Contemporary English Artists
Matthew Smith. (Penguin Modern Painters. 2s. 6d.)
I AM not convinced that Matthew Smith is a good draughtsman, despite Sickert's opinion to the contrary, quoted by Philip Hendy in his preface to this excellently produced handbook. I feel very strongly that improved drawing would rescue much of Smith's unsuccessful work, and turn many a miss into a hit ; for Smith is a painter in oils of very great quality, and since it becomes increasingly clear that the best work of the generation which succeeds him is in watercolour and gouache, so Matthew Smith is the more to be valued. Paint as paint does not greatly affect those outstanding artists now in their forties, with the exception of Ivon Hitchens and Victor Pas- more ; Paul Nash is primarily a watercolourist, so is Sutherland, so also are David Jones and Edward Burra ; Henry Moore is primarily a sculptor. Matthew Smith is a painter in oils first and last, and the oilpaint to him is second only to colour in importance, far more important than form, and taking precedence over composition.
Herein lies his strength and his weakness. His over-rapid execution together with formal carelessness and violently orchestrated colour may, to make a musical parallel, produce something as tawdry as the "Rhapsody in Blue "; on the other hand, these same qualities com- bined with his vigour, opulent sensuality and innate painterliness may produce painting as rich and breathtaking as "Boris Goudonov." Matthew Smith's preoccupation with surface quality and the luxurious juxtaposition of large masses of rich colour, is French in essence, and may explain why he is acknowledged in Paris to a greater extent than other contemporary Englishmen. For the French cannot see anything in the English tradition except for a passing admission that Turner and Constable had talent. Blake and Hogarth are not mentioned in good society. In spite of the fact that Smith is a Lancashire man, he is the product of Delacroix' barbaric opulence, of Gauguin's Latin fire, and finally of the violence of " Les Fauves." He is less native than any English painter alive, in that he does not suffer the sunstroke that seems to strike those northern painters who embrace the south.
Smith is a hit 'or miss painter; he can produce a daub and very frequently does, but when he brings it off, it comes off with a bang. The reason for the bang is that he has greatness of heart, passion, visual courage and a fine disregard for that scourge of English art, the canons of good taste. His best work is not to be withstood. The book itself is divided into equal sections of colour and monochrome reproductions ; those latter of precious little value in assessing Smith, for without either his remarkable colour or his paint quality all his structural carelessness is underlined, a particularly regrettable fact in the case of many of his portraits. The colour plates are well done. " Pale Pink Roses," " Lilies and Delphinium " and " Lilies and Golden Rod " are of his best flowerpieces. " The Little Seamstress " and " Couleur de Rose " are good examples of 'his figure painting. The " Model Waking' is a frightful flop. I am sorry there are not more landscapes in colour, and particularly sorry that the mag- nificent " Woman with a Fan " is in black and white. There is an interesting comparison to be made between Smith's French use of colour and the English method of Sutherland. Both ignore the tonal approach of Degas or Sickert, and both at first sight appear to be often arbitrary in their choice of local colour, both relate colour naturally to the chosen subject in a higher key than do their more prosaic brothers, and both for different reasons exploit 'the emotive force of primary colours. Smith does this sensually, Sutherland
Previous page
