And in art we have the same play of opposing factors, straight lines and

curves, light and dark, warm and cold colour oppose each other. Were the

balance between them perfect, the result would be dull and dead. But if

the balance is very much out, the eye is disturbed and the effect too

disquieting. It will naturally be in pictures that aim at repose that

this balance will be most perfect. In more exciting subjects less will

be necessary, but some amount should exist in every picture, no matter

how turbulent its motive; as in good tragedy the horror of the situation

is never allowed to overbalance the beauty of the treatment.

[Sidenote: Between Straight Lines and Curves]

Let us consider in the first place the balance between straight lines

and curves. The richer and fuller the curves, the more severe should be

the straight lines that balance them, if perfect repose is desired. But

if the subject demands excess of movement and life, of course there will

be less necessity for the balancing influence of straight lines. And on

the other hand, if the subject demands an excess of repose and

contemplation, the bias will be on the side of straight lines. But a

picture composed entirely of rich, rolling curves is too disquieting a

thing to contemplate, and would become very irritating. Of the two

extremes, one composed entirely of straight lines would be preferable to

one with no squareness to relieve the richness of the curves. For

straight lines are significant of the deeper and more permanent things

of life, of the powers that govern and restrain, and of infinity; while

the rich curves (that is, curves the farthest removed from the straight

line) seem to be expressive of uncontrolled energy and the more

exuberant joys of life. Vice may be excess in any direction, but

asceticism has generally been accepted as a nobler vice than

voluptuousness. The rococo art of the eighteenth century is an instance

of the excessive use of curved forms, and, like all excesses in the joys

of life, it is vicious and is the favourite style of decoration in

vulgar places of entertainment. The excessive use of straight lines and

square forms may be seen in some ancient Egyptian architecture, but this

severity was originally, no doubt, softened by the use of colour, and in

any case it is nobler and finer than the vicious cleverness of rococo

art.

We have seen how the Greeks balanced the straight lines of their

architectural forms with the rich lines of the sculpture which they used

so lavishly on their temples. But the balance was always kept on the

side of the square forms and never on the side of undue roundness. And

it is on this side that the balance would seem to be in the finest art.

Even the finest curves are those that approach the straight line rather

than the circle, that err on the side of flatnesses rather than

roundnesses.

[Sidenote: Between Flat and Gradated Tones]

What has been said about the balance of straight lines and curves

applies equally well to tones, if for straight lines you substitute flat

tones, and for curved lines gradated tones. The deeper, more permanent

things find expression in the wider, flatter tones, while an excess of

gradations makes for prettiness, if not for the gross roundnesses of

vicious modelling.

Often when a picture is hopelessly out of gear and "mucked up," as they

say in the studio, it can be got on the right road again by reducing it

to a basis of flat tones, going over it and painting out the gradations,

getting it back to a simpler equation from which the right road to

completion can be more readily seen. Overmuch concern with the

gradations of the smaller modelling is a very common reason of pictures

and drawings getting out of gear. The less expenditure of tone values

you can express your modelling with, the better, as a general rule. The

balance in the finest work is usually on the side of flat tones rather

than on the side of gradated tones. Work that errs on the side of

gradations, like that of Greuze, however popular its appeal, is much

poorer stuff than work that errs on the side of flatness in tone, like

Giotto and the Italian primitives, or Puvis de Chavannes among the

moderns.

[Sidenote: Between Light and Dark Tones.]

There is a balance of tone set up also between light and dark, between

black and white in the scale of tone. Pictures that do not go far in the

direction of light, starting from a middle tone, should not go far in

the direction of dark either. In this respect note the pictures of

Whistler, a great master in matters of tone; his lights seldom approach

anywhere near white, and, on the other hand, his darks never approach

black in tone. When the highest lights are low in tone, the darkest

darks should be high in tone. Painters like Rembrandt, whose pictures

when fresh must have approached very near white in the high lights, also

approach black in the darks, and nearer our own time, Frank Holl forced

the whites of his pictures very high and correspondingly the darks were

very heavy. And when this balance is kept there is a rightness about it

that is instinctively felt. We do not mean that the #amount# of light

tones in a picture should be balanced by the #amount# of dark tones, but

that there should be some balance between the extremes of light and dark

used in the tone scheme of a picture. The old rule was, I believe, that

a picture should be two-thirds light and one-third dark. But I do not

think there is any rule to be observed here: there are too many

exceptions, and no mention is made of half tones.

Like all so-called laws in art, this rule is capable of many apparent

exceptions. There is the white picture in which all the tones are high.

But in some of the most successful of these you will generally find

spots of intensely dark pigment. Turner was fond of these light pictures

in his later manner, but he usually put in some dark spot, such as the

black gondolas in some of his Venetian pictures, that illustrate the law

of balance we are speaking of, and are usually put in excessively dark

in proportion as the rest of the picture is excessively light.

The successful one-tone pictures are generally painted in the middle

tones, and thus do not in any way contradict our principle of balance.

[Sidenote: Between Warm and Cold Colours.]

One is tempted at this point to wander a little into the province of

colour, where the principle of balance of which we are speaking is much

felt, the scale here being between warm and cold colours. If you divide

the solar spectrum roughly into half, you will have the reds, oranges,

and yellows on one side, and the purples, blues, and greens on the

other, the former being roughly the warm and the latter the cold

colours. The clever manipulation of the opposition between these warm

and cold colours is one of the chief means used in giving vitality to

colouring. But the point to notice here is that the further your

colouring goes in the direction of warmth, the further it will be

necessary to go in the opposite direction, to right the balance. That is

how it comes about that painters like Titian, who loved a warm, glowing,

golden colouring, so often had to put a mass of the coldest blue in

their pictures. Gainsborough's "Blue Boy," although done in defiance of

Reynolds' principle, is no contradiction of our rule, for although the

boy has a blue dress all the rest of the picture is warm brown and so

the balance is kept. It is the failure to observe this balance that

makes so many of the red-coated huntsmen and soldiers' portraits in our

exhibitions so objectionable. They are too often painted on a dark, hot,

burnt sienna and black background, with nothing but warm colours in the

flesh, &c., with the result that the screaming heat is intolerable. With

a hot mass of red like a huntsman's coat in your picture, the coolest

colour should be looked for everywhere else. Seen in a November

landscape, how well a huntsman's coat looks, but then, how cold and grey

is the colouring of the landscape. The right thing to do is to support

your red with as many cool and neutral tones as possible and avoid hot

shadows. With so strong a red, blue might be too much of a contrast,

unless your canvas was large enough to admit of its being introduced at

some distance from the red.

Most painters, of course, are content to keep to middle courses, never

going very far in the warm or cold directions. And, undoubtedly, much

more freedom of action is possible here, although the results may not be

so powerful. But when beauty and refinement of sentiment rather than

force are desired, the middle range of colouring (that is to say, all

colours partly neutralised by admixture with their opposites) is much

safer.

[Sidenote: Between Interest and Mass.]

There is another form of balance that must be although it is connected

more with the subject matter of art, as it concerns the mental

significance of objects rather than rhythmic qualities possessed by

lines and masses; I refer to the balance there is between interest and

mass. The all-absorbing interest of the human figure makes it often when

quite minute in scale balance the weight and interest of a great mass.

Diagram XXVII is a rough instance of what is meant. Without the little

figure the composition would be out of balance. But the weight of

interest centred upon that lonely little person is enough to right the

balance occasioned by the great mass of trees on the left. Figures are

largely used by landscape painters in this way, and are of great use in

restoring balance in a picture.

[Illustration: Diagram XXVII.

ILLUSTRATING HOW INTEREST MAY BALANCE MASS]

[Sidenote: Between Variety and Unity.]

And lastly, there must be a balance struck between variety and unity. A

great deal has already been said about this, and it will only be

necessary to recapitulate here that to variety is due all the expression

or the picturesque, of the joyous energy of life, and all that makes the

world such a delightful place, but that to unity belongs the relating of

this variety to the underlying bed-rock principles that support it in

nature and in all good art. It will depend on the nature of the artist

and on the nature of his theme how far this underlying unity will

dominate the expression in his work; and how far it will be overlaid and

hidden behind a rich garment of variety.

But both ideas must be considered in his work. If the unity of his

conception is allowed to exclude variety entirely, it will result in a

dead abstraction, and if the variety is to be allowed none of the

restraining influences of unity, it will develop into a riotous

extravagance.

XVI

RHYTHM: PROPORTION

Rules and canons of proportion designed to reduce to a mathematical

formula the things that move us in beautiful objects, have not been a

great success; the beautiful will always defy such clumsy analysis. But

however true it is that beauty of proportion must ever be the result of

the finer senses of the artist, it is possible that canons of

proportion, such as those of the human body, may be of service to the

artist by offering some standard from which he can depart at the

dictates of his artistic instinct. There appears to be no doubt that the

ancient sculptors used some such system. And many of the renaissance

painters were interested in the subject, Leonardo da Vinci having much

to say about it in his book.

Like all scientific knowledge in art, it fails to trap the elusive

something that is the vital essence of the whole matter, but such

scientific knowledge does help to bring one's work up to a high point of

mechanical perfection, from which one's artistic instinct can soar with

a better chance of success than if no scientific scaffolding had been

used in the initial building up. Yet, however perfect your system, don't

forget that the life, the "dither," will still have to be accounted for,

and no science will help you here.

The idea that certain mathematical proportions or relationships

underlie the phenomena we call beauty is very ancient, and too abstruse

to trouble us here. But undoubtedly proportion, the quantitative

relation of the parts to each other and to the whole, forms a very

important part in the impression works of art and objects give us, and

should be a subject of the greatest consideration in planning your work.

The mathematical relationship of these quantities is a subject that has

always fascinated scholars, who have measured the antique statues

accurately and painstakingly to find the secret of their charm. Science,

by showing that different sounds and different colours are produced by

waves of different lengths, and that therefore different colours and

sounds can be expressed in terms of numbers, has certainly opened the

door to a new consideration of this subject of beauty in relation to

mathematics. And the result of such an inquiry, if it is being or has

been carried on, will be of much interest.

But there is something chilling to the artist in an array of dead

figures, for he has a consciousness that the life of the whole matter

will never be captured by such mechanical means.

The question we are interested to ask here is: are there particular

sentiments connected with the different relations of quantities, their

proportions, as we found there were in connection with different

arrangements of lines and masses? Have abstract proportions any

significance in art, as we found abstract line and mass arrangements

had? It is a difficult thing to be definite about, and I can only give

my own feeling on the matter; but I think in some degree they have.

Proportion can be considered from our two points of view of unity and

variety. In so far as the proportions of any picture or object resolve

themselves into a simple, easily grasped unity of relationship, a sense

of repose and sublimity is produced. In so far as the variety of

proportion in the different parts is assertive and prevents the eye

grasping the arrangement as a simple whole, a sense of the lively

restlessness of life and activity is produced. In other words, as we

found in line arrangements, unity makes for sublimity, while variety

makes for the expression of life. Of course the scale of the object will

have something to do with this. That is to say, the most sublimely

proportioned dog-kennel could never give us the impression of sublimity

produced by a great temple. In pictures the scale of the work is not of

so great importance, a painting or drawing having the power of giving

the impression of great size on a small scale.

The proportion that is most easily grasped is the half--two equal parts.

This is the most devoid of variety, and therefore of life, and is only

used when an effect of great repose and aloofness from life is wanted;

and even then, never without some variety in the minor parts to give

vitality. The third and the quarter, and in fact any equal proportions,

are others that are easily grasped and partake in a lesser degree of the

same qualities as the half. So that equality of proportion should be

avoided except on those rare occasions when effects remote from nature

and life are desired. Nature seems to abhor equalities, never making two

things alike or the same proportion if she can help it. All systems

founded on equalities, as are so many modern systems of social reform,

are man's work, the products of a machine-made age. For this is the

difference between nature and the machine: nature never produces two

things alike, the machine never produces two things different. Man could

solve the social problem to-morrow if you could produce him equal units.

But if all men were alike and equal, where would be the life and fun of

existence? it would depart with the variety. And in proportion, as in

life, variety is the secret of vitality, only to be suppressed where a

static effect is wanted. In architecture equality of proportion is more

often met with, as the static qualities of repose are of more importance

here than in painting. One meets it on all fine buildings in such things

as rows of columns and windows of equal size and distances apart, or the

continual repetition of the same forms in mouldings, &c. But even here,

in the best work, some variety is allowed to keep the effect from being

quite dead, the columns on the outside of a Greek pediment being nearer

together and leaning slightly inwards, and the repeated forms of

windows, columns, and mouldings being infinitely varied in themselves.

But although you often find repetitions of the same forms equidistant in

architecture, it is seldom that equality of proportion is observable in

the main distribution of the large masses.

Let us take our simple type of composition, and in Diagram XXVIII, A,

put the horizon across the centre and an upright post cutting it in the

middle of the picture. And let us introduce two spots that may indicate

the position of birds in the upper spaces on either side of this.

Here we have a maximum of equality and the deadest and most static of

results.

To see these diagrams properly it is necessary to cover over with some

pieces of notepaper all but the one being considered, as they affect

each other when seen together, and the quality of their proportion is

not so readily observed.

[Illustration: Plate XLVIII.

THE ANSIDEI MADONNA. BY RAPHAEL (NATIONAL GALLERY)

A typical example of static balance in composition.

_Photo Hanfstaengl_]

In many pictures of the Madonna, when a hush and reverence are desired

rather than exuberant life, the figure is put in the centre of the

canvas, equality of proportion existing between the spaces on either

side of her. But having got the repose this centralisation gives,

everything is done to conceal this equality, and variety in the contours

on either side, and in any figures there may be, is carefully sought.

Raphael's "Ansidei Madonna," in the National Gallery, is an instance of

this (p. 230). You have first the centralisation of the figure of the

Madonna with the throne on which she sits, exactly in the middle of the

picture. Not only is the throne in the centre of the picture, but its

width is exactly that of the spaces on either side of it, giving us

three equal proportions across the picture. Then you have the circular

lines of the arches behind, curves possessed of the least possible

amount of variety and therefore the calmest and most reposeful; while

the horizontal lines of the steps and the vertical lines of the throne

and architecture, and also the rows of hanging beads give further

emphasis to this infinity of calm. But when we come to the figures this

symmetry has been varied everywhere. All the heads swing towards the

right, while the lines of the draperies swing freely in many directions.

The swing of the heads towards the right is balanced and the eye brought

back to equilibrium by the strongly-insisted-upon staff of St. Nicholas

on the right. The staff of St. John necessary to balance this line

somewhat, is very slightly insisted on, being represented transparent

as if made of glass, so as not to increase the swing to the right

occasioned by the heads. It is interesting to note the fruit introduced

at the last moment in the right-hand lower corner, dragged in, as it

were, to restore the balance occasioned by the figure of the Christ

being on the left. In the writer's humble opinion the extremely obvious

artifice with which the lines have been balanced, and the severity of

the convention of this composition generally, are out of harmony with

the amount of naturalistic detail and particularly of solidity allowed

in the treatment of the figures and accessories. The small amount of

truth to visual nature in the work of earlier men went better with the

formality of such compositions. With so little of the variety of life in

their treatment of natural appearances, one was not led to demand so

much of the variety of life in the arrangement. It is the simplicity and

remoteness from the full effect of natural appearances in the work of

the early Italian schools that made their painting such a ready medium

for the expression of religious subjects. This atmosphere of

other-worldliness where the music of line and colour was uninterrupted

by any aggressive look of real things is a better convention for the

expression of such ideas and emotions.

[Illustration: Diagram XXVIII(1).

A, D, G]

[Illustration: Diagram XXVIII(2).

B, E, H]

[Illustration: Diagram XXVIII(3).

C, F, I]

In B and C the proportions of the third and the quarter are shown,

producing the same static effect as the half, although not so

completely.

At D, E, F the same number of lines and spots as we have at A, B, C have

been used, but varied as to size and position, so that they have no

obvious mechanical relationship. The result is an expression of much

more life and character.

At G, H, I more lines and spots have been added. At G they are

equidistant and dead from lack of variety, while at H and I they are

varied to a degree that prevents the eye grasping any obvious

relationship between them. They have consequently a look of liveliness

and life very different from A, B, C, or G. It will be observed that as

the amount of variety increases so does the life and liveliness of the

impression.

In these diagrams a certain static effect is kept up throughout, on

account of our lines being vertical and horizontal only, which lines, as

we saw in an earlier chapter, are the calmest we have. But despite this,

I think the added life due to the variety in the proportions is

sufficiently apparent in the diagrams to prove the point we wish to

make.

As a contrast to the infinite calm of Raphael's "Madonna," we have

reproduced Tintoretto's "Finding of the Body of St. Mark," in the Brera

Gallery, Milan. Here all is life and movement. The proportions are

infinitely varied, nowhere does the eye grasp any obvious mathematical

relationship. We have the same semi-circular arches as in the Raphael,

but not symmetrically placed, and their lines everywhere varied, and

their calm effect destroyed by the flickering lights playing about them.

Note the great emphasis given to the outstretched hand of the powerful

figure of the Apostle on the left by the lines of the architecture and

the line of arm of the kneeling figure in the centre of the picture

converging on this hand and leading the eye immediately to it. There is

here no static symmetry, all is energy and force. Starting with this

arresting arm, the eye is led down the majestic figure of St. Mark, past

the recumbent figure, and across the picture by means of the band of

light on the ground, to the important group of frightened figures on

the right. And from them on to the figures engaged in lowering a corpse

from its tomb. Or, following the direction of the outstretched arm of

St. Mark, we are led by the lines of the architecture to this group

straight away, and back again by means of the group on the right and the

band of light on the ground. The quantities are not placed in reposeful

symmetry about the canvas, as was the case in the Raphael, but are

thrown off apparently haphazard from lines leading the eye round the

picture. Note also the dramatic intensity given by the strongly

contrasted light and shade, and how Tintoretto has enjoyed the weird

effect of the two figures looking into a tomb with a light, their

shadows being thrown on the lid they hold open, at the far end of the

room. This must have been an amazingly new piece of realism at the time,

and is wonderfully used, to give an eerie effect to the darkened end of

the room. With his boundless energy and full enjoyment of life,

Tintoretto's work naturally shows a strong leaning towards variety, and

his amazing compositions are a liberal education in the innumerable and

unexpected ways in which a panel can be filled, and should be carefully

studied by students.

[Illustration: Plate XLIX.

THE FINDING OF THE BODY OF ST. MARK TINTORETTO (BREDA, MILAN)

Compare with Raphael's Ansidei Madonna, and note how energy and movement

take the place of static calm in the balance of this composition.

_Photo Anderson_]

The Practice and Science of Drawing · 第 13 / 17 段