Page - 198 - in Die Repräsentation der Habsburg-Lothringischen Dynastie in Musik, visuellen Medien und Architektur - 1618–1918

198 Sektion II: Herrscher, Staat, Nation right manner seems somehow affected from this perspective. The painting is clearly not painted with the same affection: the further you go to the left, the better it gets”.39 The review in the newspaper Slovenec reproached Kobilca for her understanding of Slovenia as a strictly agricultural country, given that craft and commerce were accorded no significance at all. The reviewer sharply opposed this understanding of the country saying that the Slovenians were being represented as a farming nation only, with the mayor personifying the only intelligence.40 Even Kobilca herself was not satisfied with the work. In a letter to her sister, she complained that she would never take such a commission again.41 The real reason for her dissatisfaction remains unknown, but it is possible that Kobilca knew how high the expectations of the pub- lic were because of her fame. Thus she wanted (as Beti Žerovc has written) to create an unusual and exaggerated composition which would radiate the Slovene desire for a nation, and in which every part would be recognised locally and at the same time nationally.42 Even if Kobilca remained dissatisfied with the painting – and her younger col- league, the impressionist Rihard Jakopič (1869–1943), doubtlessly with a hint of jealousy, gave the painting a very critical evaluation43 – the general public and rep- resentatives of the council and the mayor all received the painting with great en- thusiasm and awarded the painter an additional five hundred crowns.44 Based on all the above mentioned critiques, it is possible to conclude that Kobilca’s style had not advanced beyond realism – which was probably also the reason she did not meet the expectations of the critics who were keen on the newly coming impressionist style in Slovenia. Moreover, the political class accepted the realistically depicted figures and national costumes ornamented with national emblems, concluding that the painting suited the representation of Hribar’s Slovene political programme, where “vigorous Slovenians grasping their strength from the eternally fresh, invincible Slavic spirit are constructing Ljubljana as a modern town, worthy of being the capital of the country and nation”.45 Both paintings in the council chamber of Ljubljana Town Hall represent the Slo- vene society at the end of the nineteenth century. Kobilca’s allegory showed an ideal image of the Slovene nation, culturally and politically united under the patronage of a modern Ljubljana, which in reality was led by the same Emperor and town council- lors who are realistically depicted in Germ’s painting. The protagonists in Kobilca’s painting remained neutral, simplified to an ethnographic representation of the Slo- vene nation, whereas the real political leaders at the end of the nineteenth century in Germ’s painting subsequently became disputable in public due to the political changes during the First World War. Germ’s painting was therefore moved to the depot of the National Gallery in Ljubljana and replaced with the landscape painting