ART AS A NATIONAL INFLUENCE.
THE House of Commons hath a quart= ague in matters of art, now burning with a fever of .lavishness, now shivering in the cramps of parsimony. At prevent it is in the rigour of a cold fit : chilled by the " distress," it cannot open its fist, and the indul- gent Ministers are going to abate their annual demand for the works at the new Houses of Parliament. It is, however, not so much mere parsimony which now moves the august body, as a want of distinct purpose in the opposite munificence. When the money-market becomes tight, dimly-discerned zesthetical objects cede the tangible grasp on coined sovereigns. We blame not Members, individually or collectiiely. How can we wonder at Parliamentary Members, whezi, we see the apathy that hangs upon the high priests of art—the officially re- cognized heads of the profession, the elected members, of the Royal Academy ? When an effort was made to ascertain the capacity of the country in matters of art, by a contest for prizes, which were preliminary to employment on the great public edifice, the chief artists hung back from that Olympic contest. One r-oson, no doubt, was, that they had not generally cultivated historical painting, and that the veterans might have had some difficulty in adopting a new style. But the more active and predominant motive was a fear of suffering in repute and pocket through the being worsted by the juniors. It was a question between per- sonal prudence and devotion to art, and art went to t 7.e wall. It is this low state of the arts generally—for it ths,es not con- cern painting alone—which tends more than any other influence to bring down all things to the test of utilitarianism in the vul- gar sense of the word. Intellect is cultivated amongst us ; duty is trained for set purposes ; art, which combines intellect and feeling, is cultivated with no earnest devotion. Making scanty sacrifices to art, we do not earn what it can bestow. Duty may exact sacrifices from a reluctant will; but it is the sense of fit- ness or of the beautiful which makes men take delight in what is good apart from their own personal welfare. Art exercises the emotions of human nature under the highest intellectual criticism ; it imparts to those emotions an impersonal character, abstracts, purifiea, and exalts them ; it enables them to extend their generous influence to a sphere of conduct, if the expression may be allowed, beyond the bounds of merely personal interest. Art wins more than the allegiance of men to a set d nty—it wins their very wishes. The higher faculties of human nature are passive as well as active, and great natures are the most open to impressions ; for human nature can only impart what it receives; so that to exert' cise a strong influence, men must be influenced strongly. The broad effect of art is, that by developing the faculties of humanity it enlarges and elevates the view beyond mere personality ; so that the nation among whom it is in the highest condition, eteteris paribus, will possess citizens endowed with the keenest perception and the most generous aspirations.
To apply this somewhat abstract proposition for the benefit of the strictly practical English people. In all articles of social use, we have the option of considering solely the direct "utility," in the narrowest sense of the term, or of rendering every exercise of our material skill an occasion for paying homage also to the living principle of art, beauty, by clothing the naked usefulness with some appropriate adornment. If we forego the adornment we save an additional element in the prime cost of the article ; if we do so universally or generally, we satisfy a parsimonious "cheapness," which seems to be dictated by a superficial inter- pretation of political economy. But we also forego the opportu- nity of extending that influence which enlarges and elevates hu- man nature; so that what we save in the cost of our products we lose in the " tone " of society. A total neglect of art could only exist in a nation without cultivation, affection, or faith. But a low tone of society implies a low standard for public servants.
No nation, perhaps, since the beginning of the world, has dis- played so keen a sense of self-interest, so 'cute an eye to the main chance, so exclusive a devotion to personal or national ad- vancement in material welfare, as the Americans of the United States : on the whole, no nation of equal wealth and intellectual vigour has been so destitute of art : and we see the state of feel- ing in that country. Survey the list of men brought into promi- nence as candidates for the Presidency,—James K. Polk, Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, Senator Calhoun, General Taylor, General Worth, General Cass, General Scott : General Scott is the actual tool in the nefarious conquest of Mexico, the "reo vendicator 7' who visits upon the Spaniards retribution for the wrongs done by Cortez ; General Worth and General Taylor, his sul4ordinates and accusers ; General Cass, the diplomatic calumniator and mischief- maker, who did his best to set France and Eland at war ; Daniel Webster, the expedientist; Henry Clay, die philosophical conservative of slavery ; Senator Calhoun, the Nullificator; and James K. Polk, whom we need not characterize. There are men among them of power, ability, and even, in some sense, of elevated ambition ; but scarcely one is distinguished for refinement ; and how coarse, how low, how vulgar the general state of feeling must be in that community which suffers others of these men to be its leading representatives and administrators—out of such a set preferring the lowest, a Polk ! Into what mistakes, politi- cal and intellectual, such statesmen lead their country ! how little beneficial for their own nation or for mankind ! And the nation, we see, which turns up these picked specimens of its staple nature, is the one among the great states of the world which least cultivates art.
Previous page
