Deconstructing Louise

Looking at Tom Roberts’ portrait of Louise Smith, Sylvia Walsh digs deep. Sylvia writes: ‘As a reflection of historic appearances this painting raises many questions:  Who was Louise?  Captured in a romanticised, fashionable manner, does Louise’s clothing and the composition suggest her lifestyle? What can we speculate about her father and  family? Who did Louise become?  And what of Tom Roberts, a favourite Australian artist, then and now?

Children were dressed and presented to complement their father’s status, family’s affluence, upward mobility – and from the title of this painting, Louise’s claim to fame was that she was daughter to the Hon. L. L. Smith.

Usually children’s clothing of the period followed the European mode as the ‘New Australians’ desired to mimic northern hemisphere fashion if not, surpass it. Louise’s dress and shoes represent the 19thcentury fashionable custom and undoubtedly, we see one of Louise’s best outfits of quality materials befitting her recording for posterity. Artisan-made complete garments, fabric and trims may have been sent by overseas well-wishers who could not imagine such finery being available in Melbourne. However, with the emergence of designer-dressmakers and grand, retail businesses, fashions could be ordered from specialty stores in stylish city shopping precincts like Melbourne’s Block Arcade.

Louise’s clothing, on first impression, seems a simple dress but review reveals richly, ruffled neckline and hem using an expensive lace, valuable by being hand-made and likely imported – perhaps it was part of her mother’s trousseau? This frilled, trimming culminates at the shoulders with light blue, silk satin bows, maybe functional openings for fit-adjustment and also for ease of laundering the dress flat. The dress in fine fabric also imported, and probably woven lawn in cotton or maybe light-weight, Irish linen, appears a deceptively, straightforward construction. The soft materials would need support underneath with complex petticoats starched to hold the shape. Fine ankle socks and glossy patent-leather ‘party shoes’ were usually for indoor wear for special occasions, a luxury not accessible to most children who generally wore sturdy, durable boots.

Louise’s dimpled knuckles and rounded arms, translucent skin and dress style indicate early childhood. Born in 1884, Louise is pictured at four years of age.   This was a popular age for commissioning a portrait to record growth from infant to girl and Louise sits as if ‘a porcelain doll’ with angelic blue-eyed, goldilocks looks, hair gathered up to display her face, then cascading to her shoulders. Her eyes connect directly and confidently with us now, but is she responding to the artist or her family calling her to look up? Interrupted in her reading, Louise holds her place with her finger. We may guess it is a classical book title, as reading symbolised a refined pastime for a well-to-do little girl who was poised to enter the unrivalled ladies school, Presbyterian Ladies college (PLC). (Founded in 1875 in East Melbourne, PLC was one of the first independent schools for girls in Australia). And then there is the glint from her gold bracelet, showcasing a valuable, fashionable item, perhaps an heirloom, another symbol of family status and wealth and … expensive jewellery for a young child.

Her father Dr L.L. Smith (Louis Lawrence), a community leader (and subsequently the Hon. L. L. Smith upon his entry into the Victorian Parliament), followed the trend of commissioning portraits as a reassuring symbol to display and perhaps boast to relatives. Louise’s father was probably encouraged to commission an artist of high repute such as Roberts who was in demand for his society portraits. Widely travelled, Roberts had studied and worked in Europe including exhibiting at the London Academy and Paris Salon. He also initiated new ideas of art exhibition and marketing by attracting patrons with well-publicised, desirable social, art shows at the Grosvenor studios. Portraits were beautiful in themselves, and also enhanced fashionable, public and private interiors, celebrating good-looking citizens’  lifestyle and were then cherished through the generations. Later, as Mrs James Dyer, Louise presented her childhood portrait to the National Gallery of Victoria as well as one of her husband, James.

This large painting invites us to inspect it seeking visual clues surrounding this ‘good little girl’, who was probably required to be particularly well-behaved for her visit with the artist. Perhaps, Tom Roberts called on her family at home to make sketches before completing the painting in his Melbourne studio.  In 1888, when this portrait was painted, Roberts and his colleagues had moved into purpose-built city studios in Grosvenor Chambers, 9 Collins Street East, Melbourne. Meanwhile Dr Smith was residing and practising from  Consulting Rooms nearby at 182 Collins Street East, opposite the Melbourne Club, (the late residence of the Governor). The private entrance in Steven Street south, was for the family – we see an image of a fashionable, substantial building and imagine an elegant life and dress standard within.

Tom Roberts (1856-1931) demonstrates his meticulous portrait technique of fine brushwork and polished finish in this painting. Pale and lustrous in her white dress, Louise is the star of the composition contrasting with the dark, subdued background. Seated on a replicated ‘grassy knoll’ (cushions draped in green, velvety textile) this creates a scene which might be related to the story she reads, a fairy-tale perhaps? A carefully composed painting directs our view from the lower side-front into the composition. Louise’s spread out dress hem further emphasises the diagonal composition and links the prop placement in a popular, theatrical manner providing perspective and adding meaning. The composition props include wallflowers (an English garden favourite), exotic blooms for Australia, attests to cultivation at some expense as does the fashionable oriental bowl they are arranged in. A bird probably a white swan, again not native, traditionally European, emphasising a fairy-tale scenario.

While Louise is portrayed as a marvellous example of a native Melbournian, her parents had emigrated from England. Her well-respected father, who went on to become a Victorian parliamentarian, had previously had an established medical career of several decades in Britain before setting up in Victoria. Louise’s mother was his second wife. Perhaps they ventured to Australia lured by commercial opportunities and the promise of patients being able to afford treatment through success in the pastoral industry and gold rush?

Dr Smith seems to have been a great entrepreneur judging by a comprehensive article from the Maldon Herald in 1873. Here he advertised his medical practice which he undertook in Maldon one day per week treating: “Nervousness, Debility, Loss of Power, Spermatorrhoea, Indiscretions of Early Youth, Syphilitic Diseases arising from errors and the yielding to the passions” proclaiming himself – “the only legally qualified medical man in this speciality of his profession; others are unqualified, and therefore, are obtaining money under false pretences”. He further noted success treating: “many unfortunate young-old men, utterly crushed in spirit, ruined in body, and filched in pocket” – We can guess that the doctor’s services were in demand in this mining and rural region, where maybe, men had contracted ailments through yielding to passions!

We wonder how Louise’s life developed. Can we match the little girl to the woman Louise Berta Mosson Hanson-Dyer (1884 -1962)? Her 1920 photograph shows a glamorous Australian music publisher and patron of the arts. Louise was admired and well-reported as a society hostess: “rising to any occasion with gorgeous dressing, flamboyance and a truly potent personality”

Born in Melbourne, Louise was a talented pianist who studied at the Albert Street Conservatorium and then, from 1907-1908, in London and Edinburgh. As well as her father having a civic role, her brother, Sir Harold Gengoult Smith, was the Lord Mayor of Melbourne from 1931-1934 and Louise assisted him ‘vivaciously’ on occasion. She married James Dyer, a Scottish entrepreneur 27 years her senior, in 1911 and he too seemed lively, a character known as  ‘Jimmy the linoleum king’.

Louise Dyer had an energetic social life. She was president of the PLC alumni for several terms and also an active member of the Alliance Française. A generous patron of many art and music organisations, Louise donated money towards the founding of the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra. Desiring more cultural opportunities than were available locally, the Dyers moved to London in 1927 and then Paris in 1928. Louise told the press of the necessity to go to England to “procure music unavailable in Australia”. However, she returned to Australia at intervals to support her various causes. When Jimmy died shortly after arriving overseas in 1938, Louise remarried – this time to a thirty-year-old Englishman Joseph Birch Hanson who had studied in Melbourne and Paris.  Finding post-war Paris ‘untenable’ they moved to Monaco and continued their music publishing business. Ultimately, Louise died there aged 78 in 1962. Her ashes are interred in the Melbourne General Cemetery.

Thank you, Sylvia, for letting us in to Louise’s life.