FINE ARTS.

SCIENTIFIC METHOD OF TEACHING DRAWING.

TEE " Lesson in Drawing," last week, terminated in a discourse on the general principles of the art of Design, which was not reported ; that part of the conversation being remote from our immediate purpose of practically demonstrating the inefficiency of the common method of teaching drawing: it concluded, however, with a promise to " Papa"— whom we must now call by name, Mr. fact—to search out a teacher according to the scientific method, and to talk over the matter with him and the school drawingmaster, Mr. Smudge. We subjoin a report of so much of the second conversation as suffices to complete the dis- cussion of the subject.

Fact. Good morning, Mr. Spectator ! I'm glad to see you, for I have some doubts to be resolved. But first, pray tell me, have you found a teacher of drawing after your own heart ? Spec. Yes, Mr. Fact ; I'm happy to say I have ; and where it was least to be expected, in a college—University College I mean. An advertisement of a class of scientific drawing, under the direction of Mr. G. B. MOORE, caught my eye ; and I repaired to Gower Street, and had an interview with Mr. MOORE, whose view of the subject is sound and comprehensive ; and who, I was gratified to find, has adopted the plan of teaching perspective-drawing from models as well as diagrams. You would have seen in his class-room the simple mode of demonstra- tion which you practised the other day—drawing a solid subject on a transparent glass : in short, he teaches drawing upon the principles of science, which is the only true basis.

Fact. Good. Now for my queries. I've been looking at a great many pictures, prints, lithographic drawing-books, &c.; and I can't find, a straight line in any one of them : indeed, the only drawings I have met with, having straight lines, are those of architecture and ma- chinery, which are by no means so pleasing to the eye as " pictu- resque sketches ": therefore it strikes me that your " straight line" system may do very well for architects and engineers, but is not suited to sketching scenes from nature, nor necessary for drawing common objects, such as the desk you set before us : indeed, Mr. Smudge tells me that he could very soon put my son in the way of drawing real objects with more taste than your " carpenter-fashion," as he calls it. But he'll be here presently, to speak for lumsel£ Spec. Your objection Is pertinent ; but you have been confounding the end with the beginning of art, sad mixing up indications of distant scenes and many objects with exact representations of single objects near the eye. In a landscape there is scarcely a straight line ; m a street view, even, the presence of lines ought not to be apparent : in- deed there is no such thing as an actual line in nature. Outline is but the boundary or edge of substance defining the forms of things ; and in a complete picture it ought not to be visible : it is a mere fiction of art.

Fact. This sounds like paradox. You insist upon a boy learning to draw what you say ought not to be seen, and, indeed, does not exist ; and you contradict the evidence of my own senses, by telling me there is no such thing as outline in nature. Pray explain. Spec. In looking at any object, the eye naturally seeks to ascertain its form ; and that being strongly relieved against the sky—the wall of a room, or whatever the " background " may be—the eye is made strongly sensible of the opposition of substance to the atmospheric medium around its outer edge : hence, the impression of its form is conveyed by the outline, as it is termed, or outer edge of substance ; but this, so far from being more prominent than the rest of the mass, is in reality less ,so, because the aberration of the rays of light rather softens the rigidity of the edge. In proof of this, you have only to look at a painting or drawing where the outlines are hard : the buildings seem as if they stuck to the sky, or were inlaid in the distance, instead of stand- ing out in solid relief. For instance, a globe defined by a line round it looks like a hemisphere. Fact. Well, this may be true as regards pictured representation, but I can't believe it of the reality. I've often been struck by the bold relief of a church-steeple on a bright moonlight night, and looked attentively at the forms of the outline cutting against the blue sky, sharper than I ever saw represented in a picture. Till you can show me a stone form without an outline, I'm sceptical. Spec. (Looking from the window.) Then be convinced. Here's a lucky burst of sunlight come opportunely, like a ray of truth, to con- vince your understanding. Look at that newly-erected portico oppo- site : on the side next the sun, the entablature, or cornice, projects in the centre : do you see any line marking the projection on that side ? Fact. No, 1 certainly do not Spec. Yet the shadow makes it evident on the other. Fact. Clearly. But how is this ? Spec. What ! you won't be convinced without a reason ? Why, there is no contrast of colour or opposition of substance to air in this case :

the projecting block is of the same hue, tint, and substance, as the re- ceding one; and the light shining equally on both, the edge or boundary of form is lost.

Fact. This is demonstrative, certainly ; and I'm bound to be con- vinced.

Spec. I see your reason is, but your senses are not. Now, look at- tentively at that smoky brick chimney relieved against the bright at- mosphere, and watch attentively the corner of the mass of brick-work. Do you see a wiry edge? Fact. No ; it is as you say : the edge is rather softened, and it is the solid mass that makes the impression. But now about the drawing of lines. Spec. The first step in art is to learn to draw a firm and correct outline ; the last is to lose it. To sketch well, that is to indicate forms

with intelligence, you most be able to define them accurately. Sketch- ing is the short-hand of art: by its means the artist puts down the leading markings that convey the characteristic points of an object or scene ; and a few touches full of meaning serve to present the principal features. In the sketch of an accomplished artist, every line has its purpose and effect in representing other lines ; but there are hundreds of sketches," so called, that are mere counterfeits—burlesque imitations of the manner of sketching adopted by some clever man.

Fact. But since the " short-hand of art" is so expressive and intel- ligible, why may not a boy be taught that at once ? That, I take it, is the course Mr. Smudge adopts. I wish he were here, by the way.

Spec. Because, to study form, and acquire the art of delineating it correctly and with facility, a knowledge of the principles by which solid objects can be imitated on a flat surface by lines, is necessary ; and this can only be attained by first defining them accurately, on a large scale. Idr. Smudge begins to teach learners to imitate what artists of expe- rience have laboured for years to acquire: of course the tyro can only copy their peculiarities mechanically, without knowing why or where- fore : he says he teaches them the reason afterwards ; but this is setting out at the end and going back to the beginning.

(Servant announces Mr Smudge.)

Fact. Mr. Smudge, you're come in good time to defend your plan of teaching, which has been sorely assailed by Mr. Spectator here. (Intro- duces the parties.) I must leave the defence to you now. Smudge. I hear, Mr. Spectator, that you have been bearing hard upon the teachers of the old school ; to whom, nevertheless, we owe the un- rivalled excellence of our water-colour painters. The mania for science has invaded the realm of art, and we shall have mechanical draughts- men making diagrams, instead of painters of feeling producing pictures. I should have thought that you, Mr. Spectator, as one professing to direct public taste, would have resisted the intrusion of a rabble rout of mechanics into the temple hitherto sacred to Genius— Spec. And its mechanical mimics, let me add. Pardon the interrup- tion, Mr. Smudge : but I believe you had finished the sentence. Do not let us take too wide a field for discussion, however : the object of this interview is to enable Mr. Fact to decide between two different methods of teaching—the one practised by you, and that advocated by me; and as time is precious to all of us, we will proceed at once to the point, if you please. Perhaps, Mr. Smudge, you will be good enough to explain the rationale of your plan: the system which I advocate is per- haps known to you. Smudge. Oh yes ! it's architectural and engineering drawing, which you would have everybody learn—if they've patience. Spec. You do not quite understand my views, I perceive. The ob- ject being to teach every one to draw from nature or real objects, according to the rules of art, I propose that the pupils should begin by drawing a cube in perspective, first in outline, then with shadow ; and proceed thence to solid forms of more complex shapes, rectilinear and curvilinear, until they are able to draw any object of still life ; when they would go to nature ; applying the principle which is the founda- tion of my theory—namely, that a thorough understanding of the con- formation and structure of an object should precede the attempt to delineate it.

Smudge. Ah ! you wish to reduce a fine art to a mechanical one- " By line and rule works many a fool."

Spec. No: I would substitute an exact and intelligent definition of objects according to the rules of art, for a mechanical imitation of other's mannerisms.

Smudge. At best, you would substitute rigid exactness for taste and fancy. Spec. Not at all : I desire to give taste, which is selection, a ground- work of exact knowledge—to place fancy on a pedestal of reality. Smudge. Painting and sketching depend more on feeling than exact- ness : the general impression is all that is required of the artist of genius. Leave minute accuracy to mechanical draughtsmen, such as you would make. Fact. I think I perceive the difference between your systems, gentlemen : you, Mr. Spectator, would educate the artist by making him a draughtsman first; whereas you, Mr. Smudge, think this needless. I confess I prefer the method of Mr. Spectator.

Smudge. Sir, the scheme is visionary—the thing is impossible. Such a plan would make draughtsmen, and nothing else. Spec. You forget, Mr. Smudge, that TURNER, who studied under MALToN, one of the great masters of perspective, was taught on this principle : his early architectural drawings are beautiful studies of perspective, and to that he owes his power of producing aerial effect. Smudge. But they are not made of straight lines. Spec. We have only seen his picturesque studies, not his studies of architectural detail: they must have straight lines, I take it, just as well as perspective diagrams. Smudge. But where will you find amateurs—young ladies, for in- stance, who want to paint flowers and butterflies—willing to learn in this way? Is it necessary even? Spec. To prove that it is necessary, you have only to look through any young lady's album ; where you will see finely-coloured flowers without form or substance, and landscapes made up of little niggling touches as though they bad been drawn from an engraving, (which is probably the case,) or smeared with black lead rubbed on with the finger. Can you call this drawing? It is not art. Smudge. It is pretty amusement for girls. Would you fill the young ladies' albums with chairs and tables ?

Spec. I again repeat, I would teach them to understand what they draw, and make out its form according to the science of art.

Smudge. That sounds very plausible ; but supposing you had taught a pupil to draw a room full of furniture, how would you teach him to sketch a tree ?

_Spec. Why, I should direct him to study it first ; that is, to observe well the forms of the masses of foliage ; then to note the direction of the great limbs, and the ramifications of the branches of the individual tree ; and afterwards to draw a tuft of leaves, and a bough in large, that he might get a knowledge of the shape of the leaves and the peculiar forms of the branches, which of course would determine the

shape of the outline and the forms of the shadows : this done, he would sit down before the tree at the proper distance, and indicate the charac-

teristics with that freedom of hand which he had attained by his pre- vious practice, and with such an effect of reality as his knowledge of light and shade and perspective would enable him to convey. Smudge. He'd make a cold, wooden diagram, Sir. Spec. It is not to be expected that he would succeed in doing at first what painters can with difficulty accomplish after years of study and

practice—namely, to convey the pensile lightness and elasticity of masses of foliage : but he would the sooner succeed in doing this for understanding the conformation of the tree and the principles of art : at all events, he would not make the tree like a haycock, a heap of furze, an overgrown cabbage, or a pyramid of wigs.

Fact. Mr. Spectator, I'm of your opinion. But I should like you to hear Mr. Smudge expound his theory, which he has not yet done.

Smudge. Sir, my theory is practice. I put before the pupil the best examples of imitations of nature, and teach him to copy them ; when he

has copied sufficiently, he will be able to imitate nature himself; and then will be time enough to know something of the principles of art, which have been exemplified in what he has been studying. The best lesson for the pupil is to see the master draw.

Spec. And not to know on what principles he proceeds?

Smudge. Many of oar best artists cannot tell why they do such and such things. Nor is it necessary : they look at nature, and try to imitate what they see ; and if they succeed, what does it matter how ? That, Sir, is the intuition of feeling—the inspiration of genius, which is not to be revealed or understood.

Spec. So it seems. Yet art has its laws as well as nature ; and I think they ought to be known.

Smudge. A few general principles are all that is requisite ; but the eye and the hand, Sir, do it all.

Spec. There we are at issue: knowledge and understanding are the true bases of art.

Fact. Well, gentlemen, I see you will never agree ; and as I am de- cidedly in favour of Mr. Spectator's system, we'll dismiss the subject for the present.