would copy The Madonna of the Barrelhead which is famous for being in a round format in a rectangular format.

Debora

 

Agree

 

I would call it a free adaptation of the Raphael.