Imágenes de páginas

apart, “ dedicated to the perpetuation We are persuaded that it is a false and extension of the British School of view so to consider them. They are Art"—the purchase of pictures by not one necessarily in origin, and difliving British artists for the national fer in object. They are therefore built collection, especially such as are and founded upon different principles, more adapted by their style and sub- though in certain points they may be ject to a gallery than a cabinet ;" and subject to common rules ; and so are that a room should be devoted to en- often things extremely dissimilar. We gravings. They would recommend doubt if either would be benefited by the removal of the cartoons from this compulsory association. The one Hampstead court to the National Gal- would be under bondage, or the other lery. They complain of injury done under a sense of degradation. We to the great picture of Sebastian del might as well marry penmanship to Piombo by insects-would suggest an poetry. We are convinced that it is encouragement for individuals to be the word “ design" that induces this queath money as well as pictures-re initiatory error. commend pictures of the era of Raphael The art of design for the artist is to be more particularly sought for — one thing, and the art of design for seem strongly to doubt the capability the manufacturer is another. They of the persons appointed to make pur. rest not upon the same principles of chases for the National Gallery, as if invention ;-a facility of drawing, of they were chosen more for their rank, delineating by the hand, is indeed the than for taste, knowledge, and ability. elementary necessity to both—but we They also animadvert on “ the com- contend, and suppose we shall be positions of our commissions for de thought by many to deal in paradox, ciding on plans for public works," and that further than this necessity they suggest, that public money should be have little, we do not say nothing, to laid out on British works of art in the do with each other. They have not, highest and purest taste. In the com- in fact, the same objects, consequently pletion of public buildings, painting they should not, even in this elemen. and sculpture should be called in for tary part of their education, draw the the embellishment of architecture. same things. The object of manufacThe report thus terminates :-“ It tures, whatever they be, next to their will give your committee the sincerest essential utility, is ornament, admitting gratification if the result of their en- of infinite variety, and combination in quiry (in which they have been liber form and colour—that of the higher ally assisted by the artists of this arts to instruct and to please by com. country), tend in any degree to raise manding our sympathies. The ambithe character of a profession which is tious ornamentalist who will be half said to stand much higher among artist, will issue but tasteless, displeasforeign nations than in our own; to ing, incongruous productions, instead infuse, even remotely, into an indus- of works of completeness, referable to trious and enterprising people, a love the rules of his art, which are strict of art, and to teach them to respect and limited. We have been the more and venerate the name of artist." particular in the discussion of this

Such is the general subject matter point, because an idea seems to have of the report. We cannot but think been very general both with the comthat the committee have been ham- mittee and the evidence, that the study pered in the very outset, by having at of the antique, and the drawing from one time two subjects under consider statues, and casts of the Elgin marbles ation, instead of one. Arts and ma- in particular, are the very first things nufactures-each most important ! that are necessary for incipient manuWe would not undervalue either, and facturers, almost of every kind. We admit in some degree their connexion; differ in opinion_these are not things nor indeed is it difficult to show, as whose great object ever was or ought Cicero asserts, that there is a certain to be ornament. Nay, we will go farchain uniting all arts and sciences; ther and say, that they wander far but is it a vital one? One of identity from the right line, who would urge of nature ? Are they in the common even studies inferior, vastly inferior to acceptation of the terms, fine arts and this high antique, such as botanical manufactures, Siamese twins, with but drawing and knowledge ; for, in fact, one and the same nervous system ? what is the principle of ornament which

should engage the manufacturer: It for other places and materials (and is not mimetic-form or colour, or both therefore our very pleasure in them is together, but not shown in resem. destroyed by association), or unmcanblances. It is the very contrary to ing flowers instead of unmeaning patthat which is the artist's aim which terns-towns, villages_views from gives the ornamentalist the scope for annuals. Let us have all “ Byron's his genius. It may be capricious, only Beauties" on plates, dishes, and creamlet it avoid strict delineation or por jugs--but forbid it, art, that we should traiture of any thing in nature. We have the cartoons of Raphael upon really think this the essential differ- platters, or the frieze of the Parthenon ence between the arts and manufac- gallopading round a pudding dish, tures, at their commencement. The by way of “ bringing the arts home one is imitative of nothing, indeed, in to the poor man's door.” The wouldits higher kind ; whence from its con- be artist presumption of the manufacnexion with higher art, manufacture turer disgusts us above all things; is in some degree compelled to show its the very blinds for a pot-house, are link, as may sometimes be the case in transparencies of landscapes (that the finer arabesque, which will partly might have flourished, and perhaps be under the direction of the artist; have, on canvass at Somerset House, even then, if bird or beast appear, they or the Suffolk Street gallery), with should most capriciously terminate in a most unpleasing flippancy of exedelightful vagaries, out of all possibi. cution—and we turn from the vullity, and in vague dissimilarity.* Why garity of art, and in disgust for the do we delight in old china, and why moment think it scarcely worth a do we abominate all European ware, higher cost or labour. But to China and more than all our own? We dislike and would there were a Chinese wall it because of this jumbling and con- of separation, built up, towered and founding the principles of arts and guarded, to keep apart but for occamanufactures; we must be artists in sional and cautious embassies, the naall, and bad ones too. Our manufac- tion of arts from the nation of manutures will affect resemblances, and we factures. How gratifying to our eyes have on our earthenware and china, is old China ! The thin substance vulgar landscapes with vulgar figures, made purposely for the sensibility of or worse copies of better things, better the lip's delicate texture; and how

* We would not be here misunderstood. It might be said that in architecture, what is commonly the ornamental is the work of high art, as in friezes, &c.; and the Elgin marbles may be brought in illustration ; but here, we would observe that the architect is a higher artist, often himself a sculptor, and may choose or create his own ornament. And architecture and sculpture, being both highly inventive, go hand in hand for one object,-are really sister arts, and with painting, make up the three graces of the visible arts. So are there many things which may seem at the first view of the subject to come under ornament, which do not. Objects of commemoration, of reward, and presentation, of costly materials, wherein sculpture is the principal—such as vases, shields, &c., where the idea of daily use must never intrude; which idea of daily use, nevertheless, is the great merit and desideratum of the manufacture, and here is the great difference between them. We are aware that the uncostly materials of the Truscan vases may be objected against our argument ; but were they very uncostly ? Supposing them to have been so, they were of commemorative designs ; they were in their origin, historical or domestic memorials, and deposited, sacredly deposited, abstracted from all idea of private use ; por, even as they are, out of this view of their consecration (which stamps upon them a value we can scarcely divest them of) do we think the figures that encircle them are their best ornaments, and often for our own taste prefer less significant ornamental accompaniments, which would leave the impression of the beauty of the form of the object upon which they are designed more perfect. And if the shields of Achilles, or Hercules, as described by Homer and Hesiod, be objected against us, we throw ourselves back upon the same argument. They are commemorative and celestial gifts, not for use, but in the poet's conception, and indeed, where gods themselves were mingled with earthly combatants; and because the form of commemorative presentation to the Duke of Wellington, happens to have been a shield, will any one say, that the idea of its use, as such, at field-day, or even at another Waterloo, would not degrade it from its more sacred and depository character.

perfect and unerring the roundness of and lustrous are their complexions of The form, fitting only the most grace- natural enamel. Look at their little ful holding-how charming the colours roseate mouths unlike those of our omand pattern! And does not the old nivorous race,—did they ever open to china, you will say, furnish represen- aught grosser than æther or pometations of figures human and inhuman? granite seed ? and those eyes that Indeed it does, but such representa could behold nothing wrong, and those tives of species unknown! Dragons innocent feet, were they not made for with three claws, and dragons with that very peculiar, not quite earth, but five, that would turn zoological gar- soft-cushioned and aerated ground, dens into the Hesperides. And then, surfaced and inlaid with thinnest mohuman figures-delightful unreali- ther-of-pearl, and dotted with chinaties, so divested of humanity--they asters? We would enthusiastically pat may be inhabitants of the moon-who the very dragons on the back for guardcan imagine their anatomy under their ing them. Air, earth, and water, are embroidered wrappings? We gaze and all under the same shining ideality, wonder at the pale and peerless prin- and bow out of all ordinary rules of cesses of the celestial empire, un- our sublunary planet to do their pleaearthly, unfleshly substances ; chaste sure,

“ L'aura soave, e l'alba rugiadosa
L'acqua, la terra al suo favor sinctiena."

Blessed be the Genius of China, that, improve it, and delight in these things; with a happy indifference of laws, but each of them, for the advantage anatomical, geometrical, and perspec. of his art, will learn nothing. He had tivo, of the round or the square, avoids far better study the borders, pattern, similarity to any thing terrestrial, and and colour of old missals, and those proudly favours our benighted world beautiful works of arabesque, which with the translucent idealities of the abound and were executed upon true empire of porcelain. Now break principles of the ornamental. Herthrough the wall of enchantment! what culaneum and Pompeii have opened pictorial abominations do the mista- into day their treasures, and will give ken views of ornamental manufacturers still more, whose value is not in the produce! What will the china manu- pictures, but in decoration. Some facturer, the silk weaver, learn from years ago we helped to paint a roomi “ open” exhibitions, though Somer. for a friend from a drawing of one we set-House spread before him all her brought from Pompeii. It was of the treasures, and though he be put to brightest colours, blue, red, and yeldraw the Elgin Marbles from morn- low, and yet such was the assortment, ing till night? As a private indivi. that the effect was any thing but gaudual, indeed, he may have taste, and dy.*

* We are surprised to find so sensible a man as Mr Ramsay Richard Reinagle, theorising before the Committee, and we think upon rather a slippery foundation ; but if it be really correct, the lecture may do for the school, but surely the Committee wanted evidence and matter of fact of another kind. We are, however, disposed to dispute his very first position. He asserts that “ all elegant forms are derived from curvilinear ones ;" and " that any mere line, whether it be perpendicular or inclined to either side, and crossed by right-angles, presents no form of beauty." Does Mr Reinagle really believe that perpendicular lines in architecture, crossed at right-angles, are not beautiful ? What are architectural proportions but mostly perpendicular lines crossed at right-angles? What will Mr Cockrell say of the architrave? Mr Reinagle certainly offers specimens, in which, by the shortness of the intersecting line, it is difficult to imagine a figure! His parallel lines, he says, may be a gridiron. We deny it, for they are not a figure; but once make a figure of perpendicular lines, and you have, perhaps, as near a chance of a beautiful result as in your circular lines. We imagine the beauty of the figure wholly composed of right-angles, and the figure, the circle or oval, really to rest upon the same principle, the repetition of the parts opposite, as in a reflection. This conveys the idea of perfect order, which is always pleasing; and it has occurred to us that architectural drawings are often defective in this, that the point of sight is taken in a cross direction where the perspective is more complicated, and We may have whole sides of a room really think founded in common sense, papered from the lauded French school which is good taste, a great part of with landscape and figures, and how the enquiry and evidence goes to ever well done of their kind, the de- prove the necessity of giving the masigners, totally stepping out of their nufacturer the education of the artist. own line, and jumping into the artists', He is to learn geometry, botany, perproduce to the real eye of taste but spective, and we know not how many contemptible works; and at the same things of about as much use to him as time overlook the purpose of a room, Coptic or Arabic. We evidently see which is to enclose, and not perpetu. the bias of the Committee. The fine ally arrest our attention with views arts are to be finer than ever-high of the “ Bay of Naples,” or “ Ports. art to be interwoven into every kind mouth Harbour," or hunting scenes, of manufacture-painters shall no more which, erelong, make the eyes so monopolize. How many millions of ache, that we wish them away a thou- hands, fair and dirty, are now at work sand times a-day. Put your pictures in England, working in worsted and into frames, and know that you are weaving high art imported from Gerlooking at them in your room. And many, all on the great” known so is there an absurd affectation of and unknown“ principles;' and when flowers on carpets, pointers upon rugs, screens, carpets, sofas, cushions, and and an intermediate list of pictorial hangings, with a laudable national absurdities, turning from which, if ambition, shall be laid before the you chance to light on a Turkey Committee, we shall fancy them liftcarpet, how gratified is the eye by the ing up their hands in admiration of rich mixture of colours, and the repose the works they have called up, and of looking upon no objects. Yet, in congratulating each other like the Syspite of all our argument, which we racusan gossips

“ Praxione, here!
Look at this tapestry first, how finely woven-
How elegant-You'd think the gods had woven it.

Prar. Holy Minerva ! how these weavers work ;--
See how, like painters, they have wrought the hangings
With pictures large as life! How natural
They stand out; and how natural they move
Upon the wall-they look alive-Dot woven.
Well, man, it must be owned, is a wise creature l-
Ah, there he is, Adonis ! -wonderful !
All on a couch of silver.”— Elton from Theocritus.

From what has been said, it is evi- schools throughout the kingdom be dent that we consider the enquiry of adopted, wherein drawing may be the Committee, in some respect, has taught. That is the readiest mode of taken a misdirection. Yet we shall delineating objects; because we think be happy if their plan of establishing this power of drawing must be a great

where this great beauty of conspicuous order, column answering to column, and meeting in the arch, is overlooked. We should even prefer architectural views from the very centre. We do not see the beauty of Mr Reinagle's lines until he encloses them, and thereby making figures, and those figures will ever be most beautiful where there is the greatest correspondence between the parts. It is this principle of the one half of a figure being the repetition of the other half, that makes the great fascination of the kaleidescope, a little instrument that, in the hands of the ornamentalist of many manufacturers would be (and in some has been) of more use in one day, than years of study of the antique, or the finest specimens that ever adorned galleries of art. “ Ars est celare artem," is, however, no less to be observed here, than in all instances of taste. Order itself may be too precise, and too closely curb in and check variety. It is not necessary that this reflecting principle should be in every direction too exact, though it should have, perhaps, an approach throughout. It may be enough, as in vases, if it be laterally observed-perpendicularly, it may be but slightly, or even not all shown, as the subject may admit or require.

assistance, and, as it were, the trades. works (collections of arts called Exman's short-hand. He will certainly hibitions) and the great principles of most readily create forms who can art, that is, the principles of the truth most readily draw them. The evi. in art, the correctness of representadence upon the schools in France, Ber- tion, and those principles which are lin, and in Bavaria, particularly the admitted to be principles of beauty in latter, where there are no less than all ages, that there would be," &c. 33, is of very great value. We had Though the speaker undertakes to be forgotten that Burke regretted the his own interpreter, we should say, as neglect of any general instruction in in the case of Mr Puff, that “ the inart at our universities and public terpreter is the hardest to be underschools. We are happy to be refer- stood of the two." Dr Bowring is red to the opinion of so great a man. a universal linguist, and catches the We have ourselves frequently taken inconceivable idea in a moment, and some pains in this Magazine to impress answers, “ Obviously there is not." that sentiment upon the public, and Dr Bowring had before this been raupon the minds of those who only can ther willing to throw such indefinable bring any scheme to bear. The Fine examinations overboard, or at least Arts would thus chiefly be benefited, their elucidation upon other shoulders, and how would their acquisition adorn for being asked, " What is meant by and even elevate classical learning? those principles ?" first answers cerIf there be any one who for the most tainly by what they are not_" That effectual prosecution of his profession, general instruction which exhibits the requires the highest mental cultiva. great principles of art, connected with tion, it is the artist. This would give its history and progress.” How the rank and honour to the profession, and instruction in principles can be the not only necessarily create patrons, but principles themselves, we leave to those make them likewise nice judges. All to whom such replies are satisfactory; vulgarity would then be banished to but Dr Bowring, aware that he has the area of lower tastes, and arts and slipped but from words to words, and artists would assume their genuine and the exhibition of riding their circuit true dignity. The known learning of will not show any extraordinary skill some of the professors has already, we on the part of himself (the Commisthink, been beneficial. But will it not sioner), adroitly bolts over the pale, require a judgment of which we see no referring to Dr Waagen. “ Probably promise in the Report or evidence, I can hardly do better than refer to perhaps with the exception of that of the evidence of Dr Waagen, as given Baron von Klenze on the Schools of to this Committee last session, for corBavaria, in laying before the pupils, not rect definitions of the distinctions beindiscriminately every thing, but just tween the principles of art and their such things as may best suit their ul. practical application.” The reader terior destination? The mechanic may, however, spare himself the trouwill learn the art of delineation more ble of looking for what he will not completely by practising from com- find. It is a happy figure in rhetoric plicated machinery, than from the to quote or refer to authors (the more Apollo or Venus de Medicis. The foreign the better) who have never evidence of Dr Bowring will be read said one word upon the subject. A with interest-particularly that part rather unlearned friend of ours thus which relates to copyright. The want puts to silence a literary bore_“ You of separation of the subjects of arts know Jablouski puts that matter clear." and manufactures, is felt throughout We were surprised at his attainments, his evidence. We are not always sure till he assured us he knew nothing of to which his answers may apply; nor Jablouski, but had accidentally seen indeed of the direct drift of the ques. his name in a review that morning, tions. There is too much jargon about and that had he been conversing with “ the great principles of art," and we a politician he would with equal sucare sometimes surprised that any an- cess have used the name of Peter the swer should be given to questions as Great. unintelligible as the following—" Is We learn from Dr Bowring's evithere that connexion between such dence that the superior taste of French

« AnteriorContinuar »