English Art
By ANTHONY BLUNT
THE international exhibitions which have taken place annually at Burlington House for the last six years have called into existence a, new class of art literature. There have in the past been books written as popular guides to given exhibi- tions of paintings, but in general these have taken the form of "Half-hours in the National Gallery" or "Round the Louvre in Eighty Days," in which the author's object has been to put the maximum amount of information about painting of all kinds at the disposal of the reader in the mini- mum Utile. The intent of the new literature is more partisan. Each year it has been thought necessary to prove to the public that, though by comparison with previous exhibitions it might appear that the current one was of less interest, this was an illusion, and that there were undiscovered beauties in the school singled out for celebration that year which merited the deepest study and the highest praise.
The object, in fact, of these ad hoc publications has been to enable visitors to each exhibition to derive from it the greatest possible amount of pleasure. But, since there are different kinds of visitors and different kinds of paintings, the means by which this aim may be attained are various ; and as they are all used in different degrees by those who have written this year on English painting it will be as well to consider them separately as a preliminary to the particular study of these authors.
There seem to be three principal methods by which a critic can increase the pleasure which a visitor can derive from an exhibition such as that of British Art just opening at Burling- ton House. The first is the direct conveyance of enthusiasm ; Vie second is the historical method, and the third is aesthetic analysis.
The first of these methods is like Charity, to the extent that without it the other two are nothing worth. Unless we feel that the author has really looked at the paintings of which he writes, and that he has really enjoyed them, it is impossible for us to attach much importance to the most ingenious of influence-tracing or the most subtle of pattern-elucidation. If he has discovered new facts about certain artists we may feel that his work will be of use to others who will bring it to life, but unless we feel that he was in sympathy with his sub- ject we cannot help mistrusting any general interpretation which he may put on these facts. The means which a writer uses to convey his own enthusiasm are of a subtlety so great that if we could explain them we should be a long way towards explaining the fundamental qualities of language and literature.
The second, or historical, method is one which nearly all writers on painting use since it gives them a general plan for their work. But to use it aright a strict adherence to chronology is not enough. The writer must have a sense of the internal development of painting ; he must have -a keen eye for influences, and among influences he must be able to distinguish the fundamental from the superficial. In addition he must be capable of writing concise biographies of the artists with whom he, is dealing and he must show judgement in selecting only the relevant facts for mention. Finally he must have the gift of summing up the particular achievement of each artist Eo that the reader may know what qualities he is likely to find in the works of that artist.
This gift is also an essential for a writer pursuing the third method of persuasion. He may prefer to neglect chronology and write his history backwards or by jumping up and down the years, but he must in any case be 'able to put his finger on the essential quality of each artist whom he discusses, or his aesthetic analyses will be of little utility. Further, this method, which is the most difficult of all, requires clarity of thought and the greatest simplicity of language consonant with intelligibility. It is notoriously easy to boom on in
A Short History of English Painting. By Erie Underwood. (Faber. 7s. 6d.) A Short History of English Sculpture. By Eric Underwood. (Faber. 108. 6d.) An Introduction to English Painting. By John Rothenstein. (Cassell. 10s. 6d.) A Short History of Painting In England. By Miles F. do Montmorency. (Dent. 68.) - • - ' English Watercolours. ' By-Laurence Birlyoh: * 'is: ad.-)
high-sounding abstractions without risking the earthy Contact of definitions.
To these desidenvukl in the author there are to be added certain material conditions which the book itself must satisfy. It must have as many illustrations as possible ; these must be printed in clear half-tone and not in any of those seductive techniques which cajole the eye, but confuse the mind ; the works chosen for reproduction must be typical of the artists Nils() produced them ; they should if possible be chosen from among those not already familiar to every reader, and the plates should be supplied with accurate indications of the whereabouts of the objects illustrated, for the convenience of those who wish to pursue further research.
Mr. Underwood, in , writing of English painting in one volume and of English sculpture in another, uses the historical method in the sense that he begins at the begiuning end goes to somewhere near the end. But he neglects all the other methods of appeal. There is no evidence in either book that he has ever looked at any of the works of which he writes with either care or pleasure. His biographies of living painters are models of anecdotal ineptitude and in his attempts at aesthetics in speaking or sculpture he sinks as low as the old suggestion that certain modern artists aim at expressing the beauty of ugliness.
Mr. Rothenstein has clearly looked at many English paintings with pleasure. Indeed he has found enjoyment in out-of-the-way corners Where others have been led Only by curiosity. Thus he may claim, in a sense, to have discovered the historical painters of the end of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth centuries, and he puts up a sound and restrained defence of this despised kind of painting. In general his biographies are concise, though the reader gets a little weary of the inevitable beginning of the type : "X was born at• Y, the son of a poor furze-wattler." But Mr. Rothenstein presents a clear picture of the development of English painting, rarely diving far below the surface, and on these occasions getting entangled a little, as in his analysis of the vision of Constable, a confusion Of abstractions and ambiguities. The illustrations are not very clear nor very happily placed on the page.
In his preface to Mr. de Montmorency's book, Professor Gleadowe claims that it Will appeal to painters. In this he is perhaps optimistic, for the book does not contain very much which a painter could not deduce by looking at the paintings discussed. On the other hand, it will certainly appeal to those of the general Public who do not paint them- Selves by the hints in it which are essentially those of a painter. In front particularly of nineteenth-century painting Mr. de Montmorency has recorded his enjoyment and under- standing with great directness and simplicity. In addition, the illustrations are well chosen, the inclusion Of Nicholas Bacon's little-known " CoOlunaid " being particularly happy. There is one Unfortunate error on page 162 when Velasquez' portrait of Innocent X in the Doria palace is referred to as that of Innocent W hi the Vatican.
Mr. Laurence BinyOn has one incalculable advantage over the writers so far considered. Whereas they cover the whole range of English painting, he is only concerned with the
limited field of watercolours. Therefore, whereas they can work only on a scale of two miles to the inch, he has the freedom which comes Of being allowed two inches to the mile. But he has used his advantage to the full and has displayed. every possible 'Wile to lure the reader into an admiration for the English seh-ool of *watercolours. einribines much new historical material with an unparalleled skill in characterizing exactly and Simply the achievement of each artist and his place in the school. But above all he has succeeded in conVeYing. to the reader his own enthusiasm in a style so enchanting that his descriptions sometimes offer in beauty almost a verbal equivalent of the paintings of whieh he Writes. On the Other hand his enthu- -siasnri is checked at exactly the right point, and he never sPOils WS Case by claiming tOO niddi fcir.the paintings whieh he-defends. ' - '
Previous page
