Today I paid a second visit to the Tate's Turner & Constable exhibition. The Guardian paraphrased Adrian Searle's review as 'boiling portentous skies versus two men and a dog' and provided the verdict upfront: 'JMW Turner is beaten by John Constable in this mighty show.' Few other reviewers were tempted to play the game of siding with one or the other, although The Tatler went for Turner - 'he was the out-and-out winner.' I don't think there's much doubt they were the two greatest landscape painters of their era - it's not like the 'who is best, Blur or Oasis?' debate, where the sensible verdict was always "Pulp". But their differences continue to fascinate - as the wall text above states one was 'all truth', the other 'poetry' and, as can clearly be seen at the Tate, where Constable's clouds and light-flecked trees and rivers sit alongside Turner's hazy, sunset vistas, 'one is silver, the other gold.'
At the risk of being annoying, I thought I would take the absurdity of ranking these two artists seriously and apply the crass five star system we are familiar with from movie reviews. I wasn't sure how this would come out, although I was expecting to side with poetry over truth, or what George Shaw describes in the exhibition film as Turner's elemental alignment with the air, over Constable's allegiance to the earth. In the first room of early work, leaving aside sketchbooks, each artist had 12 paintings and Turner edges it (37 versus 34, or 3.1 v 2.8 on average, per painting). We then move to two Turner and two Constable rooms. Turner's average for some lovely watercolours is brought down to 2.9 by four less impressive oil sketches, but he gets a 3.2 for his Alpine scenes. Constable 'in the outdoors' includes some of his less interesting sketches (2.6) but the room devoted to fields and skies features his celebrated cloud studies and paintings around Dedham (3.2). Overall, Turner is just in the lead as we come to a room called 'The Exhibition' which pits four Constables against five Turners. Here at least I have to agree with Searle, the perfection of Constable's The White Horse and sheer energy in his The Leaping Horse make him the clear winner.
The next display, 'Fire and Water', includes this serene view of the landscape near Salisbury. As you look at it, you almost can't believe you're not looking at real water. The wall text explains that in 1830 it got accidentally assessed as a potential Royal Academy exhibit, while Constable was on the committee. His colleagues 'condemned it as 'a poor thing' that was 'very green'. Perhaps out of embarrassment, Constable stayed quiet.' Well it got five stars from me and Constable wins this room, with his famous views of Salisbury Cathedral and Hadleigh Castle easily beating Turner's Palace of Caligula. The next room has a clip from the Mike Leigh film Mr. Turner, which I wrote about here in 2015. Back then I quoted a review of an earlier Tate exhibition (in 2009) which viewed the artists as rivals, showing Constable's Opening of Waterloo Bridge alongside the Turner seascape it had overshadowed at the Royal Academy, until Turner cheekily added a red buoy on varnishing day. The Constable is on show here too, along with some of his later works which I don't find very appealing (2.4). The late Turners - Venice, the Blue Rigi, the swirling Snow Storm are always astonishing (3.9). The last room, 'Landscape and Memory' has one of my favourite paintings, Turner's Norham Castle, Sunrise, but also reminds you of the variety of Constable's work - from his detailed drawing of trees on Hampstead Heath to his dramatic depiction of Stonehenge (Turner 3.5, Constable 3.7).
So who came out on top? Well, Constable got a grand total of 221. And Turner's scores added up to... 221 as well! However, Constable, by my reckoning, had 72 paintings in the show and Turner just 66, so I declare Turner the winner.














