Of the portraits of Stevenson a word or two may be said. There is a very
good early photograph of him, taken not very long before the date of my
visit to him at Braemar in 1881, and is an admirable
likeness--characteristic not only in expression, but in pose and
attitude, for it fixes him in a favourite position of his; and is, at the
same time, very easy and natural. The velvet jacket, as I have remarked,
was then his habitual wear, and the thin fingers holding the constant
cigarette an inseparable associate and accompaniment.
He acknowledged himself that he was a difficult subject to paint--not at
all a good sitter--impatient and apt to rebel at posing and time spent in
arrangement of details--a fact he has himself, as we shall see, set on
record in his funny verses to Count Nerli, who painted as successful a
portrait as any. The little miniature, full-length, by Mr J. S. Sarjent,
A.R.A., which was painted at Bournemouth in 1885, is confessedly a mere
sketch and much of a caricature: it is in America. Sir W. B. Richmond
has an unfinished portrait, painted in 1885 or 1886--it has never passed
out of the hands of the artist,--a photogravure from it is our
frontispiece.
There is a medallion done by St Gauden's, representing Stevenson in bed
propped up by pillows. It is thought to be a pretty good likeness, and
it is now in Mr Sidney Colvin's possession. Others, drawings, etc., are
not of much account.
And now we come to the Nerli portrait, of which so much has been written.
Stevenson himself regarded it as the best portrait of him ever painted,
and certainly it also is characteristic and effective, and though not
what may be called a pleasant likeness, is probably a good representation
of him in the later years of his life. Count Nerli actually undertook a
voyage to Samoa in 1892, mainly with the idea of painting this portrait.
He and Stevenson became great friends, as Stevenson naively tells in the
verses we have already referred to, but even this did not quite overcome
Stevenson's restlessness. He avenged himself by composing these verses
as he sat:
Did ever mortal man hear tell o' sic a ticklin' ferlie
As the comin' on to Apia here o' the painter Mr Nerli?
He cam'; and, O, for o' human freen's o' a' he was the pearlie--
The pearl o' a' the painter folk was surely Mr Nerli.
He took a thraw to paint mysel'; he painted late and early;
O wow! the many a yawn I've yawned i' the beard o' Mr Nerli.
Whiles I wad sleep and whiles wad wake, an' whiles was mair than
surly;
I wondered sair as I sat there fornent the eyes o' Nerli.
O will he paint me the way I want, as bonnie as a girlie?
O will he paint me an ugly tyke?--and be d-d to Mr Nerli.
But still an' on whichever it be, he is a canty kerlie,
The Lord protect the back an' neck o' honest Mr Nerli.
Mr Hammerton gives this account of the Nerli portrait:
"The history of the Nerli portrait is peculiar. After being exhibited
for some time in New Zealand it was bought, in the course of this
year, by a lady who was travelling there, for a hundred guineas. She
then offered it for that sum to the Scottish National Portrait
Gallery; but the Trustees of the Board of Manufactures--that oddly
named body to which is entrusted the fostering care of Art in
Scotland, and, in consequence, the superintendence of the National
Portrait Gallery--did not see their way to accept the offer. Some
surprise has been expressed at the action of the Trustees in thus
declining to avail themselves of the opportunity of obtaining the
portrait of one of the most distinguished Scotsmen of recent times. It
can hardly have been for want of money, for though the funds at their
disposal for the purchase of ordinary works of art are but limited, no
longer ago than last year they were the recipients of a very handsome
legacy from the late Mr J. M. Gray, the accomplished and much lamented
Curator of the Scottish National Portrait Gallery--a legacy left them
for the express purpose of acquiring portraits of distinguished
Scotsmen, and the income of which was amply sufficient to have enabled
them to purchase this portrait. One is therefore almost shut up to
the conclusion that the Trustees were influenced in their decision by
one of the two following reasons:
"1. That they did not consider Stevenson worthy of a place in the
gallery. This is a position so incomprehensible and so utterly
opposed to public sentiment that one can hardly credit it having been
the cause of this refusal. Whatever may be the place which Stevenson
may ultimately take as an author, and however opinions may differ as
to the merits of his work, no one can deny that he was one of the most
popular writers of his day, and that as a mere master of style, if for
nothing else, his works will be read so long as there are students of
English Literature. Surely the portrait of one for whom such a claim
may legitimately be made cannot be considered altogether unworthy of a
place in the National Collection, as one of Scotland's most
distinguished sons.
"2. The only other reason which can be suggested as having weighed
with the Trustees in their decision is one which in some cases might
be held to be worthy of consideration. It is conceivable that in the
case of some men the Trustees might be of opinion that there was
plenty of time to consider the matter, and that in the meantime there
was always the chance of some generous donor presenting them with a
portrait. But, as has been shown above, the portraits of Stevenson
are practically confined to two: one of these is in America, and there
is not the least chance of its ever coming here; and the other they
have refused. And, as it is understood that the Trustees have a rule
that they do not accept any portrait which has not been painted from
the life, they preclude themselves from acquiring a copy of any
existing picture or even a portrait done from memory.
"It is rumoured that the Nerli portrait may ultimately find a resting-
place in the National Collection of Portraits in London. If this
should prove to be the case, what a commentary on the old saying: 'A
prophet is not without honour save in his own country.'"