ART
WOOD-CUTS
Ix one of his books Nietzsche has written that "the artist has the ability not to respond to immediate stimuli." What a wealth of meaning is contained in the statement ! How. aptly it applies to the great masters of the past ! But how strangely unfashionable and inappropriate would be its application to most artists of the present day ! One would imagine that English artists would find little difficulty in accepting it ; for it is so singularly paralleled with English temperamental characteristics. The alien and hysterical gurgling that we now manifest before what is considered to be beautiful may be accounted for, perhaps, by the cheapness and facility of travel on. the Continent. Were our gurgles merely to end in the throat all would be well. Unfortunately,, however, they are gaining greater durability and pernicious- ness through finding their way to canvas. We are beginning to look upon spontaneity in Art as the highest achievement. When it is combined with naiveté we become rapturous., To what does this spontaneity amount ? It is in the naturei of a mere reflex action—an insignificant and impulsive jerk expressed in paint, as fleeting and impermanent in its effect as the ban mot of an occasion—divertingly related to its time and circumstance, but of little importance to all time and circumstance. We belong to an age of sketches—rapidly executed by the painters, and as rapidly forgotten by the spectator. Great art is serious and does not belong to the realm of quick-fire repartee. The true artist does not respond on the moment ; he is too busy within himself. His stimulus reverberates too deeply to return in the form of hysterical or hasty utterance. He is giving birth and going through the throes of birth, reaching down within himself through, all conscious experience—beyond it to the deeper sources of awareness which hold the experience not of a lifetime only,, but of an age, even of ages. Feeling, reason, experience, instinct, will ; all have a bearing on the creation which comes forth., The great work radiates intensity, vital yet disciplined, and not this convulsive and licentious spontaneity that has become our watchword in art.
Certain media of expression are more conducive to this monkeyish and effective spontaneity than others. Water-, colour inevitably leads, except in rare cases, to• a slap-dash unmeaning technique, while oils entice all but the strongest into a debauch of brushwork and colour. The wood-cut, on the other hand,- because of its difficulties and its very
limi-
tations, is an ideal training ground for the young artisty
Once he has learned how to draw accurately and well, and is technically ready to compose and construct, the young student should be encouraged to take up wood-engraving ; for this medium will insure him against the hasty expression of his conception before its time—before it has been mellowed, co-ordinated and defined in his mind. A quality of meticulous definition is one of the attributes of the good wood-engraving ; each line has a significance and inevitability of relationship to the whole. In the hands of the too impetuous and shallow- minded the block becomes merely pitted and scratched by the tool. The wood-cut is perhaps of greater value to the artist than it is to the spectator, unless, of course, the latter is prepared to cast himself in the role of the former, when he will gain an appreciation of, and joy from, this form of art which will amply repay him for his trouble. He will be led through the process of creation without suffering its con- comitant pains.
The Society of Wood Engravers is probably the most catholic and alive group of associated artists in England ; :ts exhibition at the St. George's Gallery displays a wider range of taste than any other. Already full recognition has been given by the Press and the public to the high quality of the work of the older members, Gordon Craig, Paul Nash, Eric Gill, Ethelbert White, and others. But in this year's exhibition at the St. George's Gallery are important works by artists whose names are still unfamiliar to the public and who, to judge from the frankness of their work, are still fairly youthful. I shall therefore confine my criticism to these younger members. Partly because of the challenging candour of their work, and partly because of its high standard and possibilities, I feel that I can be equally candid and rigorous in my criticism. In spite of the fact that it is the common boast of artists that they never read criticisms of their work, .I venture to hope that these younger artists will alter this precedent and give some consideration to this criticism, even though they disagree with it, for their work is very important and worthy of being better.
• Mr. Blair Hughes-Stanton and Miss C. Marion Mitchell have many things in common in their work. They both have an exceptionally well-developed sense of construction com- bined with a fine feeling for texture and spatial values. Prob- ably both of them would claim that subject matter played little part in the conception of their work ; they would un- doubtedly maintain that they were concerned with pure plastic relationships. Yet my criticism is directed against their subject-matter because I believe that certain relation- ships of form in their work are not purely plastic but are determined by an attempt to be outspoken and blasé in the subject. One feels that the subject-matter has not been nobly enough felt for it to penetrate beyond the bounds of personal prejudice into the deeper and more universalized springs of pure creation. In "Truth restrained by the arms of her lovers " (No. 42), by Miss Mitchell, the main construction of the design is very fine indeed, but the component parts manifest this prejudicial weakness—the figure of Truth, in this case, is a particularly neurotic young lady surrounded by restrainers as neurotic as herself. Had the subject-matter been sufficiently assimilated this disparity between the organization of the parts and the general construction would not have been obvious. I feel convinced that it is essential
for the subject-matter to be felt to be sufficiently noble (in the widest sense) before it can break down this wall of psycho- logical prejudice that is so predominant in Miss Mitchell's work. The same criticism applies to Mr. Hughes-Stanton, although, in the execution of his work, he is a little more impatient, perhaps, than Miss Mitchell. Certain parts of No. 56 would seem to have been engraved before they had been maturely enough conceived—they lack significance and give
to a composition which recalls the surging quality of Signorelli, Gauguinesque character. The design seems to have been thought of, yet is not resolved, in three dimensions.
Nevertheless, these two artists contribute some of the most Vital compositions in the whole exhibition. Another artist who approaches to an equally high standard of design, but who has less feeling for textures than either Mr. Hughes- Stanton or Miss Mitchell, is Mr. F. C. Medworth.
Although these wood-engravings will be taken from the walls at the end of December, those who are interested will be able to see them at any time in the portfolios in the Gallery.
W. McCANcE.
Previous page
