Sir—I was much pleased with your ridicule of those shallow Critics, whose judgment, though often right as far as it goes, yet reaches only to inferior beauties; and who, unable to comprehend the whole, judge only by parts, and from thence determine the merit of extensive works. But there is another kind of Critic still worse, who judges by narrow rules, and those too often false, and which though they should be true, and founded on nature, will lead him but a very little way towards the just estimation of the sublime beauties in works of Genius; for whatever part of an art can be executed or criticised by rules, that part is no longer the work of Genius, which implies excellence out of the reach of rules. For my own part, I profess myself an Idler, and love to give my judgment, such as it is, from my immediate perceptions, without much fatigue of thinking; and I am of opinion, that if a man has not those perceptions right, it will be vain for him to endeavour to supply their place by rules; which may enable him to talk more learnedly, but not to distinguish more acutely. Another reason which has lessened my affection for thestudy of Criticism is, that Critics, so far as I have observed, debar themselves from receiving any pleasure from the polite arts, at the same time that they profess to love and admire them; for these rules being always uppermost, give them such a propensity to criticise, that instead of giving up the reins of their imagination into their author's hands, their frigid minds are employed in examining whether the performance be according to the rules of art.
To those who are resolved to be Critics in spite of nature, and at the same time have no great disposition to much reading and study, I would recommend to assume the character of Connoisseur, which may be purchased at a much cheaper rate than that of a Critic in poetry. The remembrance of a few names of Painters, with their general characters, and a few rules of the Academy, which they may pick up among the Painters, will go a great way towards making a very notable Connoisseur.
With a gentleman of this cast I visited last week the Cartoons at Hampton Court; he was just returned from Italy, a Connoisseur, of course, and of course his mouth full of nothing but the Grace of Raffaelle, the Purity of Domenichino, the Learning of Poussin, the Air of Guido, the greatness of Taste of the Caraccis, and the Sublimity and grand Contorno of Michel Angelo; with all the rest of the cant of Criticism, which he emitted with that volubility which generally those orators have, who annex no ideas to their words.
As we were passing through the rooms, in our way to the Gallery, I made him observe a whole length of Charles the First, by Vandyke, as a perfect representation of the character as well as the figure of the man. He agreed it was very fine, but it wanted spirit and contrast, and had not the flowing line, without which a figure could not possiblybe graceful. When we entered the Gallery, I thought I could perceive him recollecting his Rules by which he was to criticise Raffaelle. I shall pass over his observation of the boats being too little, and other criticisms of that kind, till we arrived at St.Paul preaching. "This," says he, "is esteemed the most excellent of all the Cartoons: what nobleness, what dignity there is in that figure of St. Paul! and yet what an addition to that nobleness could Raffaelle have given, had the art of Contrast been known in his time; but above all, the flowing line, which constitutes Grace and Beauty! You would not then have seen an upright figure standing equally on both legs, and both hands stretched forward in the same direction, and his drapery, to all appearance, without the least art of disposition." The following Picture is theCharge to Peter. "Here," says he, "are twelve upright figures; what a pity it is that Raffaelle was not acquainted with the pyramidal principle! he would then have contrived the figures in the middle to have been on higher ground, or the figures at the extremities stooping or lying; which would not only have formed the group into the shape of a pyramid, but likewise contrasted the standing figures. Indeed," added he, "I have often lamented that so great a genius as Raffaelle had not lived in this enlightened age, since the art has been reduced to principles, and had his education in one of the modern Academies; what glorious works might we then have expected from his divine pencil!"
I shall trouble you no longer with my friend's observations, which, I suppose, you are now able to continue by yourself. It is curious to observe, that at the same time that great admiration is pretended for a name of fixed reputation, objections are raised against those very qualities by which that great name was acquired.
These Critics are continually lamenting that Raffaelle had not the Colouring and Harmony of Rubens, or the Light and Shadow of Rembrandt, without considering how much the gay harmony of the former, and affectation of the latter, would take from the Dignity of Raffaelle; and yet Rubens had great Harmony, and Rembrandt understood Light and Shadow; but what may be an excellence in a lower class of Painting, becomes a blemish in a higher; as the quick, sprightly turn, which is the life and beauty of epigrammatic compositions, would but ill suit with the majesty of heroic Poetry.
To conclude; I would not be thought to infer from anything that has been said, that Rules are absolutely unnecessary, but to censure scrupulosity, a servile attention to minute exactness, which is sometimes inconsistent with higher excellence, and is lost in the blaze of expanded genius.
I do not know whether you will think Painting a general subject. By inserting this letter, perhaps you will incur the censure a man would deserve, whose business being to entertain a whole room, should turn his back on a company, and talk to a particular person.
I am, Sir, etc.
Sir—Your acceptance of a former letter on Painting gives me encouragement to offer a few more sketches on the same subject.
Amongst the Painters and the writers on Painting there is one maxim universally admitted and continually inculcated.Imitate Natureis the invariable rule; but I know none who have explained in what manner this rule is to be understood; the consequence of which is, that every one takes it in the most obvious sense—that objects are represented naturally, when they have such relief that they seem real. It may appear strange, perhaps, to hear this sense of the rule disputed; but it must be considered, that if the excellency of a Painter consisted only in this kind of imitation, Painting must lose its rank, and be no longer considered as a liberal art, and sister to Poetry: this imitation being merely mechanical, in which the slowest intellect is always sure to succeed best; for the Painter of genius cannot stoop to drudgery, in which the understanding has no part; and what pretence has the Art to claim kindred with Poetry, but by its power over the imagination? To this power the Painter of genius directs his aim; in this sense he studies Nature, and often arrives at his end, even by being unnatural, in the confined sense of the word.
The grand style of Painting requires this minute attention to be carefully avoided, and must be kept as separate from it as the style of Poetry from that of History. Poetical ornaments destroy that air of truth and plainness which ought to characterise History; but the very being of Poetry consists in departing from this plain narration, and adopting every ornament that will warm the imagination. To desire to see the excellencies of each style united, to mingle the Dutch with the Italian School, is to join contrarieties which cannot subsist together, and which destroy the efficacy of each other. The Italian attends only to the invariable, the great and general ideas which are fixed and inherent in universal Nature; the Dutch, on the contrary, to literal truth and a minute exactness in the detail, as I may say, of Nature, modified by accident. The attention to these petty peculiarities is the very cause of this naturalness so much admired in the Dutch pictures, which, if we suppose it to be a beauty is certainly of a lower order, that ought to give place to a beauty of a superior kind, since one cannot be obtained but by departing from the other.
If my opinion were asked concerning the works of Michel Angelo, whether they would receive any advantage from possessing this mechanical merit, I should not scruple to say they would lose, in a great measure, the effect which they now have on every mind susceptible of great and noble ideas. His works may be said to be all genius and soul; and why should they be loaded with heavy matter, which can only counteract his purpose by retarding the progress of the imagination?
If this opinion should be thought one of the wild extravagancies of enthusiasm, I shall only say, that those who censure it are not conversant in the works of the greatMasters. It is very difficult to determine the exact degree of enthusiasm that the arts of Painting and Poetry may admit. There may perhaps be too great an indulgence, as well as too great a restraint of imagination; and if the one produces incoherent monsters, the other produces what is full as bad, lifeless insipidity. An intimate knowledge of the passions and good sense, but not common sense, must at last determine its limits. It has been thought, and I believe with reason, that Michel Angelo sometimes transgressed those limits; and I think I have seen figures by him, of which it was very difficult to determine whether they were in the highest degree sublime or extremely ridiculous. Such faults may be said to be the ebullition of genius; but at least he had this merit, that he never was insipid; and whatever passion his works may excite, they will always escape contempt.
What I have had under consideration is the sublimest style, particularly that of Michel Angelo, the Homer of Painting. Other kinds may admit of this naturalness, which of the lowest kind is the chief merit; but in Painting, as in Poetry, the highest style has the least of common nature.
One may safely recommend a little more enthusiasm to the modern Painters; too much is certainly not the vice of the present age. The Italians seem to have been continually declining in this respect from the time of Michel Angelo to that of Carlo Maratti, and from thence to the very bathos of insipidity to which they are now sunk; so that there is no need of remarking, that where I mentioned the Italian Painters in opposition to the Dutch, I mean not the moderns, but the heads of the old Roman and Bolognian Schools; nor did I mean to include in my idea of an Italian Painter, the Venetian School, which may be said to be theDutch part of the Italian Genius. I have only to add a word of advice to the Painters—that however excellent they may be in painting naturally, they would not flatter themselves very much upon it; and to the Connoisseurs, that when they see a cat or a fiddle painted so finely, that, as the phrase is,it looks as if you could take it up, they would not for that reason immediately compare the Painter to Raffaelle and Michel Angelo.
Sir—Discoursing in my last letter on the different practice of the Italian and Dutch Painters, I observed that "the Italian Painter attends only to the invariable, the great, and general ideas, which are fixed and inherent in universal nature."
I was led into the subject of this letter by endeavouring to fix the original cause of this conduct of the Italian Masters. If it can be proved that by this choice they selected the most beautiful part of the creation, it will show how much their principles are founded on reason, and, at the same time, discover the origin of our ideas of beauty.
I suppose it will be easily granted that no man can judge whether any animal be beautiful in its kind, or deformed, who has seen only one of that species; this is as conclusive in regard to the human figure; so that if a man, born blind, were to recover his sight, and the most beautiful woman were brought before him, he could not determine whether she was handsome or not; nor if the most beautiful and most deformed were produced, could he any better determine to which he should give the preference, having seen only those two. To distinguish beauty, then, implies the having seen many individuals of that species. If it is asked, how is more skill acquired by the observation ofgreater numbers? I answer, that, in consequence of having seen many, the power is acquired, even without seeking after it, of distinguishing between accidental blemishes and excrescences which are continually varying the surface of Nature's works, and the invariable general form which Nature most frequently produces, and always seems to intend in her productions.
Thus amongst the blades of grass or leaves of the same tree, though no two can be found exactly alike, the general form is invariable: a Naturalist, before he chose one as a sample, would examine many; since if he took the first that occurred, it might have by accident or otherwise such a form as that it would scarce be known to belong to that species; he selects as the Painter does, the most beautiful, that is, the most general form of nature.
Every species of the animal as well as the vegetable creation may be said to have a fixed or determinate form, towards which Nature is continually inclining, like various lines terminating in the centre; or it may be compared to pendulums vibrating in different directions over one central point: and as they all cross the centre, though only one passes through any other point, so it will be found that perfect beauty is oftener produced by Nature than deformity: I do not mean than deformity in general, but than any one kind of deformity. To instance in a particular part of a feature; the line that forms a ridge of the nose is beautiful when it is straight; this, then, is the central form, which is oftener found than either concave, convex, or any other irregular form that shall be proposed. As we are then more accustomed to beauty than deformity, we may conclude that to be the reason why we approve and admire it, as we approve and admire customs and fashions of dress for no other reason than that we are used to them; so thatthough habit and custom cannot be said to be the cause of beauty, it is certainly the cause of our liking it; and I have no doubt but that if we were more used to deformity than beauty, deformity would then lose the idea now annexed to it, and take that of beauty: as if the whole world should agree, thatyesandnoshould change their meaning;yeswould then deny, andnowould affirm.
Whoever undertakes to proceed further in this argument, and endeavours to fix a general criterion of beauty respecting different species, or to show why one species is more beautiful than another, it will be required from him first to prove that one species is really more beautiful than another. That we prefer one to the other, and with very good reason, will be readily granted; but it does not follow from thence that we think it a more beautiful form; for we have no criterion of form by which to determine our judgment. He who says a swan is more beautiful than a dove, means little more than that he has more pleasure in seeing a swan than a dove, either from the stateliness of its motions, or its being a more rare bird; and he who gives the preference to the dove, does it from some association of ideas of innocence which he always annexes to the dove; but if he pretends to defend the preference he gives to one or the other by endeavouring to prove that this more beautiful form proceeds from a particular gradation of magnitude, undulation of a curve, or direction of a line, or whatever other conceit of his imagination he shall fix on, as a criterion of form, he will be continually contradicting himself, and find at last that the great Mother of Nature will not be subjected to such narrow rules. Among the various reasons why we prefer one part of her works to another, the most general, I believe, is habit and custom; custom makes, in a certain sense, white black, and blackwhite; it is custom alone determines our preference of the colour of the Europeans to the Ethiopians, and they, for the same reason, prefer their own colour to ours. I suppose nobody will doubt, if one of their Painters were to paint the Goddess of Beauty, but that he would represent her black, with thick lips, flat nose, and woolly hair; and, it seems to me, he would act very unnaturally if he did not, for by what criterion will anyone dispute the propriety of his idea? We indeed say that the form and colour of the European is preferable to that of the Ethiopian; but I know of no other reason we have for it, but that we are more accustomed to it. It is absurd to say that beauty is possessed of attractive powers, which irresistibly seize the corresponding mind with love and admiration, since that argument is equally conclusive in favour of the white and the black philosophers.
The black and white nations must, in respect of beauty, be considered as of different kinds, at least a different species of the same kind; from one of which to the other, as I observed, no inference can be drawn.
Novelty is said to be one of the causes of beauty. That novelty is a very sufficient reason why we should admire is not denied; but because it is uncommon, is it therefore beautiful? The beauty that is produced by colour, as when we prefer one bird to another, though of the same form, on account of its colour, has nothing to do with the argument, which reaches only to form. I have here considered the word Beauty as being properly applied to form alone. There is a necessity of fixing this confined sense; for there can be no argument, if the sense of the word is extended to everything that is approved. A rose may as well be said to be beautiful because it has a fine smell, as a bird because of its colour. When we apply the wordBeauty, we do not mean always by it a more beautiful form, but something valuable on account of its rarity, usefulness, colour, or any other property. A horse is said to be a beautiful animal; but had a horse as few good qualities as a tortoise, I do not imagine that he would then be deemed beautiful.
A fitness to the end proposed is said to be another cause of beauty; but supposing we were proper judges of what form is the most proper in an animal to constitute strength or swiftness, we always determine concerning its beauty, before we exert our understanding to judge of its fitness.
From what has been said, it may be inferred, that the works of Nature, if we compare one species with another, are all equally beautiful, and that preference is given from custom or some association of ideas; and that, in creatures of the same species, beauty is the medium or centre of all its various forms.
To conclude, then, by way of corollary: if it has been proved that the Painter, by attending to the invariable and general ideas of Nature, produce beauty, he must, by regarding minute particularities, and accidental discriminations, deviate from the universal rule, and pollute his canvas with deformity.
Printed byWalter Scott,Felling, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.
InSHILLINGMonthly Volumes, Square 8vo.Well printed on fine toned paper, with Red-line Border, and strongly bound in Cloth. Each Volume contains from 300 to 350 pages.With Introductory Notices byWilliam Sharp,Mathilde Blind,Walter Lewin,John Hogben,A. J. Symington,Joseph Skipsey,Eva Hope,John Richmond,Ernest Rhys,Percy E. Pinkerton,Mrs. Garden,Dean Carrington,Dr. J. Bradshaw,Frederick Cooper,Hon. Roden Noel,J. Addington Symonds,G. Willis Cooke,Eric Mackay,Eric S. Robertson,William Tirebuck,Stuart J. Reid,Mrs. Freiligrath Kroeker,J. Logie Robertson, M.A.,Samuel Waddington,etc.,etc.
ALREADY ISSUED—
LIFE OF LONGFELLOW.By Professor ERIC S. ROBERTSON.
"The story of the poet's life is well told. . . . The remarks on Longfellow as a translator are excellent."—Saturday Review."No better life of Longfellow has been published."—Glasgow Herald.
"The story of the poet's life is well told. . . . The remarks on Longfellow as a translator are excellent."—Saturday Review.
"No better life of Longfellow has been published."—Glasgow Herald.
LIFE OF COLERIDGE.By HALL CAINE.
TheScotsmansays—"It is a capital book. . . . Written throughout with spirit and great literary skill. The bibliography is unusually full, and adds to the value of the work."
TheScotsmansays—"It is a capital book. . . . Written throughout with spirit and great literary skill. The bibliography is unusually full, and adds to the value of the work."
LIFE OF DICKENS.By FRANK T. MARZIALS.
"An interesting and well-written biography."—Scotsman.
"An interesting and well-written biography."—Scotsman.
LIFE OF DANTE GABRIEL ROSSETTI.By JOSEPH KNIGHT.
LIFE OF SAMUEL JOHNSON.By Col. F. GRANT.
LIFE OF DARWIN.By G. T. BETTANY.
CHARLOTTE BRONTË.By AUGUSTINE BIRRELL.
LIFE OF THOMAS CARLYLE.By RICHARD GARNETT, LL.D.
LIFE OF ADAM SMITH.By R. B. HALDANE, M.P.
LIFE OF KEATS.By W. M. ROSSETTI.
Ready October 25th.
LIFE OF SHELLEY.By WILLIAM SHARP.
To be followed on November 25th by
LIFE OF SMOLLETT.By DAVID HANNAY.
Volumes in preparation byAustin Dobson,Canon Venables,James Sime,Edmund Gosse,Professor Knight,Professor Yonge,John Stuart Blackie, etc.
Volumes in preparation byAustin Dobson,Canon Venables,James Sime,Edmund Gosse,Professor Knight,Professor Yonge,John Stuart Blackie, etc.
LIBRARY EDITION OF "GREAT WRITERS."
An Issue of all the Volumes in this Series will be published, printed on large paper of extra quality, in handsome binding, Demy 8vo, price 2s. 6d. per volume.
An Issue of all the Volumes in this Series will be published, printed on large paper of extra quality, in handsome binding, Demy 8vo, price 2s. 6d. per volume.
"A sound journal, the monthly advent of which will be awaited with feelings of satisfaction and pleasure."—Bath Chronicle."To the student of nature who has had few opportunities of study, just such a magazine as this supplies a felt want. We trust that an appreciative public will ensure the success of this new magazine."—Midlothian Journal."This neatly got-up magazine seems to supply a vacant place in the ranks of serial literature, and to supply it well."—Nottingham Guardian.
"A sound journal, the monthly advent of which will be awaited with feelings of satisfaction and pleasure."—Bath Chronicle.
"To the student of nature who has had few opportunities of study, just such a magazine as this supplies a felt want. We trust that an appreciative public will ensure the success of this new magazine."—Midlothian Journal.
"This neatly got-up magazine seems to supply a vacant place in the ranks of serial literature, and to supply it well."—Nottingham Guardian.
Part III. Ready October 25th.
Annual Subscription—Seven Shillings. Post free.
Annual Subscription—Seven Shillings. Post free.
London:Walter Scott, 24 Warwick Lane, Paternoster Row.
Footnotes[1]Lib. 2, in Timæum Platonis, as cited by Junius de Pictura Veterum.—R.[2]Essays, p. 252, edit. 1625.[3]"Those," says Quintilian, "who are taken with the outward show of things, think that there is more beauty in persons who are trimmed, curled, and painted, than uncorrupt nature can give; as if beauty were merely the effect of the corruption of manners."—R.[4]Sed non qui maxime imitandus, etiam solus imitandus est Quintilian.[5]Dr. Goldsmith.[6]"Nulla ars, non alterius artis, aut mater, aut popinqua est."—Tertullas cited byJunius.[7]"Omnes artes quæ ad humanitatem pertinent, habent quoddam commune vinculum, et quasi cognatione inter se continentur."—Cicero.[8]"Put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground."—Exodusiii. 5.[9]DiscoursesII. and VI.[10]This was inadvertently said. I did not recollect the admirable treatiseOn the Sublime and Beautiful.[11]Sir William Chambers.[12]In the Loggia dei Lauzi at Florence.—Note, Ed.[13]Discourse III.[14]In Ben Jonson's "Catiline" we find this aphorism, with a slight variation:—"A serpent, ere he comes to be a dragon,Must eat a bat."[15]The addition ofacciodenotes contempt, or some deformity or imperfection attending the person to whom it is applied.[16]"Towers and Battlements it seesBosom'd high in tufted trees."—Milton, L'All.[17]Mr. Hodges.[18]James Harris.[19]Pictura quoque non alium exitum fecit, postquam Ægyptiorum audacia tam magnæ artis compendiariam invenit.[20]Che Raffaelle non ebbe quest' arte da natura, ma per lungo studio.[21]Unfortunately for mankind, thesewerethe last words pronounced by this great Painter from the Academical chair. He died about fourteen months after this Discourse was delivered.
[1]Lib. 2, in Timæum Platonis, as cited by Junius de Pictura Veterum.—R.
[2]Essays, p. 252, edit. 1625.
[3]"Those," says Quintilian, "who are taken with the outward show of things, think that there is more beauty in persons who are trimmed, curled, and painted, than uncorrupt nature can give; as if beauty were merely the effect of the corruption of manners."—R.
[4]Sed non qui maxime imitandus, etiam solus imitandus est Quintilian.
[5]Dr. Goldsmith.
[6]"Nulla ars, non alterius artis, aut mater, aut popinqua est."—Tertullas cited byJunius.
[7]"Omnes artes quæ ad humanitatem pertinent, habent quoddam commune vinculum, et quasi cognatione inter se continentur."—Cicero.
[8]"Put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground."—Exodusiii. 5.
[9]DiscoursesII. and VI.
[10]This was inadvertently said. I did not recollect the admirable treatiseOn the Sublime and Beautiful.
[11]Sir William Chambers.
[12]In the Loggia dei Lauzi at Florence.—Note, Ed.
[13]Discourse III.
[14]In Ben Jonson's "Catiline" we find this aphorism, with a slight variation:—
"A serpent, ere he comes to be a dragon,Must eat a bat."
"A serpent, ere he comes to be a dragon,Must eat a bat."
[15]The addition ofacciodenotes contempt, or some deformity or imperfection attending the person to whom it is applied.
[16]
"Towers and Battlements it seesBosom'd high in tufted trees."—Milton, L'All.
"Towers and Battlements it seesBosom'd high in tufted trees."—Milton, L'All.
[17]Mr. Hodges.
[18]James Harris.
[19]Pictura quoque non alium exitum fecit, postquam Ægyptiorum audacia tam magnæ artis compendiariam invenit.
[20]Che Raffaelle non ebbe quest' arte da natura, ma per lungo studio.
[21]Unfortunately for mankind, thesewerethe last words pronounced by this great Painter from the Academical chair. He died about fourteen months after this Discourse was delivered.
Transcriber's NoteObvious punctuation and spelling errors repaired.