ART.
THE VANDYCK EXHIBITION AT THE ACADEMY.
NOTHING is more striking in the present Exhibition than the decadence of the art of Vandyck in his later years, and the superiority of his style when he was under the Italian influence. Not that he was a copyist, for who could take the magnificent Andrea Spinola, Doge of Genoa (No. 47) for the work of an Italian painter ? The stimulus of great examples and the enthusiasm of youth caused the painter to put forth powers which seldom or never reappeared in the last —or English—period of his career. Worldly success no doubt accounted for a great deal of the falling off. When all the cultivated people of England were clamouring for por- traits, and when his extravagance and luxury made the need of gold constant, the temptation to turn his studio into a manufactory was great. We know from a contemporary what was his method. The sitter came, Vandyck made a chalk drawing, and the sitter left. The drawing was passed over to assistants, who enlarged it and drew it out on the canvas. At the next sitting Vandyck worked on the face and the sitter departed, leaving his clothes behind him. The model then appeared and was dressed in the clothes, and the assistants painted the figure, the master doing as much— or as little—as was needed to satisfy the customer. Happily, this was not alway'a the case, for sometimes the artist asserted himself and painted the whole picture from top to bottom, with what result we may see in the Lord Wharton (No. 61) from the Hermitage. This picture, which we are most grateful to the Czar for lending, is certainly one of the finest things in the Exhibition. For colour, for consistency and balance, and for splendid execution it has no superior here. Too many of the pictures painted in the English period have a flat look in spite of their softness ; hands have too often no connection with the bodies, and the figures, though they may have a certain frigid grace, have not the real charm of living things. But in the picture of Lord Wharton there are none of these defects. The modelling is firm and solid, and the figure is surrounded and enveloped by air ; it fillsla space in depth as well as in height and width. To realise these qualities compare the picture with the Earl of Derby (No. 93). This fine picture, with its swaggering red and somewhat flimsy bravado, is lacking in the splendid appreciation of modelling shown in the Lord
Wharton. This Earl of Derby portrait is typical of a number of pictures Vandyck painted, in which the people stand de- fiantly looking out of the canvas. But there is always a slight touch of unreality, which makes their aggressive port unalarming. The man in the picture just instanced, for all his straddling red legs and flushed face, does not affright us. We would much rather encounter him than, say, the Admiral by Velasquez in the National Gallery, who unmistakably has the air of a man not to be trifled with.
Of the last and English period of the painter's career there are few better examples than the wonderful picture lent by the Queen of Thomas Killigrew and Thomas Carey (No. 61). Vandyck's hand has travelled over the whole canvas, and the result is a harmony of parts and a beauty of execution which are quite delightful. Looking at this picture is like reading an eloquent piece of prose-writing by a master. It is not a great and emotional poem stirring the soul. But the grace and ease with which the painter has expressed him- self, the happy dexterity of the painting, exert the same charm as does the master of a prose style in which the right word is invariably and obviously used. Like so many pictures shown here, this is in a bad state. Dirty varnish obscures the painting, and reduces the colour almost to a monochrome.
Another instance of this is the wonderful portrait of Strafford (No. 49). There are several portraits of this prominent figure of the early part of the Revolution here, but none so striking as this. The face is wonderful in its expressiveness, and is more interesting in its treatment than in No. 82, where Strafford is represented with his secre- tary. This picture is well preserved and is protected with a glass, and its clear, fresh tones come as a great relief after so many examples of dingy brown varnish. There are two beautiful pictures of the Earl of Arundel. One (No. 42), a head only, is a splendid instance of Vandyck's method when he was painting with solid masses of colour and modelling strongly. The way in which the ruff is painted is astonishingly fine. The other portrait, in which a grandson appears, is also a fine example of the master. Amongst the best things here must be ranked the portrait of James Stuart, Duke of Richmond (No. 13). To describe such a picture is absurd, for the materials out of which it is made are so simple ; but the sympathy of the painter for his sitter is evident from the way he rendered the eyes and mouth of the man, and his soft, fair hair and white, gauzy shirt. Here is grace fully felt and rendered, and without affectation. This distinction is not quite so surely observed in the splendid young man, the Earl of Northumberland (No. 3), who stands at full length by an anchor, while ships are seen in the background. There is a fine decorative feeling and harmony both in the lines and colour of this picture, but while we admire the old gold sleeve and the red russet breeches, we cannot quite forget the attitudinising of the figure.
The portraits of Charles I. naturally attract us, for it is natural to wish to see what the man who so tangled the political skein looked like. But the curious are doomed to disappointment, for the pictures of the King here are quite unworthy of the painter, and are doubtless mere copies made by the assistants. It is to be regretted that the Windsor canvas with the three heads of Charles is not here. The Queen fares better, for the Henrietta Maria (No. 76) lent by Lord Lansdowne is a first-rate example. The large picture of the Five Children of Charles I. (No. 55) is not so attractive as the smaller one, in which only three children are seen (No. 69). Both these pictures are in a bad condi- tion, and have something of air about them,—are, in fact, Court pictures. In art, freedom is the primal condition of success. When Kings impose their little etiquettes of the Court upon the artist, eternal justice decrees that they shall have bad pictures.
There are two pictures in this collection of men in armour, which are both remarkable achievements. The Man in Armour (No. 8) is most impressive for its magnificent energy and solidity. It has the movement of the later pictures, but it also has the force and roundness of the early manner as well. The painting of the forehead and the hair are of the greatest ability. The other man in armour, John, Count of Nassau Dillenbourg (No. 51), is curiously different in style from anything else in the gallery, but in some ways it is as good as any picture here. Nothing is more striking than the drawing of the face, and the fineness of the modelling is won- derful. It would be interesting to know something of the history of this work, but the catalogue tells nothing. When we are looking at the picture we do not want to be told which way the face is turned, or whether the head is bare or not. It is a great pity that a more intelligent catalogue could not have been compiled.
It is difficult to get up any interest in the religious pictures, which fortunately form but a very small part of the collec- tion. Cold conception and hasty execution do not pro- duce interesting results. The allegories would not be much better were it not for the brilliant exception of the Rinaldo and Armida (No. 67). It is easy to point out that in this picture the methods of Veronese and Titian have been reduced to a formula. Nevertheless there is a splendour of colour about this picture which gives it nobility, and the beauty of the figure rising from the sea on the right is undeniable.
In surveying this collection, it seems impossible to doubt that in his last period Vandyck never quite reached to the greatness of his earlier manner when he painted such works as the Doge already alluded to, and the Marchese Spinola (No. 60) and the other Genoese portraits in this collection. There is all the charm and grace of the later works, but there is also a far greater feeling of power in the earlier. In the Italian pictures the grasp of the subject is unerring, the whole structure is locked together. The English pictures too often seem a fortuitous collection of face, bands, and clothes. No doubt the assistants were often responsible for this, but the master consented to let his work be spoilt.
But if we must accord to the pictures painted in Italy the first place as works of art, the English pictures must always remain of surpassing interest, not only for the splendid artistic qualities they show when at their best, but also because they represent for us the people of a time of surpassing historical interest. Not only can we see the great actors of the drama, but also the lesser people who took part in the struggle, and can say as De Quincey said in his dream :—" These are English ladies from the unhappy times of Charles I. These are the wives and daughters of those who met in peace, and sate at the same tables, and were allied by marriage or by blood ; and yet after a certain day in August, 1642, never smiled upon each other again, nor met bat in the field of battle; and at Marston Moor, at Newbury, or at Naseby, cut asunder all ties of love by the cruel sabre, and washed away in blood the memory of ancient friendship."
It would be ungracious to leave the consideration of the present Exhibition without thanking, not only those who have organised it, but also the owners of the pictures, who have generously denuded their walls for the benefit of the public.
H. S.
Previous page
