FINE ARTS.
ROYAL ACADEMY EXHIBITION.
THE CONCLUSION.
AT last we find ourselves in the Sculpture Room—as it is called by courtesy, for it is, properly speaking, nothing more than a closet. Considering the enormous revenue derived by the Academy from its annual exhibition of the works, not only of its members, but of hundreds of artists besides, we think the exhibitors have a just right to complain of their works being huddled up in little dark rooms, and placed beyond the reach of the eyes of the longest-sighted visitor, when any possibility exists of remedying so serious an evil as want of space and light. Why are the Council so inert when an appropriate and convenient site is cleared for a public edifice at Charing Cross ?—Do they expect the Government to inflict another architectural tumour upon the town, at the cost of the nation while there is money, and there ought to be talent sufficient in the Academy, to erect a suitable structure without costing the public a shilling ? Let the Academicians come forward in a spirit Worthy of the patronage and encouragement which the public bestows Upon art—a patronage more liberal, and encouragement more efficient, than the Academy holds out to rising genius, and offer to erect a Royal Academy at their own cost, if the ground were secured to them; and let such building be equally a monument of their taste and independence. " Ah " we hear the R. A.s say, "this is fine talking, but we shall sell our .pictures no better, gain no additional number of commissions, and. derive no greater income from the annual exhibition, in a new
i
Academy than n our present lodgings ; which afford light enough for cur pictures, and room to reject those which it might otherwise be troublesome to exclude." Thus, in the spirit of a close corporation of selfelected and irresponsible members, does the Academy act ; creatingjeabusies and schisms among its own body, and substituting chilling re. straint, narrow regulations, cold encouragement, and mechanical instruction for liberal feelings, fostering protection and a spirit of enthusiasm in promoting the advancement of art, and the interest, not of themselves scaly, but of the great body of artists. The profession of art and its successful cultivation should alone constitute the claims to notice required of a candidate for academic honours ; and not, as is the case now, private favour, party feeling, and petty policy. It is not the merit of the artist that is his passport to the honours and favouring patronage of the Academy ; else why are such names as those of BRIGGS, NEWTON, IJANDSEER, 1kIARTIN, DANBY, CLINT, and ALL IO be found among the Associates only, and such artists as HAYDON, STANFIELD, CAREW, BEHNES, EDMONSTONE, and many others of equaland superior merit to some R. A.s, passed over unnoticed even as Associates ? Every artist who displays talent and skill in art, not to speak of genius and invention, is not only worthy of associating with R.A.s, but they are unworthy of the title if they do not invite him to become their Associate. The greatest enemies to art are the would-be monopolizers of the high places in the Academy. The withholding of the honorary rneed of distinction where it is justly due, is to place stumblingblocks in the path of the rising artist, which impede his advancement in life though it is to be hoped they will tend to strengthen his energies in the pursuit of his art. But it is not alone by withholding their countenance in their official capacity, that the R.A.s divert the stream of patronage from the young Scions in the field of art : it is by descending to the meanness of detraction in private, that they deter the wealthy and noble from committing their reputation for taste by enennraging untitled e.lcut. TItc C111,1C3 and jealousies of painters and sculptors, one of another, is no new theme of deprecation,—such has been and always will be the ease; but to in.. crease the injurious effects of a system of official partiality and favour.. itism by private offices of ill-feeling and the whispering insinuations of authoritative opinion, is to add individual baseness to corporate injustice. We trust the enlightened and liberal patrons of art will not lend their ears to interested counsel, but boldly resolve to stake the credit of their judgment and taste upon their own opinions. This is now more frequently the case than it formerly was ; and it is the only way by which Academical influence can be successfully neutralized. The only way in which an artist can oppose that influence is by excelling in his art, though even then he cannot succeed without patronage. But to the Sculpture. Mr. WssirstacoTT's beautiful recumbent Statue of the Duke of Montpensier, 1170, first attracts our admiration, by the nature, simplicity, and ease of the attitude, and the sterling excellence of the work. It is all we can desire in a figure of this description. We are next irresistibly attracted—for nature is the loadstar of art—to the infant in Mr. Ban.v'sgroup of the Mother and Child, 1171. It is infancy in marble ; and the mother's hands group gracefully and appropriately with her lovely burthen. The position, modelling of the limbs, and character of the head of the child, are beautiful ; but we feel that the mother is only valuable as holding the child : her head is half-modern, half-antique; it does not, however, disturb the sweet repose of the sleeping child, and that is enough. 1173, " Musiaora ; " R. W. SIEVIER. A pleasing and natural representation of the Subject; the attitude familiar, graceful, and unconstrained, and delicately treated. The face is pretty, and not antique, but it has rather too much of an Egyptian cast of character. It is, nevertheless, a beautiful statue. 1172, "Devotion;" J. GOTT. A tendency to the petite in form and the artificial in style in this clever work of art, preterits our admiring it as we could wish. The ornamental in sculpture, though sanctioned by Canova, is better suited to the goldsmith than the sculptor. Refinement is not shown in littleness of parts, or by fritter. ing away breadth and simplicity:in minute details. A statue is not to be tickled up with the chisel as a miniature with the pencil. 1174, "Psyche," by T. CAMPBELL, has the same objection, though not in the same degree. The figure wants meaning, pretty as it is, and the attitude is more simple than beautiful. 1175," Venus and Cupid," by C. Rossr, R. A. is not only had and meretricious as a work of art, but it is positively indecent in attitude and expression. This group ought to be covered up. 1176, " Poetry ;" J. G. Buss; a mere school-girl. 1178, "The De. serted Mother ;" J. HEFFERNAN. Fall of expression and nature, and admirable for the fleshiness of the modelling. The face we do not like, and the marking of the eyebrows is too hard and prominent. The group, altogether, is beautiful and interesting. 1270, " Monument—. Bishop Heber blessing two Hindoos ;" F. CHANTREY, R. A. The drapery beautifully chiselled, but the air and attitude more simple and familiar than dignified or impressive. The face does not, we think, do justice to the Bishop ; it is heavy, and wants character : whereas the countenance of the lamented and excellent original was full of intelli. gence, energy, and poetry. It is rarely that Mr. CHANTREY gives any room for exception to his likenesses ; but this may be a posthumous resemblance. 1273, "Children in the Wood;" J. GOTT. This group wants the charm of the story—interest : the composition is sprawling, and the modelling meagre. 1277, "The Seven Ages ;" W. BERNE& A basso-relievo, remarkable for more ingenuity than poetry or originality. 1209, "A Guardian Angel—bas-relief;" R. WESTMACOTT, jun. A stiff attitude, rendered more rectilinear by the fall of the drapery and the angular bend of the knee. The figure wants animation as well as grace. 1185, "Birth of Venus ;" S. NIXON. One of Mr. Howasn's groups of fluid forms modelled in plaster. 1201, "The Happy Mo. ther 3." E. PHYSICK. In a very unhappy attitude. We are alarmed by the sounding titles of some of the works, which we really could not see. For instance, we strangely overlooked Ajax tearing Cassandra from the Altar of Minerva, The Hours bringing forth the Horses of Apollo, &c. Nay, we have passed over Mr. NICHOLLS'S colossal Hercules Agonistes ; which we examined atten. tively, thinking that a sculptor, though a young one, would not model a figure nine feet high without its possessing some merit. It has the merit of boldness, and, for aught we know, of correct musculation ; but we cannot conceive that any possible attitude or exertion would develop all the external muscles of the body so prominently, as though the body were flayed. The fact is, that the artist, having selected an attitude, grand, powerful, and expressive of a passive struggle with an uncon. querable pain, has modelled a set of limbs in a high state of muscular action, and put them together ; for the figure wants unity, and the dif. ferent parts of it connexion : separately they may be very fine, but tos gether, their extreme muscular development physically annoys for want of life and motion in the entire figure. This is the most difficult point to attain in a statue, but it is one which is necessary to a representation of extreme action ; and the sculptor, having boldly imposed on himself a Herculean task, his art must stand or fall by his success or failure. We should judge the head of the figure to be defective in eraniologiotti development : there is very little room_ for brains. The busts are numerous ; but for the most part ranged like jars on the shelf of a store-room, out of the way of lickerish urchins, so that no one can either appreciate their beauties or discover their defects. Of those near the eye, we cannot speak very favourably : they must possess more merit as likenesses than as works of art, to be acceptable to their pro. prietors. Mr. CHANTREY's bust of Mr. Soane, 1241, is not only the best, but almost the only really fine one. It has individual character and resemblance, and an air of life and nature, and an appearance of fleshiness, that distinguish his unrivalled busts. There are two or three imbecile and abortive attempts to put Lawrence in marble. Mr. DENMAN'S bust of the late Professor of Sculpture, Mr. Elam:tan, 1231, is strikingly and faithfully like, but is hard, dry, and mechanical. Mr. BAILY'S of Mr. Faraday, 1244, is stunted, and has a villanous look ; we need not say, therefore, it is very unlike the man. 1261, "The Crusader, a Study," has good character. We omitted to notice 1186, "The Forsaken ;" J. DENHAM. An attitude more bold than graceful or natural. 1187, "Hannah ;" T. GRINSBY. A piece of pipe-clay. 1195, " Juno Attiring;" in an attitude of distortion. 1196, "Hymen giving Advice to a Newmarried Couple ;" E. PHYSICK. Tame and commonplace. Before We took leave of the Academy, we reckoned upon a hearty laugh with our readers at the facetito of the Exhibition, the most pro. minent of which we noticed; but our mirth has got mournful, and we forbear. We can the better afford to do so, seeing that "every puny whipster" can laugh at the follies and mistakes of genius.
Previous page
