Pictures Every Child Should Know
by
Dolores Bacon
Part 1 out of 6
Arno Peters, Branko Collin, Tiffany Vergon, Charles Aldarondo, Charles
Franks, and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team
PICTURES EVERY CHILD SHOULD KNOW
A SELECTION OF THE WORLD'S ART MASTERPIECES FOR YOUNG PEOPLE
BY DOLORES BACON
Illustrated from Great Paintings
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Besides making acknowledgments to the many authoritative writers upon
artists and pictures, here quoted, thanks are due to such excellent
compilers of books on art subjects as Sadakichi Hartmann, Muther,
C. H. Caffin, Ida Prentice Whitcomb, Russell Sturgis and others.
INTRODUCTION
Man's inclination to decorate his belongings has always been one of
the earliest signs of civilisation. Art had its beginning in the lines
indented in clay, perhaps, or hollowed in the wood of family utensils;
after that came crude colouring and drawing.
Among the first serious efforts to draw were the Egyptian square and
pointed things, animals and men. The most that artists of that day
succeeded in doing was to preserve the fashions of the time. Their
drawings tell us that men wore their beards in bags. They show us,
also, many peculiar head-dresses and strange agricultural
implements. Artists of that day put down what they saw, and they saw
with an untrained eye and made the record with an untrained hand; but
they did not put in false details for the sake of glorifying the
subject. One can distinguish a man from a mountain in their work, but
the arms and legs embroidered upon Mathilde's tapestry, or the figures
representing family history on an Oriental rug, are quite as correct
in drawing and as little of a puzzle. As men became more intelligent,
hence spiritualised, they began to express themselves in ideal ways;
to glorify the commonplace; and thus they passed from Egyptian
geometry to gracious lines and beautiful colouring.
Indian pottery was the first development of art in America and it led
to the working of metals, followed by drawing and portraiture. Among
the Americans, as soon as that term ceased to mean Indians, art took a
most distracting turn. Europe was old in pictures, great and
beautiful, when America was worshipping at the shrine of the chromo;
but the chromo served a good turn, bad as it was. It was a link
between the black and white of the admirable wood-cut and the true
colour picture.
Some of the Colonists brought over here the portraits of their
ancestors, but those paintings could not be considered "American" art,
nor were those early settlers Americans; but the generation that
followed gave to the world Benjamin West. He left his Mother Country
for England, where he found a knighthood and honours of every kind
awaiting him.
The earliest artists of America had to go away to do their work,
because there was no place here for any men but those engaged in
clearing land, planting corn, and fighting Indians. Sir Benjamin West
was President of the Royal Academy while America was still revelling
in chromos. The artists who remained chose such objects as Davy
Crockett in the trackless forest, or made pictures of the Continental
Congress.
After the chromo in America came the picture known as the "buckeye,"
painted by relays of artists. Great canvases were stretched and
blocked off into lengths. The scene was drawn in by one man, who was
followed by "artists," each in turn painting sky, water, foliage,
figures, according to his specialty. Thus whole yards of canvas could
be painted in a day, with more artists to the square inch than are now
employed to paint advertisements on a barn.
The Centennial Exhibition of 1876 came as a glorious flashlight. For
the first time real art was seen by a large part of our nation. Every
farmer took home with him a new idea of the possibilities of drawing
and colour. The change that instantly followed could have occurred in
no other country than the United States, because no other people would
have travelled from the four points of the compass to see such an
exhibition. Thus it was the American's _penchant_ for travel which
first opened to him the art world, for he was conscious even then of
the educational advantages to be found somewhere, although there
seemed to be few of them in the United States.
After the Centennial arose a taste for the painting of "plaques," upon
which were the heads of ladies with strange-coloured hair; of
leather-covered flatirons bearing flowers of unnatural colour, or of
shovels decorated with "snow scenes." The whole nation began to revel
in "art." It was a low variety, yet it started toward a goal which
left the chromo at the rear end of the course, and it was a better
effort than the mottoes worked in worsted, which had till then been
the chief decoration in most homes. If the "buckeye" was
hand-painting, this was "single-hand" painting, and it did not take a
generation to bring the change about, only a season. After the
Philadelphia exhibition the daughter of the household "painted a
little" just as she played the piano "a little." To-day, much less
than a man's lifetime since then, there is in America a universal love
for refined art and a fair technical appreciation of pictures, while
already the nation has worthily contributed to the world of
artists. Sir Benjamin West, Sully, and Sargent are ours: Inness,
Inman, and Trumbull.
The curator of the Metropolitan Museum in New York has declared that
portrait-painting must be the means which shall save the modern
artists from their sins. To quote him: "An artist may paint a bright
green cow, if he is so minded: the cow has no redress, the cow must
suffer and be silent; but human beings who sit for portraits seem to
lean toward portraits in which they can recognise their own features
when they have commissioned an artist to paint them. A man _will_
insist upon even the most brilliant artist painting him in trousers,
for instance, instead of in petticoats, however the artist-whim may
direct otherwise; and a woman is likely to insist that the artist who
paints her portrait shall maintain some recognised shade of brown or
blue or gray when he paints her eye, instead of indulging in a burnt
orange or maybe pink! These personal preferences certainly put a limit
to an artist's genius and keep him from writing himself down a
madman. Thus, in portrait-painting, with the exactions of truth upon
it, lies the hope of art-lovers!"
It is the same authority who calls attention to the danger that lies
in extremes; either in finding no value in art outside the "old
masters," or in admiring pictures so impressionistic that the objects
in them need to be labelled before they can be recognised.
The true art-lover has a catholic taste, is interested in all forms of
art; but he finds beauty where it truly exists and does not allow the
nightmare of imagination to mislead him. That which is not beautiful
from one point of view or another is not art, but decadence. That
which is technical to the exclusion of other elements remains
technique pure and simple, workmanship--the bare bones of art. A thing
is not art simply because it is fantastic. It may be interesting as
showing to what degree some imaginations can become diseased, but it
is not pleasing nor is it art. There are fully a thousand pictures
that every child should know, since he can hardly know too much of a
good thing; but there is room in this volume only to acquaint him with
forty-eight and possibly inspire him with the wish to look up the
neglected nine hundred and fifty-two.
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
I. Andrea del Sarto, Florentine School, 1486-1531
II. Michael Angelo (Buonarroti), Florentine School, 1475-1564
III. Arnold Bcklin, Modern German School, 1827-1901
IV. Marie-Rosa Bonheur, French School, 1822-1899
V. Alessandro Botticelli, Florentine School, 1447-1510
VI. William Adolphe Bouguereau, French (Genre) School 1825-1905
VII. Sir Edward Burne-Jones, English (Pre-Raphaelite) School, 1833-1898
VIII. John Constable, English School, 1776-1837
IX. John Singleton Copley, English School, 1737-1815
X. Jean Baptiste Camille Corot, Fontainebleau-Barbizon School, 1796-1875
XI. Correggio (Antonio Allegri), School of Parma, 1494(?)--1534
XII. Paul Gustave Dor, French School, 1833-1883
XIII. Albrecht Drer, Nuremberg School, 1471-1528
XIV. Mariano Fortuny, Spanish School, 1838-1874
XV. Thomas Gainsborough, English School, 1727-1788
XVI. Jean Lon Grme, French Semi-classical School, 1824-1904
XVII. Ghirlandajo, Florentine School, 1449-1494
XVIII. Giotto (di Bordone), Florentine School, 1276-1337
XIX. Franz Hals, Dutch School, 1580-84-1666
XX. Meyndert Hobbema, Dutch School, 1637-1709
XXI. William Hogarth, School of Hogarth (English), 1697-1764
XXII. Hans Holbein, the Younger, German School, 1497-1543
XXIII. William Holman Hunt, English (Pre-Raphaelite) School, 1827-
XXIV. George Inness, American, 1825-1897
XXV. Sir Edwin Henry Landseer, English School, 1802-1873
XXVI. Claude Lorrain (Gelle), Classical French School, 1600-1682
XXVII. Masaccio (Tommaso Guidi), Florentine School, 1401-1428
XXVIII. Jean Louis Ernest Meissonier, French School, 1815-1891
XXIX. Jean Franois Millet, Fontainebleau-Barbizon School, 1814-1875
XXX. Claude Monet, Impressionist School of France, 1840-
XXXI. Murillo (Bartolom Estban), Andalusian School, 1617-1682
XXXII. Raphael (Sanzio), Umbrian, Florentine, and Roman Schools,
1483-1520
XXXIII. Rembrandt (Van Rijn), Dutch School, 1606-1669
XXXIV. Sir Joshua Reynolds, English School, 1723-1792
XXXV. Peter Paul Rubens, Flemish School, 1577-1640
XXXVI. John Singer Sargent, American and Foreign Schools, 1856-
XXXVII. Tintoretto (Jacopo Robusti), Venetian School, 1518-1594
XXXVIII. Titian (Tiziano Vecelli), Venetian School, 1489-1576
XXXIX. Joseph Mallord William Turner, English, 1775-1831
XL. Sir Anthony Van Dyck, Flemish School, 1599-1641
XLI. Velasquez (Diego Rodriguez de Silva), Castilian School, 1599-1660
XLII. Paul Veronese (Paolo Cagliari), Venetian School, 1528-1588.
XLIII. Leonardo da Vinci, Florentine School, 1452-1519.
XLIV. Jean Antoine Watteau, French (Genre) School, 1684-1721
XLV. Sir Benjamin West, American, 1738-1820
Index
ILLUSTRATIONS
FRONTISPIECE
The Avenue, Middleharnis, Holland--_Hobbema_
Madonna of the Sack--_Andrea del Sarto_
Daniel--_Michael Angelo (Buonarroti)_
The Isle of the Dead--_Arnold Bcklin_
The Horse Fair--_Rosa Bonheur_
Spring--_Alessandro Botticelli_
The Hay Wain--_John Constable_
A Family Picture--_John Singleton Copley_
The Holy Night--_Correggio (Antonio Allegri)_
Dance of the Nymphs--_Jean Baptiste Camille Corot_
The Virgin as Consoler--_Wm. Adolphe Bouguereau_
The Love Song--_Sir Edward Burne-Jones_
The Mystic Marriage of St. Catherine--_Correggio_
Moses Breaking the Tablets of the Law--_Paul Gustave Dor_
The Nativity--_Albrecht Drer_
The Spanish Marriage--_Mariana Fortuny_
Mrs. Richard Brinsley Sheridan--_Thomas Gainsborough_
The Sword Dance--_Jean Lon Grme_
Portrait of Giovanna degli Albizi--_Ghirlandajo (Domenico Bigordi)_
The Nurse and the Child--_Franz Hals_
The Meeting of St. John and St. Anna at Jerusalem--_Giotto (Di
Bordone)_
The Avenue--_Meyndert Hobbema_
The Marriage Contract--_Wm. Hogarth_
The Light of the World--_William Holman Hunt_
Robert Cheseman with his Falcon--_Hans Holbein, the Younger_
The Berkshire Hills--_George Inness_
The Old Shepherd's Chief Mourner--_Sir Edwin Henry Landseer_
The Artist's Portrait--_Tommaso Masaccio_
Acis and Galatea--_Claude Lorrain_
Retreat from Moscow--_Jean Louis Ernest Meissonier_
The Angelus--_Jean Franois Millet_
The Immaculate Conception--_Murillo (Bartolom Estban)_
Haystack in Sunshine--_Claude Monet_
The Sistine Madonna--_Raphael (Sanzio)_
The Night Watch--_Rembrandt (Van Rijn)_
The Duchess of Devonshire and Her Daughter--_Sir Joshua Reynolds_
The Infant Jesus and St. John--_Peter Paul Rubens_
Carmencita--_John Singer Sargent_
The Miracle of St. Mark--_Tintoretto (Jacopo Robusti)_
The Artist's Daughter, Lavinia--_Titian (Tiziano Vecelli)_
The Fighting Tmraire--_Joseph Mallord William Turner_
The Children of Charles the First--_Sir Anthony Van Dyck_
Equestrian Portrait of Don Balthasar Carlos--_Velasquez (Diego
Rodriguez de Silva)_
The Marriage at Cana--_Paul Veronese_
The Death of Wolfe--_Sir Benjamin West_
The Artist's Two Sons--_Peter Paul Rubens_
The Last Supper--_Leonardo da Vinci_
Fte Champtre--_Jean Antoine Watteau_
I
ANDREA DEL SARTO
(Pronounced Ahn'dray-ah del Sar'to)
_Florentine School_
1486-1531
_Pupil of Piero di Cosimo_
Italian painters received their names in peculiar ways. This man's
father was a tailor; and the artist was named after his father's
profession. He was in fact "the Tailor's Andrea," and his father's
name was Angelo.
One story of this brilliant painter which reads from first to last
like a romance has been told by the poet, Browning, who dresses up
fact so as to smother it a little, but there is truth at the bottom.
Andrea married a wife whom he loved tenderly. She had a beautiful face
that seemed full of spirituality and feeling, and Andrea painted it
over and over again. The artist loved his work and dreamed always of
the great things that he should do; but he was so much in love with
his wife that he was dependent on her smile for all that he did which
was well done, and her frown plunged him into despair.
Andrea's wife cared nothing for his genius, painting did not interest
her, and she had no worthy ambition for her husband, but she loved
fine clothes and good living, and so encouraged him enough to keep him
earning these things for her. As soon as some money was made she would
persuade him to work no more till it was spent; and even when he had
made agreements to paint certain pictures for which he was paid in
advance she would torment him till he gave all of his time to her
whims, neglected his duty and spent the money for which he had
rendered no service. Thus in time he became actually dishonest, as we
shall see. It is a sad sort of story to tell of so brilliant a young
man.
Andrea was born in the Gualfonda quarter of Florence, and there is
some record of his ancestors for a hundred years before that, although
their lives were quite unimportant. Andrea was one of four children,
and as usual with Italians of artistic temperament, he was set to work
under the eye of a goldsmith. This craftsmanship of a fine order was
as near to art as a man could get with any certainty of making his
living. It was a time when the Italian world bedecked itself with rare
golden trinkets, wreaths for women's hair, girdles, brooches, and the
like, and the finest skill was needed to satisfy the taste. Thus it
required talent of no mean order for a man to become a successful
goldsmith.
Andrea did not like the work, and instead of fashioning ornaments from
his master's models he made original drawings which did not do at all
in a shop where an apprentice was expected to earn his salt. Certain
fashions had to be followed and people did not welcome fantastic or
new designs. Because of this, Andrea was early put out of his master's
shop and set to learn the only business that he could be got to learn,
painting. This meant for him a very different teacher from the
goldsmith.
The artist may be said to have been his own master, because, even when
he was apprenticed to a painter he was taught less than he already
knew.
That first teacher was Barile, a coarse and unpleasing man, as well as
an incapable one; but he was fair minded, after a fashion, and put
Andrea into the way of finding better help. After a few years under
the direction of Piero di Cosimo, Andrea and a friend, Francia Bigio,
decided to set up shop for themselves.
The two devoted friends pitched their tent in the Piazza del Grano,
and made a meagre beginning out of which great things were to
grow. They began a series of pictures which was to lead at least one
of them to fame. It was in the little Piazza, del Grano studio that
the "Baptism of Christ" was painted, a partnership work that had been
planned in the Campagnia dello Scalzo.
"The Baptism" was not much of a picture as great pictures go, but it
was a beginning and it was looked at and talked about, which was
something at a time when Titian and Leonardo had set the standard of
great work. In the Piazza del Grano, Andrea and his friend lived in
the stables of the Tuscan Grand Dukes, with a host of other fine
artists, and they had gay times together.
Andrea was a shy youth, a little timid, and by no means vain of his
own work, but he painted with surprising swiftness and sureness, and
had a very brilliant imagination. Its was his main trouble that he had
more imagination than true manhood; he sacrificed everything good to
his imagination.
After the partnership with his friend, he undertook to paint some
frescoes independently, and that work earned for him the name of
"Andrea senza Errori"--Andrea the Unerring. Then, as now, each artist
had his own way of working, and Andrea's was perhaps the most
difficult of all, yet the most genius-like. There were those, Michael
Angelo for example, who laid in backgrounds for their paintings; but
Andrea painted his subject upon the wet plaster, precisely as he meant
it to be when finished.
He was unlike the moody Michael Angelo; unlike the gentle Raphael;
unlike the fastidious Van Dyck who came long afterward; he was
hail-fellow-well-met among his associates, though often given over to
dreaminess. He belonged to a jolly club named the "Kettle Club,"
literally, the Company of the Kettle; and to another called "The
Trowel," both suggesting an all around good time and much good
fellowship The members of these clubs were expected to contribute to
their wonderful suppers, and Andrea on one occasion made a great
temple, in imitation of the Baptistry, of jelly with columns of
sausages, white birds and pigeons represented the choir and
priests. Besides being "Andrew the Unerring," and a "Merry Andrew," he
was also the "Tailor's Andrew," a man in short upon whom a nickname
sat comfortably. He helped to make the history of the "Company of the
Kettle," for he recited and probably composed a touching ballad called
"The Battle of the Mice and the Frogs," which doubtless had its origin
in a poem of Homer's. But all at once, in the midst of his gay
careless life came his tragedy; he fell in love with a hatter's
wife. This was quite bad enough, but worse was to come, for the hatter
shortly died, and the widow was free to marry Andrea.
After his marriage Andrea began painting a series of Madonnas,
seemingly for no better purpose than to exhibit his wife's beauty over
and over again. He lost his ambition and forgot everything but his
love for this unworthy woman. She was entirely commonplace, incapable
of inspiring true genius or honesty of purpose.
A great art critic, Vasari, who was Andrea's pupil during this time,
has written that the wife, Lucretia, was abominable in every way. A
vixen, she tormented Andrea from morning till night with her bitter
tongue. She did not love him in the least, but only what his money
could buy for her, for she was extravagant, and drove the sensitive
artist to his grave while she outlived him forty years.
About the time of the artist's marriage he painted one fresco, "The
Procession of the Magi," in which he placed a very splendid substitute
for his wife, namely himself. Afterward he painted the Dead Christ
which found its way to France and it laid the foundation for Andrea's
wrongdoing. This picture was greatly admired by the King of France who
above all else was a lover of art. Francis I. asked Andrea to go to
his court, as he had commissions for him. He made Andrea a money offer
and to court he went.
He took a pupil with him, but he left his wife at home. At the court
of Francis I. he was received with great honours, and amid those new
and gracious surroundings, away from the tantalising charms of his
wife and her shrewish tongue, he began to have an honest ambition to
do great things. His work for France was undertaken with enthusiasm,
but no sooner was he settled and at peace, than the irrepressible wife
began to torment him with letters to return. Each letter distracted
him more and more, till he told the King in his despair, that he must
return home, but that he would come back to France and continue his
work, almost at once. Francis I., little suspecting the cause of
Andrea's uneasiness, gave him permission to go, and also a large sum
of money to spend upon certain fine works of art which he was to bring
back to France.
We can well believe that Andrea started back to his home with every
good intention; that he meant to appease his wife and also his own
longing to see her; to buy the King his pictures with the money
entrusted to him, and to return to France and finish his work; but,
alas, he no sooner got back to his wife than his virtuous purpose
fled. She wanted this; she wanted that--and especially she wanted a
fine house which could just about be built for the sum of money which
the King of France had entrusted to Andrea.
Andrea is a pitiable figure, but he was also a vagabond, if we are to
believe Vasari. He took the King's money, built his wretched wife a
mansion, and never again dared return to France, where his dishonesty
made him forever despised.
Afterward he was overwhelmed with despair for what he had done, and he
tried to make his peace with Francis; but while that monarch did not
punish him directly for his knavery; he would have no more to do with
him, and this was the worst punishment the artist could have
had. However, his genius was so great that other than French people
forgot his dishonesty and he began life anew in his native place.
Almost all his pictures were on sacred subjects; and finally, when
driven from Florence to Luco by the plague, taking with him his wife
and stepdaughter, he began a picture called the "Madonna del Sacco"
(the Madonna of the Sack).
This fresco was to adorn the convent of the Servi, and the sketches
for it were probably made in Luco. When the plague passed and the
artist was able to return to Florence, he began to paint it upon the
cloister walls.
Andrea, like Leonardo, painted a famous "Last Supper," although the
two pictures cannot be compared. In Andrea's picture it is said that
all the faces are portraits.
Just before the plague sent him and his family from Florence a most
remarkable incident took place. Raphael had painted a celebrated
portrait of Pope Leo X. in a group, and the picture belonged to
Ottaviano de Medici. Duke Frederick II., of Mantua, longed to own this
picture, and at last requested the Medici to give it to him. The Duke
could not well be refused, but Ottaviano wanted to keep so great a
work for himself. What was to be done? He was in great trouble over
the affair. The situation seemed hopeless. It seemed certain that he
must part with his beloved picture to the Duke of Mantua; but one day
Andrea del Sarto declared that he could make a copy of it that even
Raphael himself could not tell from his original. Ottaviano could
scarcely believe this, but he begged Andrea to set about it, hoping
that it might be true.
Going at the work in good earnest, Andrea painted a copy so exact that
the pupil of Raphael, who had more or less to do with the original
picture, could not tell which was which when he was asked to
choose. This pupil, Giulio Romano, was so familiar with every stroke
of Raphael's that if he were deceived surely any one might be; so the
replica was given to the Duke of Mantua, who never found out the
difference.
Years afterward Giulio Romano showed the picture to Vasari, believing
it to be the original Raphael, neither Andrea nor the Medici having
told Romano the truth. But Vasari, who knew the whole story, declared
to Romano that what he showed him was but a copy. Romano would not
believe it, but Vasari told him that he would find upon the canvas a
certain mark, known to be Andrea's. Romano looked, and behold, the
original Raphael became a del Sarto! The original picture hangs in the
Pitti Palace, while the copy made by Andrea is in the Naples Gallery.
The introduction of Andrea to Vasari was one of the few gracious
things, that Michael Angelo ever did. About Andrea he said to Raphael
at the time: "There is a little fellow in Florence who will bring
sweat to your brows if ever he is engaged in great works." Raphael,
would certainly have agreed, with him had he known what was to happen
in regard to the Leo X. picture.
Notwithstanding Andrea's unfortunate temperament, which caused him to
be guided mostly by circumstances instead of guiding them, he was said
to be improving all the time in his art. He had a great many pupils,
but none of them could tolerate his wife for long, so they were always
changing.
Throughout his life the artist longed for tenderness and encouragement
from his wife, and finally, without ever receiving it, he died in a
desolate way, untended even by her. After the siege of Florence there
came a pestilence, and Andrea was overtaken by it. His wife, afraid
that she too would become ill, would have nothing to do with him. She
kept away and he died quite alone, few caring that he was dead and no
one taking the trouble to follow him to his grave. Thus one of the
greatest of Florentine painters lived and died. Years after his death,
the artist Jacopo da Empoli, was copying Andrea's "Birth of the
Virgin" when an old woman of about eighty years on her way to mass
stopped to speak with him. She pointed to the beautiful Virgin's face
in the picture and said: "I am that woman." And so she was--the widow
of the great Andrea. Though she had treated him so cruelly, she was
glad to have it known that she was the widow of the dead genius.
PLATE--THE MADONNA DEL SACCO
_(Madonna of the Sack)_
This picture is a fresco in the cloister of the Annunziata at
Florence, and it is called "of the sack" because Joseph is posed
leaning against a sack, a book open upon his knees.
Doubtless the model for this Madonna is Andrea del Sarto's abominable
wife, but she looks very sweet and simple in the picture. The folds of
Mary's garments are beautifully painted, so is the poise of her head,
and all the details of the picture except the figure of the
child. There is a line of stiffness there and it lacks the softness of
many other pictures of the Infant Jesus.
PLATE--THE HOLY FAMILY
In this picture in the Pitti Palace, Florence, Andrea del Sarto
represents all the characters in a serious mood. There are St. John
and Elizabeth, Mary and the Infant Jesus, and there is no touch of
playfulness such as may be found in similar groups by other artists of
the time. Attention is concentrated upon Jesus who seems to be
learning from his young cousin. The left hand, resting upon Mary's arm
is badly drawn and in character does not seem to belong to the figure
of the child. A full, overhanging upper lip is a dominant feature in
each face.
Other works of Andrea del Sarto are "Charity," which is in the Louvre;
"Madonna dell' Arpie," "A Head of Christ," "The Dead Christ," "Four
Saints," "Joseph in Egypt," his own portrait, and "Joseph's Dream."
II
MICHAEL ANGELO (BUONARROTI)
(Pronounced Meek-el-ahn-jel-o (Bwone-ar-ro'tee))
_Florentine School_
1475-1564
_Pupil of Ghirlandajo_
This wonderful man did more kinds of things, at a time when almost all
artists were versatile, than any other but one. Probably Leonardo da
Vinci was gifted in as many different ways as Michael Angelo, and in
his own lines was as powerful. This Florentine's life was as tragic as
it was restless.
There is a tablet in a room of a castle which stands high upon a rocky
mount, near the village of Caprese, which tells that Michael Angelo
was born in that place. The great castle is now in ruins, and more
than four hundred years of fame have passed since the little child was
born therein.
The unhappy existence of the artist seems to have been foreshadowed by
an accident which happened to his mother before he was born. She was
on horseback, riding with her husband to his official post at Chiusi,
for he was governor of Chiusi and Caprese. Her horse stumbled, fell,
and badly hurt her. This was two months before Michael Angelo was
born, and misfortune ever pursued him.
The father of Angelo was descended from an aristocratic house--the
Counts of Canossa were his ancestors--and in that day the profession
of an artist was not thought to be dignified. Hence the father had
quite different plans for the boy; but the son persisted and at last
had his way. When he was still a little child his father finished his
work as an official at Caprese and returned to Florence; but he left
the little Angelo behind with his nurse. That nurse was the wife of a
stonemason, and almost as soon as the boy could toddle he used to
wander about the quarries where the stonecutters worked, and doubtless
the baby joy of Angelo was to play at chiseling as it is the pleasure
of modern babies to play at peg-top. After a time he was sent for to
go to Florence to begin his education.
In Florence he fell in with a young chap who, like himself, loved art,
but who was fortunate enough already to be apprenticed to the great
painter of his time--Ghirlandajo. One happy day this young Granacci
volunteered to take Michael Angelo to his master's studio, and there
Angelo made such an impression on Ghirlandajo that he was urged by the
artist to become his pupil.
All the world began to seem rose coloured to the ambitious boy, and he
started his life-work with enthusiasm. At that time he was thirteen
years old, full of hope and of love for his kind; but his good fortune
did not last long. He had hardly settled to work in Ghirlandajo's
studio than his genius, which should have made him beloved, made him
hated by his master. Angelo drew superior designs, created new
art-ideas, was more clever in all his undertakings than any other
pupil--even ahead of his master; and almost at once Ghirlandajo became
furiously jealous. This enmity between pupil and master was the
beginning of Angelo's many misfortunes.
One day he got into a dispute with a fellow student, Torregiano, who
broke his nose. This deformity alone was a tragedy to one like Michael
Angelo who loved everything beautiful, yet must go through life
knowing himself to be ill-favoured.
In height he was a little man, topped by an abnormally large head
which was part of the penalty he had to pay for his talents. He had a
great, broad forehead, and an eye that did not gleam nor express the
beauty of his creative mind, but was dull, and lustreless, matching
his broken, flattened nose. Indeed he was a tragedy to himself. In the
"History of Painting" Muther describes his unhappy disposition:
"In his youthful years he never learned what love meant. 'If thou
wishest to conquer me,' in old age he addresses love, 'give me back my
features, from which nature has removed all beauty.' Whenever in his
sonnets he speaks of passion, it is always of pain and tears, of
sadness and unrequited longing, never of the fulfilment of his
wishes."
Then, too, Michael Angelo had a quarrelsome disposition, and he was
harsh in his criticism of others. He hated Leonardo da Vinci more for
his great physical beauty than for his genius. He quarreled with most
of his contemporaries, never joined the assemblies of his brother
artists, but dwelt altogether apart. His was a gloomy and melancholy
disposition and he never found relief outside his work.
He was all kinds of an artist--poet, sculptor, architect, painter--and
although he worked with the irregularity of true genius, he worked
indefatigably when once he began. It is said that when he was making
his "David" he never removed his clothing the whole time he was
employed upon the work, but dropped down when too exhausted to work
more, and slept wherever he fell.
His first flight from the workshop of Ghirlandajo was to the gardens
of the great Florentine prince, Lorenzo de' Medici, who had sent to
Ghirlandajo for two of his best pupils. He wished them to come to his
gardens and study the beautiful Greek statues which ornamented
them. The choice fell to Angelo and Granacci. Probably those statues
in Lorenzo's garden were the first glimpses of really great art that
Michael Angelo ever had. Certain it is that he was overwhelmed with
happiness when he was given permission to copy what he would, and at
once he fell to work with his chisel. His first work in that garden
was upon the head of an old faun; and Lorenzo, walking by, curious to
know to what use the lad was putting his opportunity, made a
criticism:
"You have made your faun old," he said, "yet you have left all the
teeth; at such an age, generally the teeth are wanting."
Angelo had nothing to say and the prince walked on, but when next he
came that way, he found that Angelo had broken off two of the faun's
teeth; and this recognition of his criticism pleased Lorenzo so much
that he invited Angelo to live with him. At first his father
objected. He felt himself to be an aristocrat, and sculpture and
painting were indeed low occupations for his son, who he had resolved
should be nothing less than a silk merchant. Nevertheless, the
prince's command, united with the son's pleading, compelled the father
to give up his cherished dream of making a merchant of him, and Angelo
went to live in the palace.
Then indeed what seemed a beautiful life opened out. He was dressed in
fine clothing, dined with princes, and possibly he was grateful to his
patron. Some historians say so, and add that when Lorenzo died Angelo
wept, and returned sadly to his father's house to mourn, but this tale
seems at odds with what else we know of Angelo's unangelic, envious
and bitter disposition. It is quite certain, however, that with the
death of Lorenzo, Angelo's, fortunes became greatly changed. Another
prince followed in line--Pietro de' Medici--but he was a poor thing,
who brought little good to anybody. He had small use for Michael
Angelo's genius, but it is said that he did give him one
commission. After a great storm one day, he asked him to make a
snow-man for him, and Angelo obligingly complied. It was doubtless a
very beautiful snow-man, but although it was Angelo's it melted in the
night, even as if it had been Johnny's or Tommy's snow-man, and left
no trace behind.
In Rome there was a high and haughty pope on the throne--Julius
II.--who had probably not his match for obstinacy and haughtiness,
excepting in the great painter and sculptor. When Angelo went to Rome,
he was bound to come in conflict with Julius for it was popes and
princes who gave art any reason for being in those days, and the
Church prescribed what kind of art should be cultivated. Michael was
to come directly under the command of the pope and such a combination
promised trouble. Kings themselves had to remove their crowns and hats
to Julius, and why not Michael Angelo? Yet there he stood, covered,
before the pope, opposing his greatness to that of the pope. Soderini
says that Angelo treated the pope as the king of France never would
have dared treat him; but Angelo may have known that kings of France
might be born and die, times without number, while there would never
be born another Michael Angelo. There could be nothing but antagonism
between Angelo and Julius, and soon after the artist returned to
Florence; but the necessity for following his profession enabled
Julius to tame him after all, and it is said that the pope led him
back to Rome, later, "with a halter about his neck." This must have
been agony to Angelo.
Back in Rome, he was commissioned to make a tomb for the pope. He had
no sooner set about the preliminaries--the getting of suitable marble
for his work--than he began to quarrel with the men who were to hew
it. When that difficulty was settled, and the marble was got out, he
had a set-to with the shipowners who were to transport the stone, and
that row became so serious that the sculptor was besieged in his own
house.
At another and later time, when he was engaged upon the frescoes of
the Sistine Chapel, he was made to work by force. He accused the man
who had built the scaffolding upon which he must stand, or lie, to
paint, of planning his destruction. He suspected the very assistants
whom he, himself, had chosen to go from Florence, of having designs
upon his life. He locked the chapel against them, and they had to turn
away when they went to begin work. Because of his insane suspicion he
did alone the enormous work of the frescoes. Doubtless he was half
mad, just as he was wholly a genius.
By the time he had finished those frescoes he was so exhausted and
overworked that he wrote piteously to his people at home, "I have not
a friend in Rome, neither do I wish nor have use for any." This of
course was not true; or he would not have made the statement. "I
hardly find time to take nourishment. Not an ounce more can I bear
than already rests upon my shoulders." Even when the work was done he
felt no happiness because of it, but complained about everything and
everybody.
If Angelo thought this an unhappy day, worse was in store for
him. Julius II. died and in his place there came to reign upon the
papal throne, Leo X. If Michael Angelo had been restricted in his work
before, he was almost jailed under Leo X. Julius had been a virile,
forceful man, and Michael Angelo was the same. Since he must be
restrained and dictated to, it was possible for the artist to listen
to a man who was in certain respects strong like himself, but to be
under the thumb of a weak, effeminate person like Leo, was the tragedy
of tragedies to Angelo. That was a marvellous time in Rome. All its
citizens had become so pleasure-loving that the world, stood still to
wonder. When the pope banqueted, he had the golden plates from which
fair women had eaten hurled into the Tiber, that they might never be
profaned by a less noble use than they had known. From all this riot
and madness of pleasure, Michael Angelo stood aside with frowning brow
and scornful mien. He approved of nothing and of nobody--despising
even Raphael, the gentle and loving man whom the pleasure-crazed
people of Rome paused to smile upon and love. The pope said that
Angelo was "terrible," and that he filled everybody with fear.
Finally, Rome so resented his frowning looks and his surly ways that
work was provided for him at a distance. He was sent to Florence again
to build a facade. While there, the city was conquered, and Angelo was
one who fought for its freedom, but even so, he fled just at the
crisis. Thus he ever did the wrong thing--excepting when he worked. In
Florence he had planned to do mighty things, but he never accomplished
any one of them. He planned to make a wonderful colossal statue on a
cliff near Carrara, and also he resolved to make the tomb of Julius
the nucleus of a "forest of statues."
Michael Angelo never married, but he was burdened with a family and
all its cares. He supported his brothers and even his nephews, and
took care of his father. All of those people came to him with their
difficulties and with their demands for money. He chided, quarreled,
repelled, yet met every obligation. He would sit beside the sick-bed
of a servant the night through, but growl at the demands of his near
relatives--and it is not unlikely that he had good reason.
At last he withdrew himself from all human society but that of little
children, whom he cared to speak with and to please. He would have
naught to do with men of genius like himself; and when he fell from a
scaffolding and injured himself, the physician had to force his way
through a barred window, in order to get into the sick man's presence
to serve him.
An illustration of his determined solitude is given in the "Young
People's Story of Art:"
"There had long been lying idle in Florence an immense block of
marble. One hundred years before a sculptor had tried to carve
something from it, but had failed. This was now given to Michael
Angelo. He was to be paid twelve dollars a month, and to be allowed
two years in which to carve a statue. He made his design in wax; and
then built a tower around the block, so that he might work inside
without being seen."
Everything Angelo undertook bore the marks of gigantic
enterprise. Although he never succeeded in making the tomb of Julius
II. the central piece in his forest of statues, the undertaking was
marvellous enough. His original plan was to make the tomb three
stories high and to ornament it with forty statues, and if St. Peter's
Church was large enough to hold it, the work was to be placed therein;
but if not, a church was to be built specially to hold the tomb. When
at last, in spite of his difficulties with workmen and shipowners, the
marbles were deposited in the great square before St. Peter's, they
filled the whole place; and the pope, wishing to watch the progress of
the work and not himself to be observed, had a covered way built from
the Vatican to the workshop of Angelo in the square, by which he might
come and go as he chose, while an order was issued that the sculptor
was to be admitted at all times to the Vatican. No sooner was this
arrangement completed than Angelo's enemies frightened the pope by
telling him there was danger in making his tomb before his death; and
with these superstitions haunting him Julius II. stopped the work,
leaving Angelo without the means to pay for his marbles. With the
doors of the Vatican closed to him, Angelo withdrew, post haste to
Florence--and who can blame him? Nevertheless, the work was resumed
after infinite trouble on the pope's part. He had to send again and
again for Angelo and after forty years, the work was finished. There
the sequel of the sculptor's forty-years war with self and the world
stands to-day in "Moses," the wonderful, commanding central figure
which seems to reflect all the fierce power which Angelo had to keep
in check during a life-time.
The command of Julius that he should paint the ceiling of the Sistine
Chapel aroused all his fierce resistance. He did it under protest, all
the while accusing those about him of having designs upon his life.
"I am not a painter, but a sculptor," he said.
"Such a man as thou is everything that he wishes to be," the pope
replied.
"But this is an affair of Raphael. Give him this room to paint and let
me carve a mountain!" But no, he must paint the ceiling; but to render
it easier for him the pope told him he might fill in the spaces with
saints, and charge a certain amount for each. This Angelo, who was
first of all an artist, refused to do. He would do the work rightly or
not at all. So he made his own plans and cut himself a cardboard
helmet, into the front of which he thrust a candle, as if it were a
Davy lamp, and he lay upon his back to work day and night at the hated
task. During those months he was compelled to look up so continually,
that never afterward was he able to look down without difficulty. When
he had finished the work Julius had some criticisms to make.
"Those dresses on your saints are such poor things," he said. "Not
rich enough--such very poor things!"
"Well, they were poor things," was Angelo's answer. "The saints did
not wear golden ornaments, nor gold on their garments."
After Julius II. and Leo X. came Pope Paul III., and he, like the
other two, determined to have Angelo for his workman. Indeed all his
life, Michael Angelo's gifts were commanded by the Church of Rome. It
was for Paul III. he painted the "Last Judgment." His former work upon
the Sistine Chapel had been the story of the creation. All his work
was of a mighty and allegorical nature; tremendous shoulders, mighty
limbs, herculean muscles that seemed fit to support the
universe. These allegories are made of hundreds of figures. To-day
they are still there, though dimmed by the smoke of centuries of
incense, and dismembered by the cracking of plaster and disintegration
of materials.
Angelo's methods of work, as well as their results, were
oppressive. In his youth, while trying to perfect himself in his study
of the human form, he drew or modelled, from nude corpses. He had
these conveyed by stealth from the hospital into the convent of Santo
Spirito, where he had a cell and there he worked, alone.
He was concentrated, mentally and emotionally, upon himself. The only
remark he made after the blow from Torregiano was, "You will be
remembered only as the man who broke my nose!" This proved nearly
true, since Torregiano was banished, and murdered by the Spanish
Inquisition.
All sorts of anecdotes have floated through the centuries concerning
this man and his work. For example, he made a statue of a sleeping
cupid, which was buried in the ground for a time that it might assume
the appearance of age, and pass for an antique. Afterward it was sold
to the Cardinal San Giorgio for two hundred ducats, though Michael
Angelo received only thirty. Nevertheless, he died a rich man, after
having cared for a numerous family, while he himself lived like a man
without means. All the tranquillity he ever knew he enjoyed in his old
age.
It was characteristic of his perversity that he left his name upon
nothing that he made, with one exception. Vasari relates the story of
that exception:
"The love and care which Michael Angelo had given to this group, 'In
Paradise,' were such that he there left his name--a thing he never did
again for any work--on the cincture which girdles the robe of Our
Lady; for it happened one day that Michael Angelo, entering the place
where it was erected, found a large assemblage of strangers from
Lombardy there, who were praising it highly; one of them asking who
had done it, was told, 'our Hunchback of Milan'; hearing which Michael
Angelo remained silent, although surprised that his work should be
attributed to another. But one night he repaired to St. Peter's with a
light and his chisels, to engrave his name on the figure, which seems
to breathe a spirit as perfect as her form and countenance."
If his youth had been given to sculpture, his maturity to the painting
of wondrous frescoes, so his old age was devoted to architecture, and
as architect he rebuilt the decaying St. Peter's. In this work he felt
that he partly realised his ideal. Sculpture meant more to him, "did
more for the glory of God," than any other form of art. When he had
finished his work on St. Peter's, he is said to have looked upon it
and exclaimed: "I have hung the Pantheon in the air!"
This colossal genius died in Rome, and was carried by the light of
torches from that city back to his better loved Florence, where he was
buried. His tomb was made in the Santa Croce, and upon it are three
female figures representing Michael Angelo's three wonderful arts:
Architecture, sculpture and painting. No artist was greater than he.
His will committed "his soul to God, his body to the earth, and his
property to his nearest relatives."
PLATE--DANIEL
This wonderful painting is a part of the decoration of the Sistine
Chapel in Rome. The picture of the prophet tells so much in itself,
that a description seems absurd. It is enough to call attention to the
powerful muscles in the arm, the fall of the hand, and then to speak
of the main characteristics of the artist's pictures.
It is extraordinary that there is no blade of grass to be found in any
painting by Michael Angelo. He loved to paint but one thing, and that
was the naked man, the powerful muscles, or the twisted limbs of those
in great agony. He loved only to work upon vast spaces of ceiling or
wall. Look at this picture of Daniel and see how like sculpture the
pose and modelling appear to be. First of all, Michael Angelo was a
sculptor, and most of the painting which fate forced him to do has the
characteristics of sculpture.
One critic has remarked that he loves to think of this strange man
sitting before the marble quarry of Pietra Santa and thinking upon all
the beings hidden in the cliff--beings which he should fashion from
the marble.
It was said that in Michael Angelo's hands the Holy Family became a
race of Titans, and where others would have put plants or foliage,
Angelo placed men and naked limbs to fill the space. When his subject
made some sort of herbage necessary, he invented a kind of medival
fern in place of grass and familiar leaves. Everything appears brazen
and hard and mighty, suggestive of Angelo's own throbbing spirit and
maddened soul. Most of his work, when illustrated, must be shown not
as a whole but in sections, but one can best mention them as entire
picture themes. On the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel are nine frescoes
describing "The Creation of The World," "The Fall of Man" and "The
Deluge." "The Last Judgment" occupies the entire altar wall in the
same chapel of the Vatican. "The Holy Family" is in the Uffizi
Gallery, Florence.
III
ARNOLD BCKLIN
(Pronounced Bek'-lin)
_Modern German School (Dsseldorf)_
1827-1901
This splendid artist is so lately dead that it does not seem proper
yet to discuss his personal history, but we can speak understandingly
of his art, for we already know it to be great art, which will stand
the test of time. His imagination turned toward subjects of solemn
grandeur and his work is very impressive and beautiful.
He was born in Basel, "one of the most prosaic towns in Europe." His
father was a Swiss merchant, and not poor; thus the son had ordinarily
good chances to make an artist of himself. He was born at a time when
to be an artist had long ceased to be a reproach, and men no longer
discouraged their sons who felt themselves inspired to paint great
pictures.
When Bcklin was nineteen years old he took himself to Dsseldorf,
with his merchant father's permission, and settled down to learn his
art, but in that city he found mostly "sentimental and anecdotal"
pictures being painted, which did not suit him at all. Then he took
himself off to Brussels, where again he was not satisfied, and so went
to Paris. But while in Brussels he had copied many old masters, and
had advanced himself very much, so that he did not present himself in
Paris raw and untried in art.
At first he studied in the Louvre, then went to Rome, seeking ever the
best, and being hard to satisfy. He found rest and tranquillity in
Zrich, a city in his native country, but it was Italy that had most
influenced his work.
He loved the Campagna of Rome with its ruins and the sad grandeur of
the crumbling tombs lining its way, and therefore a certain
mysterious, grand, and solemn character made his pictures unlike those
of any other artist. He loved to paint in vertical (up-and-down)
fines, rather than with the conventional horizontal outlines that we
find in most paintings. This method gives his pictures a different
quality from any others in the world.
He loved best of all to paint landscape, and it is said of him that
"as the Greeks peopled their streams and woods and waves with
creatures of their imagination, so Bcklin makes the waterfall take
shape as a nymph, or the mists which rise above the water source
wreathe into forms of merry children; or in some wild spot hurls
centaurs together in fierce combat, or makes the slippery, moving wave
give birth to Nereids and Tritons."
Muther, art-critic and biographer, calls our attention to the
similarity between Wagner's music and Bcklin's painting. While Wagner
was "luring the colours of sound from music," Bcklin's "symphonies of
colour streamed forth like a crashing orchestra," and he calls him the
greatest colour-poet of the time.
In appearance Bcklin was fine of form, healthy and wholesome in all
his thoughts and way of living. In 1848 he took part in revolutionary
politics and later this did him great harm. Only the influence of his
friends kept him from ruin. After the Franco-Prussian war he was made
Minister of Fine Arts. In this office he rendered great service; but
because he had to witness the wrecking of the Column Vendme in order
to save the Louvre and the Luxembourg from the mob, he was censured;
indeed so heavy a fine was imposed that it took his whole fortune to
pay it; and he was banished into the bargain. From 1892 to 1901 he
lived in or near Florence, and he died at Fiesole, January 16th, 1901.
PLATE--THE ISLE OF THE DEAD
This picture is perhaps the greatest of the many great Arnold Bcklin
paintings, and it is both fascinating and awe-inspiring.
It best shows his liking for vertical lines in art. The Isle of the
Dead is of a rocky, shaft-like formation in which we may see hewn-out
tombs; and there, tall cypress trees are growing.
The traces of man's work in the midst of this sombre, ideal, and
mystic scene add to the impressiveness of the picture. The isle stands
high and lonely in the midst of a sea.
The water seems silently to lap the base of the rocks and the trees
are in black shadow, massed in the centre. It looks very mysterious
and still. There is a stone gateway touched with the light of a dying
day. It is sunset and the dead is being brought to its resting place
in a tiny boat, all the smaller for its relation to the gloomy
grandeur of the isle which it is approaching. One figure is standing
in the boat, facing the island, and the sunlight falls full upon his
back and touches the boat, making that spot stand out brilliantly from
all the rest of the picture.
Among Bcklin's paintings are "Naiads at Play," which hangs in the
Museum at Basel, "A Villa by the Sea," "The Sport of the Waves,"
"Regions of Joy," "Flora," and "Venus Dispatching Cupid."
IV
MARIE-ROSA BONHEUR
(Pronounced Rosa Bon-er)
_French School_
1822-1895
_Pupil of Raymond B. Bonheur_
Rosa Bonheur, Landseer, and Murillo maybe called "Children's Painters"
in this book because they painted things that children, as well as
grown-ups, certainly can enjoy. To be sure, Murillo was a very
different sort of artist from Rosa Bonheur or Landseer, but if the two
latter painted the most beautiful, animals--dogs, sheep, and
horses--Murillo painted the loveliest little children.
Rosa was the best pupil of her father; Raymond B. Bonheur. In Bordeaux
they lived together the peaceful life of artists, the father being
already a well known painter when his daughter was born. She became,
as Mr. Hamerton, who knew her, said, "the most accomplished female
painter who ever lived ... a pure, generous woman as well and can
hardly be too much admired ... as a woman or an artist. She is simple
in her tastes and habits of life and many stories are told of her
generosity to others."
After a time the Bonheurs moved to Paris where young Rosa could have
better opportunities; and there she put on man's clothing, which she
wore all her life thereafter. She wore a workingman's blouse and
trousers, and tramped about looking more like a man than a woman with
her short hair. This, made everybody stare at her and think her very
queer, but people no longer believe that she dressed herself thus in
order to advertise herself and attract attention; but because it was
the most convenient costume for her to get about in. She went to all
sorts of places; the stockyards, slaughter houses, all about the
streets of Paris, to learn of things and people, especially of
animals, which she wished most to paint. She could hardly have gone
about thus if she had worn women's clothing.
Rosa Bonheur exhibited her first painting at the _Salon_ in 1841, and
this was twelve years before her beloved father died; thus he had the
happiness of knowing that the daughter whom he had taught so lovingly
was on the road to success and fortune. He knew that when fortune
should come to her she would use it well. The year that she exhibited
her work in the _Salon_ she painted only two little pictures--one of
rabbits, the other of sheep and goats--but they were so splendidly
done that all the critics knew a great woman artist had arrived.
It was then that her enemies, those who were becoming jealous of her
work, said that she was wearing men's clothing in order to attract
attention to herself.
Soon her work began to be bought by the French Government, which was a
sure sign of her power. She was already much beloved by the people. In
the meantime we in America and others in England had heard of
Mademoiselle Bonheur, but we heard far less about her painting than we
did about her masculine garb. We thought of her mostly as an eccentric
woman; but one day came "The Horse Fair," and all the world heard of
that, so the artist was to be no longer judged by the clothes she wore
but by her art. Finally, she received the cross of the Legion of
Honour, and also was made a member of the Institute of Antwerp.
She lived near Fontainebleau; her studio a peaceful retired home, till
the Franco-Prussian war came about. Then she and others began to fear
that her studio and pictures would be destroyed, so the artist was
forced to stop her work and prepared to go elsewhere. But the Crown
Prince of Prussia himself ordered that Mademoiselle Bonheur should not
even be disturbed. Her work had made her belong to all the world and
all the world was to protect her if need be.
Rosa Bonheur had a brother who, some critics said, was the better
artist, but if that were true it is likely that his popularity would
in some degree have approached that of his sister. Rosa Bonheur did
not paint many large canvases, but mostly small ones, or only
moderately large; but when she painted sheep it seems that one might
shear the wool, it stands so fleecy and full; while her horses rampage
and curvet, showing themselves off as if they were alive.
PLATE--THE HORSE FAIR
This picture was exhibited all over the world very nearly. It was
carried to England and to America, and won admiration wherever it was
seen. Finally it was sold in America. It was first exhibited in 1853,
the year in which the artist's father died. Mr. Ernest Gambart was the
first who bought the picture, and he wrote of it to his friend,
Mr. S.P. Avery: "I will give you the real history of 'The Horse Fair,'
now in New York. It was painted in 1852, by Rosa Bonheur, then in her
thirtieth year, and exhibited in the next _Salon_. Though much admired
it did not find a purchaser. It was soon after exhibited in Ghent,
meeting again with much appreciation, but was not sold, as art did not
flourish at the time. In 1855 the picture was sent by Rosa Bonheur to
her native town of Bordeaux and exhibited there. She offered to sell
it to the town at the very low price 12,000 francs ($2,400). While
there, I asked her if she would sell it to me, and allow me to take it
to England and have it engraved. She said: 'I wish to have my picture
remain in France. I will once more impress on my countrymen, my wish
to sell it to them for 12,000 francs. If they refuse, you can have it,
but if you take it abroad, you must pay me 40,000 francs.' The town
failing to make the purchase, I at once accepted these terms, and Rosa
Bonheur then placed the picture at my disposal. I tendered her the
40,000 francs and she said: 'I am much gratified at your giving me
such a noble price, but I do not like to feel that I have taken
advantage of your liberality; let us see how we can combine in the
matter. You will not be able to have an engraving made from so large a
canvas. Suppose I paint you a small one from the same subject, of
which I will make you a present.' Of course I accepted the gift, and
thus it happened that the large work went travelling over the kingdom
on exhibition, while Thomas Landseer was making an engraving from the
quarter-size replica.
"After some time (in 1857 I think), I sold the original picture to
Mr. William P. Wright, New York (whose picture gallery and residence
were at Weehawken, N.J.), for the sum of 30,000 francs, but later I
understood that Mr. Stewart paid a much larger price for it on the
breaking up of Mr. Wright's gallery. The quarter size replica, from
which the engraving was made, I finally sold to Mr. Jacob Bell, who
gave it in 1859 to the nation, and it is now in the National Gallery,
London. A second, still smaller replica, was painted a few years
later, and was resold some time ago in London for 4,000
($20,000). There is also a smaller water-colour drawing which was sold
to Mr. Bolckow for 2,500 guineas ($12,000), and is now an heirloom
belonging to the town of Middlesbrough. That is the whole history of
this grand work. The Stewart canvas is the real and true original, and
only large size 'Horse-Fair.'
"Once in Mr. Stewart's collection, it never left his gallery until the
auction sale of his collection, March 25th, 1887, when it was
purchased by Mr. Cornelius Vanderbilt for the sum of $55,000, and
presented to the Metropolitan Museum of Art."
And thus we have the whole story of the "Horse-Fair." The picture is
93-1/2 inches high, and 197 inches wide, and it contains a great
number of horses, some of which are ridden, while others are led, and
all are crowding with wild gaiety toward the fair where it is quite
plain they know they are about to be admired and their beauty shown to
the best advantage. Other well-known Rosa Bonheurs are "Ploughing,"
"Shepherd Guarding Sheep," "Highland Sheep," "Scotch Deer," "American
Mustangs," and "The Study of a Lioness."
V
ALESSANDRO BOTTICELLI
(Pronounced Ah-lays-sahn'dro Bo't-te-chel'lee)
_Florentine School,_
1447-1510 (Vasari's dates)
_Pupil of Filippo Lippi and Verrocchio_
Botticelli took his name from his first master, as was the fashion in
those days. The relation of master and apprentice was very close, not
at all like the relation of pupil and teacher to-day.
Botticelli's father was a Florentine citizen, Mariano Filipepi, and he
wished his son to become a goldsmith; hence the lad was soon
apprenticed to Botticelli, the goldsmith. As a scholar, the little
goldsmith had not distinguished himself. Indeed it is said that as a
boy he would not "take to any sort of schooling in reading, writing,
or arithmetic." It cannot be said that this failure distinguished him
as a genius, or the world would be full of genius-boys; but the result
was that he early began to learn his trade.
Fortunately for him and us, Botticelli, the smith, was a man of some
wisdom and when he saw that the lad originated beautiful designs and
had creative genius he did not treat the matter with scorn, as the
master of Andrea del Sarto had done, but sent him instead to Fra
Filippo (Lippo Lippi) to be taught the art of painting. So kind a deed
might well establish a feeling of devotion on little Alessandro's part
and make him wish to take his master's name.
Fra Filippo was a Carmelite monk, merry and kindly; simple, good, and
gifted, but his temperament did not seem to influence his young
pupil. Of all unhappy, morbid men, Botticelli seems to have been the
most so, unless we are to except Michael Angelo.
After studying with the monk, Botticelli was summoned by Pope Sixtus
IV. to Rome to decorate a new chapel in the Vatican. Before that time
his whole life had been greatly influenced by the teachings of
Savonarola who had preached both passionately and learnedly in
Florence, advocating liberty. From the time he fell under Savonarola's
wonderful power, the artist grew more and more mystic and morbid. In
Rome it was the custom to have the portraits of conspirators, or
persons of high degree who were revolutionary or otherwise
objectionable to the state, hung outside the Public Palace, and in
Botticelli's time there was a famous disturbance among the aristocrats
of the state. In 1478 the powerful Pazzi family conspired against the
Medici family, which then actually had control. It was Botticelli who
was engaged to paint the portraits of the Pazzi family, which to their
shame and humiliation were to be displayed upon the palace walls.
One peculiarity of this artist's pictures was that he used actual
goldleaf to make the high lights upon hair, leaves, and draperies. The
effect of the use of this gold was very beautiful, if unusual, and it
may have been that his apprenticeship as a goldsmith suggested to him
such a device.
Also it was he who created certain characteristics of painting that
have since been thought original with Burne-Jones. This was the use of
long stiff lily-stalks or other upright details in his compositions.
Examples of this idea, which produced so weird an effect, will be
found in his allegory of "Spring," where stiff tree-trunks form a part
of the background. In the "Madonna of the Palms" upright lily-stalks
are held in pale and trembling hands. Like Michael Angelo, who came
years afterward, Botticelli was a guest of the great Lorenzo the
"Magnificent," in Florence. It was by Botticelli's hand that the
greater painter sent a letter to Lorenzo from a duchess friend who was
also his patron. This was in Angelo's youth; in Botticelli's old age.
All his life was a drama of morbid seeking after the unattainable, and
finally he became so poor and helpless that in his old age he would
have starved had Lorenzo de' Medici not taken care of him. Lorenzo and
other friends who in spite of his gloominess admired his real piety,
gathered about him and kept him from starvation.
On his "Nativity," Botticelli wrote: "This picture I, Alessandro,
painted at the end of the year 1500 in the troubles of Italy, in the
halftime after the time, during the fulfilment of the eleventh of
John, in the second woe of the Apocalypse, in the loosing the devil
for three and a half years. Afterward he shall be chained according to
the twelfth of John, and see him trodden down as in this picture." All
of this is interesting because Botticelli himself wrote it, but it is
not very easily understood by any child, nor by many grown people.
Botticelli did some very extraordinary things, but whether they are
beautiful or not one must decide for himself. They are paintings so
characteristic that one must think them very beautiful or else not at
all so.
PLATE--LA PRIMAVERA
_(Spring)_
In this picture we have the forerunner of a modern painter, because we
see in it certain, qualities that we find in Bcklin. Look at the
effect of vertical lines; the tree trunks, and the poses of the
slender women. Over all hovers a cupid who is sending love-shafts into
the hearts of all in springtime.
Notice the lacy effect of the flowers that bestar the wind-blown gown
of "La Primavera," the fern-like leaves that fleck the background; the
draperies that do not conceal the forms of the nymphs of the lovely
springtime.
The very spirit of spring is seen in all the half-floating,
half-dancing, gliding, diaphanous figures of the forest. The flowers
of "La Primavera's" crown are blue and white cornflowers and
primroses. She scatters over the earth tulips, anemones, and
narcissus. The painting is allegorical and unique. Never were such
fluttering odds and ends of draperies painted before, nor such
fascinating effects had from canvas, paint, or brush. The picture
hangs in Florence in the Uffizi Gallery. A German critic tells us that
the "Realm of Venus," is a better title for this picture, and that it
was painted after a poem of that name.
Other pictures by this artist are: "The Birth of Venus," "Pallas,"
"Judith," "Holofernes," "St. Augustine," "Adoration of the Magi," and
"St. Sebastian."
VI
WILLIAM ADOLPHE BOUGUEREAU
(Pronounced W. A'dolf Bou-gair-roh)
_French (Genre) School_
1825-1905
_Pupil of Picot and the Ecole des Beaux-Arts_
Bouguereau's business-like father meant his son also to be
business-like, but he made the mistake of permitting him to go to a
drawing school in Bordeaux and there, to his father's chagrin, the
youngster took the annual prize. After that there seemed nothing for
the father to do but grin and bear it, because the son decided to be
an artist and had fairly won his right to be one.
Young Bouguereau had no money, and therefore he went to live with an
uncle at Saintonge, a priest, who had much sympathy with the boy's
wish to paint, and he left him free to do the best he could for
himself in art. He got a chance to paint some portraits, and when he
and his uncle talked the matter over It was decided that he should
take the money got for them, and go to Paris. It was there that he
sought Picot, his first truly helpful teacher; and there, for the
first time he learned more than he already knew about art.
All Bouguereau's opportunities in life were made by himself, by his
own genius. No one gave him anything; he earned all. He longed to go
to Italy, and in the Ecole des Beaux-Arts he won the Prix de Rome,
which made possible a journey to the land of great artists. The French
Government began to buy his work, and he began to receive commissions
to decorate walls in great buildings; thus, gradually, he made for
himself fame and fortune.
When this artist undertook to paint sacred subjects, of great dignity,
he was not at his best; but when he chose children and mothers and
everyday folk engaged about their everyday business, he painted
beautifully. Americans have bought many of his pictures and he has had
more popularity in this country than anywhere outside of France.
Some authorities give the birthplace of Bouguereau as La Rochelle; at
any rate he died there at midnight, on the nineteenth of August, 1905.
PLATE--THE VIRGIN AS CONSOLER
The main distinction about this artist's pictured faces is the
peculiarly earnest expression he has given to the eyes. In this
picture of the Virgin there is great genius in the pose and death-look
of the little child whose mother has flung herself across the lap of
Mary, abandoned to her agony. This painting is hung in the
Luxembourg. Others by the same master are called "Psyche and Cupid"
"Birth of Venus," "Innocence," and "At the Well."
VII
SIR EDWARD BURNE-JONES
_English (Pre-Raphaelite) School_
1833-1898
_Pupil of Rossetti_
This artist has been called the most original of all contemporaneous
artists. He has also been called the "lyric painter"; meaning that he
is to painting what the lyric poet is to literature. His work once
known can almost always be recognised wherever seen afterward. He did
not slavishly follow the Pre-Raphaelite school, yet he drew most of
his ideas from its methods. He was, in the use of stiff lines, a
follower of Botticelli, and not original in that detail, as some have
seemed to think.
PLATE--CHANT D'AMOUR
_(The Love-Song)_
This is a picture in the true Burne-Jones style: a beautiful woman in
billowy draperies, playing upon a harp forms the central figure of the
group of three--a listener on either side of her. There is the
attractiveness of the Burne-Jones method about this picture, but after
all there seems to be no very good reason for its having been
painted. The subject thus treated has only a negative value, and
little suggestion of thought or dramatic idea.
Another picture of this artist, in which his use of stiff draperies is
specially shown, is that of the women at the tomb of Christ, when they
find the stone rolled away and, looking around, see the Saviour's
figure before them. The scene is low and cavern-like, with a brilliant
light surrounding the tomb. This artist also painted "The Vestal
Virgin," "King Cophetua and the Beggar Maid," "Pan and Psyche," "The
Golden Stairs," and "Love Among the Ruins."
VIII
JOHN CONSTABLE
_English School_
1776-1837
_Pupil of the Royal Academy_
John Constable was the son of a "yeoman farmer" who meant to make him
also a yeoman farmer. Mostly we find that the fathers of our artists
had no higher expectations for their sons than to have them take up
their own business; to begin as they had, and to end as they expected
to. But in John Constable's case, as with all the others, the father's
methods of living did not at all please the son, and having most of
all a liking for picture-making; young John set himself to planning
his own affairs.
Nevertheless, the foundation of John's art was laid right there in the
Suffolk farmer's home and conditions. He was born in East Bergholt,
and the father seems to have believed in windmills, for early in life
the signs of wind and weather became a part of the son's education. He
learned a deal more of atmospheric conditions there on his father's
windmill planted farm than he could possibly have learned shut up in a
studio, French fashion. As a little boy he came to know all the signs
of the heavens; the clouds gathering for storm or shine; the bending
of the trees in the blast; all of these he loved, and later on made
the principal subjects of his art. He learned to observe these things
as a matter of business and at his father's command; thus we may say
that he studied his life-work from his very infancy. All about him
were beautiful hedgerows, picturesque cottages with high pitched roofs
covered with thatch, and it was these beauties which bred one other
great landscape painter besides Constable, of whom we shall presently
speak, Gainsborough.
At last, graduating from windmills, John went to London. He had a
vacation from the work set him by his father, and for two years he
painted "cottages, studied anatomy," and did the drudgery of his art;
but there was little money in it for him, and soon he had to go into
his father's counting house, for windmills seemed to have paid the
elder Constable, considerably better than painting promised to pay
young John.
John doubtless liked counting-house work even less than he had done
the study of windmills and weather in his father's fields. He was a
most persistent fellow, however, and finally he returned to London, to
study again the art he loved, this time in the Royal Academy, which
meant that he had made some progress.
His father gave him very little aid to do the things he longed to do,
but after his father's death he found that a little money was coming
to him from the estate--4,000. He had already triumphed over his
difficulties by painting his first fine pictures; he now knew that he
was to become a successful artist, and be able to take care of himself
and a wife. Though in love, he had hitherto been too poor to
marry. His first splendid work was "Dedham Vale."
Though things were going very well with him, it was not until Paris
discovered him that he achieved great success. In 1824 he painted two
large pictures which he took to Paris, and there he found fame. The
best landscape painting in France dates from the time when Constable's
works were hung in the Louvre, to become the delight of all
art-lovers.
He received a gold medal from Charles X., and became more honoured
abroad than he had ever been at home.
Constable had many enemies, and made many more after he became an
Academician. Some artists, who would have liked that honour and who
could not gain it for themselves, declared that Constable painted
"with a palette knife," though it certainly would not have mattered if
he had, since he made great pictures.
He painted things exactly as he saw them, and was not a popular
artist. Most of all, he loved to paint the scenes that he had known so
well in his youth, and he did them over and over again, as if the
subject was one in which he wished to reach perfection.
When he died he left a picture, "Arundel Castle and Mill," standing
with its paint wet upon his easel for he passed away very suddenly, on
April 1st, leaving behind him many unsold paintings.
He was a sensitive chap, and throughout his youth was greatly
distressed by the differences of opinion between himself and his
father. He was torn asunder between a sense of duty and his own wish
to be an artist; and his greatest consolation in this situation was in
the friendship he had formed for a plumber, who, like himself, dearly
loved art. The plumber's name was John Dunthorne, and the two men
wandered about the country, when not employed at their regular work,
and together, by streams and in fields, painted the same scenes. At
one time they hired a little room in the neighbouring village which
they made into a studio. Constable was a handsome fellow in his youth
and was known to all as the "handsome miller." His father, the yeoman
farmer with the windmills, was also a miller.
In London he became acquainted with one John Smith, known as
"Antiquity Smith," who taught him something of etching. After he was
recalled to his father's business, his mother wrote to "Antiquity
Smith," that she hoped John "would now attend to business, by which he
will please me and his father, and ensure his own respectability and
comfort"--a complete expression of the middle-class British mind. Her
satisfaction was short-lived, for her son soon returned to London.
When his first pictures were rejected by the Royal Academy he showed
one of them to Sir Benjamin West, who said hopefully: "Don't be
disheartened, young man, we shall hear of you again; you must have
loved nature very much before you could have painted this."
About that time he tried to paint many kinds of pictures, such as
portraits and sacred subjects, but he did not seem to succeed in
anything except the scenes of his boyhood, which he truly loved. Hence
he gave up attempting that which he could do only passably, and kept
to what he could do supremely well.
When his friends wished him to continue portrait painting, the only
thing that was well paid at that time, Constable wrote: "You know I
have always succeeded best with my native scenes. They have always
charmed me, and I hope they always will. I have now a path marked out
very distinctly for myself, and I am desirous of pursuing it
uninterruptedly."
About the time he fell in love and before his father's death, his
health began to fail, and the young woman's mother would have none of
him. Her father was in favour of Constable, but he could not hold out
against the chance of his daughter losing her grandfather's fortune by
marrying the wrong man.
The lady was not so distractingly in love as young Constable was, and
she did not entirely like the idea of poverty, even with John, so she
held off, and with so much anxiety Constable became downright ill. For
five years the pair lived apart, and then the artist and the young
woman, whose name was Maria Bicknell, lost their mothers about the
same time, This drew them very closely together; and to help the
matter on, John's attendance upon his father in his last illness
brought him to the same town as Miss Bicknell. After his father's
death, he urged the young lady so strongly to be his wife that she
consented They were married and her father soon forgave her, but not
so her grandfather, who declared that he never would forgive her, but
he really must have done so from the first, for when he died it was
found that he had left her a little fortune of 4,000. This was about
the same amount the artist had received from his father, so that they
were able to get on very well.
After Constable's marriage he went on a visit to Sir George Beaumont,
and there an amusing incident occurred which is known to-day as the
story of Sir George's "brown tree." It seems that Constable's ideas of
colour for his landscapes were so true to nature that a good many
people did not approve of them, and one day while painting, Sir George
declared that the colour of an old Cremona fiddle was the best model
of colour tone that a landscape could have. Constable's only answer
was to place the fiddle on the green lawn in front of the house. At
another time his host asked the artist, "Do you not find it very
difficult to determine where to place your brown tree?" "Not at all,"
was Constable's reply, "for I never put such a thing into a picture in
my life."
In painting one picture many times he declared, "Its light cannot be
put out because it is the light of nature." A Frenchman called
attention to one of his pictures thus: "Look at these landscapes by an
Englishman. The ground appears to be covered with dew."
Notwithstanding the little fortune of his wife and himself, Constable
was not quite carefree, because he had to raise a good sized family of
six children so that when his wife's father died and left his daughter
20,000 he said to a friend: "Now I shall stand before a six-foot
canvas with a mind at ease, thank God!" In the very midst of this
happiness, his beloved wife became ill with consumption, and was
certain to die. He no longer cared very much for life and wrote very
sadly:
"I have been ill, but am endeavouring to get work again, and could I
get afloat upon a canvas of six feet, I might have a chance of being
carried from myself." When he became a member of the Royal Academy, he
said: "It has been delayed until I am solitary and cannot impart it,"
meaning that without his dear wife to share his good fortune, it
seemed an empty honour to him.
Strange things are told which show how little his work was valued by
his countrymen. After he had become a member of the Academy one of his
small pictures was entered but rejected; nobody knowing anything about
it. It was put on one side among the "outsiders." Finally, one of his
fellow members glancing at it was attracted.
"Stop a bit! I rather like that. Why not say 'doubtful'?" Later
Constable acknowledged the picture as his, and then they wished to
hang it, but he refused to let them. Another Academy story is about
his picture "Hadleigh Castle." On Varnishing Day, Chartney, a
brilliant critic, told Constable that the foreground of the picture
was "too cold," and so he undertook to "warm it," by giving it a
strong glaze with asphaltum with Constable's brush which he snatched
from the artist's hand. Constable gazed at him in horror. "Oh! there
goes all my dew," he cried, and when Chartney's back was turned he
hurriedly wiped the "warmth" all away and got back his "dew."
Even the amusing things that happened to him, seem to have a little
sadness about them. He wrote to a friend: "Beechey was here yesterday,
and said: 'Why d--n it Constable, what a d--n fine picture you are
making; but you look d--n ill, and you've got a d--n bad cold!' so,"
added Constable, "you have evidence on oath of my being about a fine
picture and that I am looking ill."
An illustration of his painstaking and truthfulness to nature is that
he once took home with him from a visit bottles of coloured sand and
fragments of stone which he meant to introduce into a picture; and on
passing some slimy posts near a mill, he said to his host, "I wish you
could cut those off and send their tops to me."
Constable was a loyal friend, the most persistent of men, and several
anecdotes are told of his characteristics. His friend Fisher said to
him:
"Where real business is to be done, you are the most energetic and
punctual of men. In smaller matters, such as putting on your breeches,
you are apt to lose time in deciding which leg shall go in first."
PLATE--THE HAY WAIN
This picture was first called "Landscape," and it was painted in
1821. In his letters about it, however, Constable also called it
"Noon," and others wrote of it as "Midsummer Noon." This tells us what
a wealth of hot sunlight is suggested by the painting.
It shows a little farmhouse upon the bank of a stream, a spot well
known as "Willy Lott's Cottage." The owner had been born there and he
died there eighty-eight years later, without ever having left his
cottage for four whole days in all those years. Upon the tombstone of
Lott, which is in the Bergholt burial ground, his epitaph calls the
house "Gibeon Farm." It was a favourite scene with Constable, and he
painted it many times from every side. It is the same house we see in
the "Mill Stream," another Constable painting, and again in "Valley
Farm." In this last picture he painted the side opposite to the one
shown in the "Hay Wain."
The stream near which the house stands spreads out into a ford, and in
the picture the hay cart, with two men upon it, is passing through the
ford. The horses are decked out with red tassels. On the right of the
stream there is a broad meadow, golden green in the sunlight, "with
groups of trees casting cool shadows on the grass, and backed by a
distant belt of woodland of rich blues and greens." On the right is a
fisherman, half hidden by a bush, standing near his punt.
Constable wrote to his friend, Fisher, "My picture goes to the Academy
on the tenth." This was written on April 1st, 1821. "It is not so
grand as Tinney's." This shows us, that Constable had not vanity
enough to interfere with his self-criticism. Again in a letter written
to him by a friend: "How does the 'Hay Wain' look now it has got into
your own room again?" adding that he wished to see it there, away from
the Academy which to him was always "like a great pot of boiling
varnish."
Later Fisher wrote: "I have a great desire to possess your 'Wain,' but
I cannot now reach what it is worth;" and he begged Constable not to
sell it without giving him a chance to try once more to raise the
money to buy it. He wrote that the picture would become of greater
value to his children if the artist left it hanging upon the walls of
the Academy, "till you join the society of Ruysdael, Wilson, and
Claude. As praise and money will then be of no value to you, the world
will liberally bestow both."
Later a Frenchman wished to buy it for exhibition purposes, and when
Constable wrote to Fisher of this, his friend replied that he had
better sell it to the Frenchman "for the sake of the _clat_ it may
give you. The stupid English public, which has no judgment of its own,
will begin to think there is something in it if the French make your
works national property. You have long lain under a mistake; men do
not purchase pictures because they admire them, but because others
covet them."
Finally, the "Hay Wain" was sold to the French dealer for 250, and
Constable threw in a picture of Yarmouth for good measure. Later a
friend declared that he had created a good deal of argument about
landscape painting, and that there had come to be two divisions, for
he had practically founded a new school. He received a gold medal for
the "Hay Wain," and the French nation tried to buy it. In the Louvre
are "The Cottage," "Weymouth Bay," and "The Glebe Farm." Elsewhere are
"Hampstead Heath," "Salisbury Cathedral," "The Lock on the Stour,"
"Dedham Mill," "The Valley Farm," "Gillingham Mill," "The Cornfield,"
"Boat-Building," "Flatford Mill on the River Stour," besides many
others.
IX
JOHN SINGLETON COPLEY
_English School_
1737-1815
A little boy with a squirrel was the first picture that pointed this
artist toward fame and that was painted in England and exhibited at
the Society of Arts.
This American-born Irishman had no family or ancestry of account, but
he himself was to become the father of Lord Chancellor Lyndhurst, and
he did some truly fine things in art.
About the same time America had another painter, Benjamin West, marked
out for fame, but he got his start in Europe while Copley had already
become a successful artist before he left Boston, his native place.
He liked best to paint "interiors"--rooms with fine furniture and
curtains, women in fine clothing and men in embroidered waistcoats and
bejewelled buckles.
In 1777 he got into the Royal Academy, and on the whole had
considerable influence on European art. If we study the portraits that
he painted while in Boston, we can get a very complete idea of the
surroundings of the "Royalists" at the time of our colonial history.
PLATE--THE COPLEY FAMILY GROUP
In this picture there are seven figures with an open landscape forming
the background. The baby of the family plays, with uplifted arms, upon
grandfather's knee. The mother on the couch, surrounded by her three
other children, is kissing one while another clings to her. Before her
stands a prim little maid, gowned in the fashion of grown-folks of her
day. A little lock of hair falling upon her forehead suggests that
when she was good she was very, very good, and when she was bad she
was horrid! She wears a little cap. At the back is the artist himself
in a wig and other fashions of the time. A great column rises behind
him, forming a part of the architecture or the landscape, one hardly
knows which in so artificially constructed a picture.
Copley painted also John Hancock, Judge Graham, Jeremiah Lee, and
General Joseph Warren.
X
JEAN BAPTISTE CAMILLE COROT
(Pronounced Zhahn Bah-teest' Cah-mee'yel Coh'roh)
_Fontainebleau-Barbizon School_
1796-1875
_Pupil of Michallon_
About three hundred years before Corot's time there was a
Fontainebleau school of artists, made up of the pathetic Andrea del
Sarto, the wonderful Leonardo da Vinci, and Cellini. These painters
had been summoned from their Italian homes by Francis I., to decorate
the Palace of Fontainebleau. The second great group of painters who
had studios in the forest and beside the stream were Rousseau, Dupr,
Diaz, and Daubigny; Troyon, Van Marcke, Jacque; then Millet, the
painter of peasants.
Corot was born in Paris and received what education the ordinary
school at Rouen could give him. He was intended by his parents for
something besides art, as it would seem that every artist in the world
was intended. Corot was to grow up and become a respectable draper; at
any rate a draper.
The young chap did as his father wished, until he was twenty-six years
old, and dreary years those must have been to him. He did not get on
well with his master, nor did the world treat him very well. He found
neither riches nor the fame that was his due till he was an old man of
seventy. At that age he had become as rich a man as he might have been
had he remained a sensible draper.
Best of all, Corot loved to paint clouds and dewy nights, pale moons
and early day, and of all amusements in the world, he preferred the
theatre. There he would sit; gay or sad as the play might make him,
weeping or laughing and as interested as a little child.
After he had anything to give away, Corot was the most madly generous
of men. It was he who gave a pension to the widow of his brother
artist, Millet, on which she lived all the rest of her days. He gave
money to his brother painters and to all who went to him for aid; and
he always gave gaily, freely, as if giving were the greatest joy,
outside of the theatre, a man could have. Everyone who knew him loved
him, and there was no note of sadness in his daily life, though there
seems to be one in his poetical pictures. Because of his generous ways
he was known as "Pere Corot." He sang as he worked, and loved his
fellowmen all the time; but most of all, he loved his sister.
"Rousseau is an eagle," he used to say in speaking of his fellow
artist. "As for me, I am only a lark, putting forth some little songs
in my gray clouds."
It has been noted that most great landscape painters have been
city-bred, a remarkable fact. Constable and Gainsborough were born and
bred in the country, but they are exceptions to the rule. Corot's
parents were Parisians of the purest dye, having been court-dressmakers
to Napoleon I.; and when Corot finally determined to leave the
draper's shop and become a painter, his father said: "You shall
have a yearly allowance of 1,200 francs, and if you can live on that,
you can do as you please." When his son was made a member of the
Legion of Honour, after twenty-three years of earnest work, his father
thought the matter over, and presently doubled the allowance, "for
Camille seems to have some talent after all," he remarked as an excuse
for his generosity.
It is told that when he first went to study in Italy, Corot longed to
transfer the moving scenes before him to canvas; but people moved too
quickly for him, so he methodically set about learning how to do with
a few strokes what he would otherwise have laboured over. So he
reduced his sketching to such a science that he became able to sketch
a ballet in full movement; and it is remarked that this practice
trained him for presenting the tremulousness of leaves of trees, which
he did so exquisitely.
One learns something of this painter of early dawn and soft evening
from a letter he wrote to his friend Dupr:
One gets up at three in the morning, before the sun; one goes and sits
at the foot of a tree; one watches and waits. One sees nothing much at
first. Nature resembles a whitish canvas on which are sketched
scarcely the profiles of some masses; everything is perfumed, and
shines in the fresh breath of dawn. Bing! the sun grows bright but has
not yet torn aside the veil behind which lie concealed the meadows,
the dale, and hills of the horizon. The vapours of night still creep,
like silvery flakes over the numbed-green vegetation. Bing! bing!--a
first ray of sunlight--a second ray of sunlight--the little flowers
seem to wake up joyously. They all have their drop of dew which
trembles--the chilly leaves are stirred with the breath of morning--in
the foliage the birds sing unseen--all the flowers seem to be saying
their prayers. Loves on butterfly wings frolic over the meadows and
make the tall plants wave--one sees nothing--yet everything is
there--the landscape is entirely behind the veil of mist, which
mounts, mounts, sucked up by the sun; and as it rises, reveals the
river, plated with silver, the meadow, the trees, cottages, the
receding distance--one distinguishes at last everything that one had
divined at first.
In all the world there can hardly be a more exquisite story of
daybreak than this; and so beautiful was the mood into which Corot
fell at eventime, as he himself describes it, that it would be a
mistake to leave it out. This is his story of the night:
Nature drowses--the fresh air, however, sighs among the leaves--the
dew decks the velvety grass with pearls. The nymphs fly--hide
themselves--and desire to be seen. Bing! a star in the sky which
pricks its image on the pool. Charming star--whose brilliance is
increased by the quivering of the water, thou watchest me--thou
smilest to me with half-closed eye! Bing!--a second star appears in
the water, a second eye opens. Be the harbingers of welcome, fresh and
charming stars. Bing! Bing! Bing!--three, six, twenty stars. All the
stars in the sky are keeping tryst in this happy pool. Everything
darkens, the pool alone sparkles. There is a swarm of stars--all
yields to illusion. The sun being gone to bed, the inner sun of the
soul, the sun of art awakens. Bon! there is my picture done!
In writing those letters, Corot made literature as well as
pictures. That little word "bing!" appears also in his paintings, as
little leaves or bits of tree-trunk, some small detail which,
high-lightened, accents the whole.
PLATE--DANCE OF THE NYMPHS
There could hardly be a more charming painting than this which hangs
in the Louvre. It is of a half-shut-in landscape of tall trees, their
branches mingling; and all the atmospheric effects that belong to
Corot's work can here be seen.
On the open greensward is a group of nymphs dancing gaily, while over
all the scene is the veil of fairy-land or of something quite
mysterious. At the back and side, satyrs can be seen watching the
nymphs. There is here less of the blur of leaves than that seen in
later pictures, but the same soft effect is found, and the little
"bings" are the accents of light placed upon a leaf, a nymph's
shoulder, or a tree-trunk.
This picture was painted in 1851, when Corot had not yet developed
that style which was to mark all his later work.
Besides this picture he painted "Paysage," "The Bathers" "Ville
d'Arvay," "Willows near Arras," "The Bent Tree," "A Gust of Wind," and
others.
XI
CORREGGIO (ANTONIO ALLEGRI)
(Pronounced Cor-rage'jyo Ahl-lay'gree)
_School of Parma_
1494(?)-1534
_Pupil of Mantegna_
When Correggio was a little boy, he lived in the odour of spices,
which were kept upon his father's shop-shelves. He was a highly-spiced
little boy and man, although the most timid and shrinking. His
imagination was the liveliest possible.
The spice merchant lived in the town of Correggio, and thus the artist
got his name. Correggio knew what should be inside the lovely flesh of
his painted figures before he began to paint them, because he studied
anatomy in a truly scientific manner before he studied painting.
Probably no other artist up to that time, had ever begun with the bare
bones of his models, but Correggio may be said to have worked from the
inside out. He learned about the structure of the human frame from
Dr. Giovanni Battista Lombardi, and showed his gratitude to his
teacher by painting a picture "Il Medico del Correggio" (Correggio's
Physician), and presenting it to Doctor Lombardi.
Back to Full Books
|