Maxfield Parrish was born into an old Quaker family on July 25, 1870, in Philadelphia. Frederick was his given name; he later adopted Maxfield, a family name, as a middle name. His parents encouraged his artistic pursuits, exposing him to great literature, art, and music. His father, Stephen Parrish, was also a painter, but came from a strict Quaker upbringing where painting was considered sinful. Stephen had to resort to painting secretly in the attic. He therefore fostered his son’s painting abilities in any way that he could. The young man spent two years, 1884-6, in Europe with his parents, attended classes at Dr. Kornemann’s school in Paris; continued his education at Haverford College, followed by classes at the Pennsylvania Academy of the Fine Arts in the early 1890s.
Parrish became a highly successful illustrator, sought after by well-known magazines of the day. He illustrated books, calendars, covers, advertisements, painted murals, as well as producing the paintings for which he remains famous.
Parrish married Lydia Austin, an instructor at the Drexel Institute in 1895. They eventually established a permanent home in Cornish, New Hampshire. Some detail of a personal nature is mentioned in a blog, Illustration Art, Artists in Love Pt 1.
Snip
Maxfield Parrish was 33, a successful illustrator living on a grand country estate, when he first met Sue Lewin. She was a 16 year old girl from a nearby farm town hired to help Parrish and his wife care for their two young children. Because Parrish's wife would no longer pose for him, he drafted their young nanny to pose in fairy tale costumes.
Lewin soon became his muse, modeling for his most famous illustrations.
Eventually Parrish moved out of the mansion where his wife and children stayed and set up residence in his art studio so that he and Lewin could work closely together. Not long after that, Parrish's wife began taking their children away on extended trips.
I'm tempted to add a Pythonesque "nudge nudge, wink, wink" here. The rest of the tale is available at the link provided.
Parrish has been called "Master of Makebelieve" - it's easy to see why. Many of his pieces remind me slightly of the paintings of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood in Britain in the 19th century. Their work is rather more sensual, but I felt certain he was influenced by them; this was confirmed in a brief biography HERE
"(Parrish)was particularly drawn to such contemporary English artists as the Pre-Raphaelites, Rossetti, and Lord Leighton. Parrish took an immediate interest in Leighton's art, his lifestyle, and this shaped Parrish's artistic vision, and most certainly contributed to the creation of his curious blend of naturalism, fantasy and romanticism."
The painting below is one of Lord Leighton's.
 |
| Idyll (c.1880) |
Parrish painted serenity, using glowing tones. He achieved a luminous glow by a particular method: applying thin layers of paint and varnish one atop the other. I'd love to see some of the originals, because the computer screen, though a wondrous accessory, will reflect only a general idea of the "feel" of the real thing. It seems, even from what can be seen on-line that his paintings did capture light wonderfully well.
He referred to himself as "a mechanic who paints." The "props" - vases, columns etc. used in his paintings - were made in his machine shop and carefully lighted before he began to paint. He was a meticulous draftsman, his work has an almost photographic quality. His technique, use of color and choice of subject matter add the touch of mythical unreality, suitable to his serene idyllic themes.
He painted until age 90, died, aged 95 in 1966. He is reported to have said:"There are countless artists whose shoes I am not worthy to polish - whose prints would not pay the printer, the question of judgment is a puzzling one." The general public knew what it liked, and relied on its own judgment - it liked Maxfield Parrish's work.
Samples of Parrish's paintings. As mentioned already, I doubt the true quality of his talent in depicting light and colour is properly evident from online images, but - these'll have to suffice for now.
 |
| Daybreak |
 |
| Lute Players |
 |
| Stars |
 |
| The Young King of the Black Isles |
 |
| Romance |
 |
| Ecstasy |
 |
| Top Farm - Winter |
ASTROLOGY
Born 25 July 1870 in Philadelphia PA at 6.00pm (but Astro.com gives this time a DD rating (unreliable). There's an alternative time mentioned, of 5.20 AM, recorded as "available in an old file" .
Or, here's the chart for a 5.20 AM birth - take your pick!
Either natal chart shows a clear "funnel" configuration, with Saturn in Sagittarius at the business end. He has been referred to as a "businessman with a brush" as well as "Master of Makebelieve". Capricorn (ruled by Saturn) rising at 6 PM underlines his instinct for business.
There's a Yod (two quincunx aspects joined by a sextile) involving the sextile between Pluto and Uranus with Saturn at the pointy end of the Yod formation - Saturn in focus on two counts, and a Capricorn ascendant would bring in a third. If born at 5.20 AM Leo would have been rising; the 5.20 AM chart puts Moon in Gemini rather than Cancer. I'm not sure which I prefer...on balance, I think I prefer the 6 PM chart, but an argument could be made for either.
Neptune (imagination and fantasy) in Aries trines Saturn in Sagittarius and sextiles Venus. Venus Mars and Moon form a stellium, albeit Venus is in the last degree of Gemini while Moon and Mars are in Cancer. Neptune's harmonious links are reflected in the artist's nickname "Master of Makebelieve".
Parrish's penchant for depicting androgynous figures rather than voluptuous feminine, or overtly masculine figures may be symbolised by the grouping of the Moon, Mars and Venus in his (6 PM version) natal chart. Masculine Mars sandwiched between feminine Moon and Venus, with just a degree or so between - an androgynous mix!
It's interesting that Parrish's first painting was titled "Moonrise". His Moon at home in Cancer (at 6 PM) would be one of the stronger placements in his chart. Sun at home in Leo is also strongly placed. It seems significant to me that the two celestial bodies which are major givers of light, strong in his natal chart, reflect clearly in his paintings always lauded for their unusually clear depiction of.....light!
