The Project Gutenberg eBook, Art Principles, by Ernest Govett

Title: Art Principles

With Special Reference to Painting Together with Notes on the Illusions Produced by the Painter

Author: Ernest Govett

Release Date: June 14, 2011 [eBook #36427]

Language: English

Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1

***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK ART PRINCIPLES***

 

E-text prepared by Chris Curnow
and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team
(http://www.pgdp.net)
from page images generously made available by
Internet Archive
(http://www.archive.org)

 

Note: Images of the original pages are available through Internet Archive. See http://www.archive.org/details/artprincipleswit00goverich

 

---

 

---

---

 

Art Principles

With Special Reference to Painting

 

Together with Notes on the
Illusions Produced by the Painter

 

By

Ernest Govett

 

With Thirty-one Illustrations

G. P. Putnam's Sons
New York and London
The Knickerbocker Press
1919

 

---

 

Copyright, 1919
by
ERNEST GOVETT

 

 

The Knickerbocker Press, New York

---

PREFACE

This book is put forward with much diffidence, for I am well aware of its insufficiencies. My original idea was to produce a work covering all the principles of painting, but after many years spent in considering the various recorded theories relating to æsthetic problems, and in gathering materials to indicate how the accepted principles have been applied, I came to the conclusion that a single life is scarcely long enough for the preparation of an exhaustive treatise on the subject. Nevertheless, I planned a work of much wider scope than the one now presented, but various circumstances, and principally the hindrance to research caused by the war, impelled me to curtail my ambition. Time was fading, and my purpose seemed to be growing very old. I felt that if one has something to say, it is better to say it incompletely than to run the risk of compulsory silence. The book will be found little more than a skeleton, and some of its sections, notably those dealing with illusions in the art, contain only a few suggestions and instances, but perhaps enough is said to induce a measure of further inquiry into the subject.

That part of the work dealing with the fine arts generally is the result of long consideration of the apparent contradictions involved in the numerous suggested standards of art. In a little book on The Position of Landscape in Art (published under a nom de plume a few years ago), I threw out, as a ballon d'essai, an idea of the proposition now elaborated as the Law of General Assent, and I have been encouraged to affirm this proposition more strongly by the fact that its validity was not questioned in any of the published criticism of the former work; nor do I find reason to vary it after years of additional deliberation. I have not before dealt with the other propositions now put forward.

The notes being voluminous I have relegated them to the end of the book, leaving the feet of the text pages for references only.

Where foreign works quoted have been translated into English, the English titles are recorded, and foreign quotations are given in English, save in one or two minor instances where the sense could not be precisely rendered in translation.

E. G.    

New York, January, 1919.

---

CONTENTS

href="@public@vhost@g@gutenberg@html@files@36427@[email protected]#Page_83" class="pginternal" tag="{http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml}a">83   VI.—Expression. Part 1.—The Ideal 86   VII.—Expression. Part 2.—Christian Ideals 91 The Deity—Christ—The Madonna—Madonna and Child.   VIII.—Expression. Part 3.—Classical Ideals 106 Ideals of the Greeks—Use of the ancient divinities by the Painter.   IX.—Expression. Part 4.—General Ideals 135   X.—Expression. Part 5.—Portraiture 141 Limitations of the Portrait Painter—Emphasis and addition of qualities in portrait painting—Practice of the ancient Greeks—Dignity—Importance of Simplicity—Some of the great masters—Portraiture of women—The English masters—The quality of Grace—The necessity for Repose.   XI.—Expression. Part 6.—Miscellaneous 167 Grief—The Smile—The Open Mouth—Contrasts—Representation of Death.   XII.—Landscape 192 Limitations of the Landscape Painter—Illusion of opening distance—Illusion of motion in Landscape—Moonlight scenes—Transient conditions.   XIII.—Still-life 214   XIV.—Secondary Art 219 Paintings of record—Scenes from the Novel—From the written drama—From the acted drama—Humorous subjects—Allegorical paintings.   XV.—Colour 228   BOOK II Introductory.—Illusion in the Painter's Art 236 CHAPTER   I.—Illusion of Relief 239   II.—Illusion of Motion with Men and Animals 249   III.—Illusion of Suspension and Motion in the Air 259   Notes 273   Index of Artists and Works of Art Mentioned in this Book 357   General Index 369

---

LIST OF PLATES

Egyptian Dynasty, about 3000 B.C. (Cairo Museum.) (b). Head from a fragmentary statuette of Babylonia, dating about 2600 B.C. (Louvre: from Spearing's "Childhood of Art.") The first head is generally regarded as the finest example of Egyptian art extant, and certainly there was nothing executed in Egypt to equal it during the thirty centuries following the 5th Dynasty. The Babylonian head is the best work of Chaldean art known to us, though there are some fine fragments remaining from the period of about a thousand years later. It will be observed that the tendency of the art in both examples is towards the aims achieved by the Greeks. (See Page 7.)   Plate 2.—"Le Bon Dieu d'Amiens", in the North Porch, Amiens Cathedral 18 This figure by a French sculptor of the thirteenth century, was considered by Ruskin to be the finest ideal of Christ in existence. It is another example of the universality of ideals, for the head from the front view might well have been modelled from a Grecian work of the late fourth or early third century B.C. (See Page 319.)   Plate 3.—After an Ancient Copy of the Cnidian Venus of Praxiteles. (Vatican) 30 It is commonly agreed that this is the finest model in existence after the great work of Praxiteles, which itself has long disappeared. The figure as it now stands at the Vatican, has the right arm restored, and the hand is made to hold up some metallic drapery with which the legs are covered, the beauty of the form being thus seriously weakened. (See Pages 111 et seq.)   Plate 4.—Venus Anadyomene 42 (a). Ancient Greek sculpture from the design of Venus in the celebrated picture of Apelles. (Formerly Chessa Collection, now in New York.) The immense superiority of the sculpture over the painting (Plate 5), from the point of view of pure art, is visible at a glance. It is an indication of the far-reaching scope of the sculptor when executing ideals. (See Page 113.)   Plate 5.—Venus Anadyomene, from the Painting by Titian. (Bridgewater Collection.) 42 Compare with the Sculpture on Plate 4. (See Page 115)   Plate 6.—Venus Reposing, by Giorgione. (Dresden Gallery) 54 This is the finest reposing Venus in existence in painting. It was the model for the representation of the goddess in repose used by Titian, and many other artists who came after him. (See Page 116.)   Plate 7.—Demeter 66 (a). Head from the Cnidos marble figure of the fourth century B.C., attributed to Scopas. (British Museum.) (b). Small head in bronze of the third century B.C. (Private Collection.) In each of these heads the artist has been successful in maintaining the ideal, while indicating a suggestion of the sorrowful resignation with which Grecian legend has enveloped the mind picture of Demeter. Nevertheless, even this slight departure from the established rule tends to lessen the art, though in a very small degree. (See Page 122.)   Plate 8.—Raphael's Sistine Madonna (Dresden Gallery), with the Face of the Central Figure in Fragonard's The Pursuit Substituted for that of the Virgin 80 This and the two following plates show very clearly that in striving for an ideal, artists must necessarily arrive at the same general type. (See Pages 138 et seq.)   Plate 9.—Raphael's Virgin of the Rose (Madrid), with the Face of the Figure Representing Profane Love in Titian's Picture Substituted for that of the Virgin 92   Plate 10.—Raphael's Holy Family (Madrid), with the Face of Luini's Salome Substituted for that of the Virgin 102   Plate 11.—The Pursuit, by Fragonard. (Frick Collection, N. Y.) 114 A detail from this picture forms the

Frontispiece. It will be observed that in the complete painting the central figure apparently wears a startled expression, but that this is entirely due to the surroundings and action, is shown by the substitution of the face of the central figure for that of the Virgin in the Sistine Madonna, Plate 8. (See Page 139.)   Plate 12.—Portrait Heads of the Greek Type, Fourth Century, b.c. (See Page 145) 130 (a). Head of Plato. (Copenhagen Museum.) (b). Term of Euripides. (Naples Museum.)   Plate 13.—Portrait Heads of the Time of Imperial Rome. (See Page 145) 146 (a). Vespasian. (Naples Museum.) (b). Hadrian. (Athens Museum.)   Plate 14.—Sacrifice of Iphigenia, from a Pompeian Fresco. (Roux Ainé's Herculanum et Pompei, Vol. III) 160 This work is presumed to be a copy of the celebrated picture of Timanthes, in which the head of Agamemnon was hidden because the artist could see no other way of expressing extreme grief without distorting the features. (See Pages 168 and 339.)   Plate 15.—All's Well, by Winslow Homer. (Boston Museum, U. S. A.) 176 An instance where the permanent beauty of a picture is killed by an open mouth. After a few moments' inspection, it will be observed that the mouth appears to be kept open by a wedge. (See Page 176.)   Plate 16.—Hercules Contemplating Death, by A. Pollaiuolo. (Frick Collection, New York.) 190 The only known design of this nature which appears to exist in any of the arts. (See Pages 190 and 343.)   Plate 17.—Arcadian Landscape, by Claude Lorraine. (National Gallery, London) 198 A fine illusion of opening distance created by the precise rendering of the aerial perspective. The illusion is of course unobservable in the reproduction owing to its small size and the want of colour. (See Page 198).   Plate 18.—Landscape, by Hobbema. (Met. Museum, New York) 210 A fine example of Hobbema's work. A strong light is thrown in from the back to enable the artist to multiply his signs for the purpose of deepening the apparent distance. (See Page 202.)   Plate 19.—Landscape, by Jacob Ruysdael, (National Gallery, London) 220 Example of an illusion of movement in flowing water. (See Page 204.)   Plate 20.—The Storm, by Jacob Ruysdael. (Berlin Gallery) 232 Exhibiting an excellent illusion of motion, due to the faithful representation of a series of consecutive movements of water as the vessel passes through it. The illusion is practically lost in the reproduction, but the details of design may be observed. (See Page 206.)   Plate 21.—The Litta Madonna, by Lionardo da Vinci. (Hermitage) 240 This is perhaps the best example known of an illusion of relief secured by shading alone. (See Page 240.)   Plate 22.—Christ on the Cross, by Van Dyck. (Antwerp Museum)

class="pginternal" tag="{http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml}a">252 A superb example of relief obtained by the exclusion of accessories. Van Dyck took the idea from Rubens, who borrowed it from Titian, this artist improving on Antonella da Messina. The relief of course is not well observed in the reproduction because of its miniature form. The work is usually regarded as the finest of its kind in existence. (See Page 244.)   Plate 23.—Patricia, by Lydia Emmet. (Private Possession, N. Y.) 264 A very excellent example of the plan of securing relief described in Book II, Chap. I. Here also the relief is not observed in the reproduction, but the original is of life size and provides an illusion as nearly perfect as possible. (See Page 247.)   Plate 24.—The Creation of Adam, by Michelangelo. (Vatican) 276 Instance of the use of an oval form of drapery to assist in presenting an illusion of suspension in the air. (See Page 260.)   Plate 25.—The Pleiads, by M. Schwind. (Denner Collection.) 288 One of the finest examples of illusion of motion in the air. (See Page 269.)   Plate 26.—St. Margaret, by Raphael. (Louvre) 302 Perhaps the best example in existence of a painted human figure in action. It will be seen that every part of the body and every fold of the drapery are used to assist in the expression of movement. (See Page 250.)   Plate 27.—Diana and Nymphs Pursued by Satyrs, by Rubens. (Prado) 318 A good example of an illusion of motion created by showing a number of persons in different stages of a series of consecutive actions. (See Page 254.)   Plate 28.—Automedon with the Horses of Achilles, by H. Regnault. (Boston Museum, U. S. A.) 334 The extraordinary spirit and action of these horses are above the experience of life, but they do not appear to be beyond the bounds of possibility. In any case the action is perfectly appropriate here, as the animals are presumed to be immortal. (See Page 256.)   Plate 29.—Marble Figure of Ariadne. (Vatican) 348 This work, of the Hellenistic period, illustrates the possibility of largely varying the regular proportions of the human figure without injury to the art, by the skilful use of drapery. (See Page 329.)

---

Art Principles

---

INTRODUCTION

In view of the many varied definitions of "Art" which have been put forward in recent times, and the equally diverse hypotheses advanced for the solution of æsthetic problems relating to beauty, it is necessary for one who discusses principles of art, to state what he understands by the terms "Art" and "Beauty."

Though having a widely extended general meaning, the term "Art" in common parlance applies to the fine arts only, but the term "Arts" has reference as well to certain industries which have utility for their primary object. This work considers only the fine arts, and when the writer uses the term "Art" or "Arts" he refers to one or more of these arts, unless a particular qualification is added. The definition of "Art" as applied to the fine arts, upon which he relies, is "The production of beauty for the purpose of giving pleasure," or as it is more precisely put, "The beautiful representation of nature for the purpose of giving disinterested pleasure." This is, broadly, the definition generally accepted, and is certainly the understanding of art which has guided the hands of all the creators of those great works in the various arts before which men have bowed as triumphs of human skill.

There has been no satisfactory definition of "Beauty," nor can the term be shortly interpreted until there is a general agreement as to what it covers. Much of the confusion arising from the contradictory theories of æstheticists in respect of the perception of beauty is apparently due to the want of separate consideration of emotional beauty and beauty of mind, that is to say, the beauty of sensorial effects and beauty of expression respectively.1 There are kinds of sensorial beauty which depend for their perception upon immediately preceding sensory experience, or particular coexistent surroundings which are not necessarily permanent, while in other cases a certain

beauty may be recognized and subsequently appear to vanish altogether. From this it is obvious that any æsthetic system based upon the existence of an objectivity of beauty must fall to the ground. On the other hand, without an objectivity there can be no system, because in its absence a line of reasoning explaining cause and effect in the perception of beauty, which is open to demonstration, is naturally impossible. Nor may we properly speak of a philosophy of art.2 We may reasonably consider æsthetics a branch of psychology, but the emotions arising from the recognition of beauty vary only in degree and not in kind, whether the beauty be seen in nature or art. Consequently there can be no separate psychological enquiry into the perception of beauty created by art as distinguished from that observable in nature.

It must be a natural attraction for the insoluble mysteries of life that has induced so many philosophers during the last two centuries to put forward æsthetic systems. That no two of these systems agree on important points, and that each and every one has crumbled to dust from a touch of the wand of experience administered by a hundred hands, are well-known facts, yet still the systems continue to be calmly presented as if they were valuable contributions to knowledge. Each new critic in the domain of philosophy carefully and gravely sets them up, and then carefully and gravely knocks them down.3 An excuse for the systems has been here and there offered, that the explanations thereof sometimes include valuable philosophical comments or suggestions. This may be, but students cannot reasonably be expected to sift out a few oats from a bushel of husks, even if the supply be from the bin of a Hegel or a Schopenhauer. Is it too much to suggest that these phantom systems be finally consigned to the grave of oblivion which has yawned for them so long and so conspicuously? Bubbles have certain measurements and may brilliantly glow, but they are still bubbles. It is as impossible to build up a system of philosophy upon the perception of beauty, which depends entirely upon physical and physiological laws, as to erect a system of ethics on the law of gravitation, for a feasible connection between superstructure and foundation cannot be presented to the mind.

We may further note that a proper apprehension of standards of judgment in art cannot be obtained unless the separate and relative æsthetic values of the two forms of beauty are considered, because the beauty of a work may appear greater at one time than at another, according as it is more or less permanent or fleeting, that is to say, according as the balance of the sensorial and intellectual elements therein is more or less uneven; or if the beauty present be almost entirely emotional, according as the observer may be affected by independent sensorial conditions of time or place. Consequent upon these considerations, an endeavour has been made in this work to distinguish between the two forms of beauty in the various arts, and the separate grades thereof.

It will be noticed that the writer has adopted the somewhat unusual course of including fiction among the fine arts. Why this practice is not commonly followed is hard to determine, but no definition of a fine art has been or can be given which does not cover fiction. In the definition here accepted, the art is clearly included, for the primary object of fiction is the beautiful representation of nature for the purpose of giving disinterested pleasure.

---

Art is independent of conditions of peoples or countries. Its germ is unconnected with civilization, politics, religion, laws, manners, or morals. It may appear like a brilliant flower where the mind of man is an intellectual desert, or refuse to bloom in the busiest hive of human energy. Its mother is the imagination, and wherever this has room to expand, there art will grow, though the ground may be nearly sterile, and the bud wither away from want of nourishment. Every child is born a potential artist, for he comes into the world with sensorial nerves, and a brain which directs the imagination. The primitive peoples made beautiful things long before they could read or write, and the recognition of harmony of form appears to have been one of the first understandings in life after the primal instincts of self-preservation and the continuation of the species. Some of the sketches made by the cave men of France are equal to anything of the kind produced in a thousand years of certain ancient civilizations, commencing countless centuries after the very existence of the cave men had been forgotten; and even if executed now, would be recognized as indicating the possession of considerable talent by the artists. The greatest poem ever written was given birth in a country near which barbaric hordes had recently devastated populous cities, and wrecked a national fabric with which were interwoven centuries of art and culture. That the author of this poem had seen great works of art is certain, or he could not have conceived the shield of Achilles, but the laboured sculpture that had fired his imagination, and the legends which had perhaps been the seed of his masterpieces were doubtless buried with his own records beneath the tramp of numberless mercenaries. Fortunately here and there the human voice could draw from memory's store, and so the magic of Homer was whispered by the dying to the living; but even his time and place are now only vaguely known, and he remains like the waratah on the bleached pasture of some desert fringe—a solitary blaze of scarlet where all else is drear and desolate.