headquarters of the Exhibition. I was ushered into the presence of
this gentleman, Hawkins, to whom I said:--'I am Mr. Whistler, and I
believe this note is from you. I have come to remove my etchings'; but
I did not mention that my work was to be transferred to the English
Art Section."
"'Ah!' said the gentleman--the officer--'we were very sorry not to
have had space enough for all your etchings, but we are glad to have
seventeen and the portrait."
"'You are too kind' I said, 'but really I will not trouble you.'"
"Mr. Hawkins was quite embarrassed, and urged me to reconsider my
determination, but I withdrew every one of the etchings, and they are
now well hung in the English Department."
"I did not mind the fact that my works were criticized, but it was the
discourteous manner in which it was done. If the request to me had been
made in proper language, and they had simply said:--'Mr. Whistler,
we have not space enough for twenty-seven etchings. Will you kindly
select those which you prefer, and we shall be glad to have them,' I
would have given them the privilege of placing them in the American
Section."...
"_Whacking Whistler_"
[Sidenote: _New York Herald_, Paris Edition, Oct. 4.
1889.]
In an interview in yesterday's _Herald_ the eccentric artist, Mr. J.
McNeill Whistler, "jumped" in a most emphatic manner upon General
Hawkins, Commissioner of the American Art Department at the
Exhibition. He objects to the General for being a cavalry officer;
refers to him sarcastically as "Hawkins," and declares him ignorant of
the most elementary principles alike of art and politeness--all this
because he, Whistler, was requested by the Commissioner to remove from
the Exhibition premises some ten of his rejected etchings.
In a spirit of fair play a correspondent called upon General Hawkins,
giving him an opportunity, if he felt so disposed, of "jumping," in
his turn, on his excitable opponent. The General did feel "so
disposed," and proceeded, in popular parlance, to "see" Mr. J. McNeill
Whistler and "go him one better." In this species of linguistic
gymnastics, by the way, the military Commissioner asks no odds of
any one. He began by gently remarking that Mr. Whistler, in his
published remarks, had soared far out of the domain of strict
veracity. This was not bad for a "starter," and was ably supported by
the following detailed statement:--
"Mr. Whistler says he received a note from me. That is a mistake. I
have never in my life written a line to Mr. Whistler.[40] What he did
receive was a circular with my name printed at the bottom. These
circulars were sent to all the artists who had pictures refused by the
jury, and contained a simple request that such pictures be removed.
[Note 40: The official memory:
"DEAR SIR--I wish by return mail you would send
description for oils; and if you desire to have titles
to etchings printed, you will have to furnish the
necessary material for copy.--Yours faithfully,
RUSH C. HAWKINS,
Commissariat General, Paris, March 29, 1889.
(_Autograph._)
To Mr. Whistler."]
"Our way of doing business was not, it seems, up to Mr. Whistler's
standard of politeness, so he got angry and took away, not only the
ten rejected etchings, but seventeen others which had been accepted.
It is a little singular that among about one hundred and fifty artists
who received this circular, Mr. Whistler should have been the only one
to discover its latent discourtesy. How great must be Mr. Whistler's
capacity for detecting a snub where none exists!"
"In any case, there is not the slightest reason for Mr. Whistler's
venting his ire upon me. I had no more to do with either accepting or
rejecting his pictures than I had with painting them. What he sent
us was judged on its merits by a competent and impartial jury of his
peers. If there were ten etchings rejected it only shows that there
were ten etchings not worthy of acceptance. A few days after the
affair a trio of journalists--not all men either--came to me,
demanding that I reverse this 'iniquitous decision,' as they styled
it. I told these three prying scribblers in a polite way that if they
would kindly attend to their own affairs I would try to attend to
mine. In this connection, I may remark that there are in Paris a
number of correspondents who ought not to be allowed within gun-shot
of a newspaper office."
"The next mis-statement in Mr. Whistler's interview is in regard to
the ultimate disposal of his important etchings. His words are:--'Mr.
Hawkins was quite embarrassed, and urged me to reconsider my
determination, but I withdrew every one of the etchings, and they are
now well hung in the English department.'"
"Now, I leave it to any fair-minded person if the plain inference from
this statement is not that the whole twenty-seven etchings were
accepted by the English department. If not, what in heaven's name is
he crowing about? But the truth is that while we rejected only
_ten_ of his etchings, the English department rejected _eighteen_
of them, and of the nine accepted only hung two on the line. Had Mr.
Whistler been the possessor of a more even temper and a little more
common sense, he would have had five or six of his works on the line
in the American department, and nearly twice as many on exhibition
than is actually the case. Really, I fail to see what he gained by the
exchange, unless it was a valuable experience. He says I was
embarrassed when I saw him; I fancy he will be embarrassed when he
sees these facts in 'cold type.'"
"_Whistler's Grievance_"
_TO THE EDITOR:_
[Sidenote: _New York Herald._]
Sir--I beg that you will kindly print immediately these, my regrets,
that General Rush Hawkins should have been spurred into unwonted and
unbecoming expression by what I myself read with considerable
bewilderment in the _New York Herald_, October 3, under the head of
"Whistler's Grievance."
I can assure the gallant soldier that I have no grievance.
Had I known that, when--over what takes the place of wine and walnuts
in Holland--I remembered lightly the military methods of the jury, I
was being "interviewed," I should have adopted as serious a tone as
the original farce would admit of; or I might have even refused to be
a party at all to the infliction upon your readers of so old and
threadbare a story as that of the raid upon the works of art in the
American section of the Universal Exhibition.
Your correspondent, I fancy, felt much more warmly, than did I,
wrongs that--who knows?--are doubtless rights in the army; and my
sympathies, I confess, are completely with the General, who did only,
as he complains, his duty in that state of life in which it had
pleased God, and the War Department, to call him, when, according to
order, he signed that naïvely authoritative note, circular, warrant,
or what not--for he did irretrievably fasten his name to it, whether
with pen or print, thereby hopelessly making the letter his own. Thus
have we responsibility, like greatness, sometimes thrust upon us.
On receipt of the document I came--I saw the commanding officer, who,
until now, I fondly trusted, would ever remember me as pleasantly as I
do himself--and, knowing despatch in all military matters to be of
great importance, I then and there relieved him of the troublesome
etchings, and carried off the painting.
It is a sad shock to me to find that the good General speaks of me
without affection, and that he evinces even joy when he says with a
view to my entire discomfiture:--"While we rejected only ten of his
etchings, the English department rejected eighteen of them, and of the
nine accepted, only hung two on the line."
Now, he is wrong!--the General is wrong.
The etchings now hanging in the English section--and perfect is
their hanging, notwithstanding General Hawkins's flattering
anxiety--are the only ones I sent there.
In the haste and enthusiasm of your interviewer, I have, on this
point, been misunderstood.
There was moreover here no question of submitting them to a "competent
and impartial jury of his peers"--one of whom, by the way, I am
informed upon undoubted authority, had never before come upon an
"etching" in his hitherto happy and unchequered Western career.
We all knew that the space allotted to the English department was
exceedingly limited, and each one refrained from abusing it. Here I
would point out again, hoping this time to be clearly understood,
that, had the methods employed in the American camp been more civil,
if less military, all further difficulties might have been avoided.
Had I been properly advised that the room was less than the demand for
place, I would, of course, have instantly begged the gentlemen of the
jury to choose, from among the number, what etchings they pleased. So
the matter would have ended, and you, Sir, would have been without
this charming communication!
The pretty embarrassment of General Hawkins on the occasion of my
visit, I myself liked, thinking it seemly, and part of the good
form of a West Point man, who is taught that a drum-head court
martial--and what else in the experience of this finished officer
should so fit him for sitting in judgment upon pictures?--should be
presided at with grave and softened demeanour.
If I mistook the General's manner, it is another illusion the less.
And I have, Sir,
the honour to be,
Your obedient servant,
[Illustration]
Amsterdam, Oct. 6.
_The Art-Critic's Friend_
[Sidenote: _The Scots Observer_, April 5, 1890.]
Mr. Whistler has many things to answer for, and not the least of them
is the education of the British Art-Critic. That, at any rate, is the
impression left by a little book made up--apparently against the
writer's will--of certain of the master's letters and _mots_.... It is
useful and pleasant reading; for not only does it prove the painter to
have a certain literary talent--of aptness, unexpectedness, above all
impertinence--but also it proves him never to have feared the face of
art-critical man.... To him the art-critic is nothing if not a person
to be educated, with or against the grain; and when he encounters him
in the ways of error, he leaps upon him joyously, scalps him in print
before the eyes of men, kicks him gaily back into the paths of truth
and soberness, and resumes his avocation with that peculiar zest an
act of virtue does undoubtedly impart. Indeed, Mr. Whistler, so far
from being the critic's enemy, is on the contrary the best friend
that tradesman has ever had. For his function is to make him
ridiculous....
... Yes, Mr. Whistler is often "rowdy" and unpleasant; in his last
combat with Mr. Oscar Wilde--("Oscar, you have been down the area
again")--he comes off a palpable second; his treatment of 'Arry dead
and "neglected by the parish" goes far to prove that his sense of
smell is not so delicate nor so perfectly trained as his sense of
sight....
_A Question_
_TO THE EDITOR:_
[Sidenote: _The Scots Observer_, April 19, 1890.]
Sir--It is, I suppose, to your pleasant satisfaction in "The Critic's
Friend" that I owe the early copy of the _Scots Observer_, pointed
with proud mark, in the blue pencil of office, whereby the impatient
author hastened to indicate the pithy personal paragraphs, that no
time should be wasted upon other matter with which the periodical is
ballasted.
Exhilarated by the belief that I had been remembered--for vanity's
sake let me fancy that you have bestowed upon me your own thought and
hand--I plunged forthwith into the underlined article, and read with
much amusement your excellent appreciation.
Having forgotten none of your professional manner as art arbiter, may
I say that I can picture to myself easily the sad earnestness with
which you now point the thick thumb of your editorial refinement
in deprecation of my choicer "rowdyism"? And knowing your analytical
conscientiousness, I can even understand the humble comfort you take
in Oscar's meek superiority; but, for the life of me, I cannot follow
your literary intention when you say that my care of "''Arry,' dead
and neglected by the parish," goes far to prove that my "sense of
smell is not so delicate nor so perfectly trained as" my "sense of
sight."
Do you mean that my discovery of the body is the result of a cold in
the head? and that, with a finer scent, I should have missed it
altogether? or were you only unconsciously remembering and dreamily
dipping your pen into the ink of my former description of "'Arry's"
chronic catarrh? In any case, I am charmed with what I have just read,
and only regret that the ridiculous "Romeike" has not hitherto sent me
your agreeable literature.--Also I am, dear Sir, your obedient
servant,
[Illustration]
_The End of the Piece_
Sir--I beg to draw your attention to the contents of your letter to
the _Scots Observer_, dated April 12th, in which you state that you
"regret the ridiculous Romeike has not hitherto sent me your agreeable
literature."
This statement, had it been true, was spiteful and injurious, but
being untrue (entirely) it becomes malicious, and I must ask you at
once to apologise.
And at the same time to draw your attention to the fact that we have
supplied you with 807 cuttings.
We have written to the _Scots Observer_ for an ample apology, or the
matter will be placed in our solicitor's hands, and we demand the same
of you.
Yours obediently,
ROMEIKE & CURTICE.
J. MCN. WHISTLER, Esq.
April 25, 1890.
_Exit the Prompter_
Sir--If it be not actionable, permit me to say that you _really are
delightful_!!
_Naïveté_, like yours, I have never met--even in my long experience
with all those, some of whose "agreeable literature" may be, I
suppose, in the 807 cuttings you charge me for.
Who, in Heaven's name, ever dreamed of you as an actual person?--or
one whom one would mean to insult?
My good Sir, no such intention--believe me--did I, in my wildest of
moments, ever entertain.
_Your_ scalp--if you have such a thing--is safe enough!--and I even
think--however great my willingness to assist you--could not possibly
appear in the forthcoming Edition.
To Mr. ROMEIKE,
April 25.
[Illustration]
_L'Envoi_
When the Chairman, in a singularly brilliant and felicitous speech led
up to the toast of the evening, Mr. Whistler rose to his feet.
[Sidenote: _Sunday Times_, May 5, 1889.]
[Sidenote: Report of a reply to the toast of the evening
at the complimentary dinner given to Mr. Whistler,
London, May 1, 1889.]
"You must feel that, for me," said Mr. Whistler, "it is no easy task
to reply under conditions of which I have so little habit. We are all
even too conscious that mine has hitherto, I fear, been the gentle
answer that sometimes turneth not away wrath."
"Gentlemen," said he, "this is an age of rapid results, when remedies
insist upon their diseases, that science shall triumph and no time be
lost; and so have we also rewards that bring with them their own
virtue. It would ill become me to question my fitness for the position
it has pleased this distinguished company to thrust upon me."
"It has before now been borne in upon me, that in surroundings of
antagonism, I may have wrapped myself, for protection, in a species of
misunderstanding--as that other traveller drew closer about him
the folds of his cloak the more bitterly the winds and the storm
assailed him on his way. But, as with him, when the sun shone upon him
in his path, his cloak fell from his shoulders, so I, in the warm glow
of your friendship, throw from me all former disguise, and, making no
further attempt to hide my true feeling, disclose to you my deep
emotion at such unwonted testimony of affection and faith."
_Auto-Biographical_
_TO THE EDITOR:_
[Sidenote: _Pall Mall Gazette_, July 28, 1891.]
Sir,--May I request that you allow me to make known, through your
influential paper, the fact that the canvas, now shown as a completed
work of mine, at Messrs. Dowdeswell's, representing three draped
figures in a conservatory, is a painting long ago barely begun, and
thrown aside for destruction?
Also I am in no way responsible for the taste of the frame with its
astonishments of plush! and varied gildings.
I think it not only just to myself to make this statement, but right
that the public should be warned against the possible purchase of a
picture in no way representative, and, in its actual condition,
absolutely worthless.--I am, Sir, your obedient servant,
_Chelsea, July 27, 1891._
[Illustration]
_Mr. Whistler "had on his own Toast"_
_TO THE EDITOR:_
[Sidenote: _Pall Mall Gazette_, Aug. 1, 1891.]
Sir,--I have read with interest Mr. Whistler's letter in your issue of
July 28. I happened to be at Messrs. Dowdeswell's galleries the other
day and saw the picture he refers to. It was not on public exhibition,
but was in one of their private rooms, and was brought out for my
inspection _à propos_ of a conversation we were having. Now, so far
from Messrs. Dowdeswell showing it as a "completed work," they
distinctly spoke of it as unfinished; nor can I imagine any one
acquainted with Mr. Whistler's works speaking of any of them as
"completed!" In "L'Envoi" of the catalogue of his exhibition held at
Messrs. Dowdeswell's a short time ago I find the following paragraph
from his pen:--"The work of the master reeks not of the sweat of the
brow--suggests no effort--and _is finished from its beginning_." The
only inference possible is either that Mr. Whistler is not a master,
or that the work is finished! He has, however, spent what
time he could spare from his literary labours in endeavouring to
induce the world to believe that the slightest scratch from his pen is
worthy to rank with "Las Lanzas," and I am therefore surprised to
learn that he has altered his opinion. Still, I quite agree with him
when he tells us that some of his work is "absolutely worthless!"--I
am, sir, more in sorrow than in anger, your obedient servant,
W. C.
_July 31, 1891._
_What "Mr. Whistler had on his own Toast"_
_TO THE EDITOR:_
[Sidenote: _Pall Mall Gazette_, Aug. 4, 1891.]
Sir,--My letter should have met with no reply at all. It was a
statement--authoritative and unanswerable, if there ever were one.
Because of the attention drawn to it, in the press, I felt called upon
to advise the Public that one of _my own works_ is condemned _by
myself_. Final this, one would fancy!
That the accidental owners of the Gallery should introduce themselves
to the situation, is of a most marked irrelevancy. They come in _comme
un cheveu sur la soupe_, to be removed at once.
The dealer's business is to buy and sell. In the course of such
traffic, these same busy picture bodies, without consulting me, put
upon the market a painting that I, the author, intended to
efface--and, thanks to your courtesy, I have been enabled to say so
effectually in your journal.
All along have I carefully destroyed plates, torn up proofs, and
burned canvases, that the truth of the quoted word shall prevail,
and that the future collector shall be spared the mortification of
cataloguing his pet mistakes.
To destroy, is to remain.
What is commercial irritation beside a clean canvas?
What is a gentlemanly firm in Bond Street beside Eternity?--I am, sir,
your obedient servant,
_Chelsea, August 1, 1891._
[Illustration]
_NOCTURNES, MARINES,
AND
CHEVALET PIECES_
_A CATALOGUE_
[Illustration]
_SMALL COLLECTION
KINDLY LENT
THEIR OWNERS_
"_THE VOICE OF A PEOPLE_"
"I do not know when so much amusement has been afforded to the
British public as by Mr. Whistler's pictures."
_Speech of the Attorney-General of England.
Westminster, Nov. 16, 1878._
1.--NOCTURNE.
GREY AND SILVER--CHELSEA EMBANKMENT--WINTER.
_Lent by F. G. Orchar, Esq._
"With the exception, perhaps, of one of Mr. Whistler's meaningless
canvases, there is nothing that is actually provocative of undue mirth
or ridicule."
_City Press._
"In some of the Nocturnes the absence, not only of definition, but of
gradation, would point to the conclusion that they are but engaging
sketches. In them we look in vain for all the delicate differences
of light and hue which the scenes depicted present."
_F. Wedmore, "Four Masters of Etching."_
2.--SYMPHONY IN WHITE, No. III.
_Lent by Louis Huth, Esq._
"It is not precisely a symphony in white--one lady has a yellowish
dress and brown hair and a bit of blue ribbon, the other has a red
fan, and there are flowers and green leaves. There is a girl in white
on a white sofa, but even this girl has reddish hair; and of course
there is the flesh colour of the complexions."
_P. G. Hamerton, "Saturday Review."_
"Mr. Whistler appears as eccentrically as ever.... Art is not served
by freaks of resentment.... We hold him deeply to blame that these
figures are badly drawn.
"... 'Taste,' which is mind working in Art, would, even if it could at
all conceive them, utterly reject the vulgarities of Mr. Whistler with
regard to form, and never be content with what suffices him in
composition."--_Athenæum._
"Painting, or art generally, as such, with all its technicalities,
difficulties, and particular ends, is nothing but a noble and
expressive language, invaluable as the vehicle of thought, but by
itself nothing."
_John Ruskin, Esq., Art Professor,
"Modern Painters."_
3.--CHELSEA IN ICE.
_Lent by Madame Venturi._
"We are not sure but that it would be something like insult to our
readers to say more about these 'things.' They must surely be meant in
jest; but whether the public have chiefly to thank Mr. Whistler or the
Managers of the Grosvenor Gallery for playing off on them this sorry
joke we do not know, nor greatly care. _Meliora canamus!_"--_Knowledge._
4.--NOCTURNE.
BLUE AND GOLD--OLD BATTERSEA BRIDGE.
_Lent by Robert H. C. Harrison, Esq._
"His Nocturne in Blue and Gold, No. 3, might have been called, with a
similar confusion of terms: A Farce in Moonshine, with half-a-dozen
dots."--_Life._
"The picture representing a night scene on Battersea Bridge has no
composition and detail. A day, or a day and a half, seems a reasonable
time within which to paint it. It shows no finish--it is simply
a sketch."
_Mr. Jones, R.A.--Evidence in Court,
Nov. 16, 1878._
5.--THE LANGE LEIZEN--OF THE SIX MARKS.
PURPLE AND ROSE.
_Lent by J. Leathart._
"Mr. Whistler paints subjects sadly below the merit of his
pencil."--_London Review._
"A worse specimen of humanity than could be found on the oldest piece
of china in existence."
_Reader._
"The hideous forms we find in his Chinese vase painteress ... an
ostentatious slovenliness of execution ... objects as much out of
perspective as the great blue vase in the foreground, _&c._ ...
_&c._...
"It is Mr. Whistler's way to choose people and things for painting
which other painters would turn from, and to combine these oddly
chosen materials as no other painter would choose to combine them. He
should learn that eccentricity is not originality, but the caricature
of it."--_Times._
6.--NOCTURNE.
TRAFALGAR SQUARE--SNOW.
_Lent by Albert Moore, Esq._
"The word 'impressionist' has come to have a bad meaning in art.
Visions of Whistler come before you when you hear it. Such visions are
not of the best possible augury, for who loves a nightmare?"
_Oracle._
"Like the landscape art of Japan, they are harmonious decorations, and
a dozen or so of such engaging sketches placed in the upper panels of
a lofty apartment would afford a justifiable and welcome alternative
even to noble tapestries or Morris wallpapers."--_F. Wedmore, "Four
Masters of Etching."_
7.--NOCTURNE--BLACK AND GOLD.
THE FIRE WHEEL.
"Mr. Whistler has 'a sweet little isle of his own' in the shape of an
ample allowance of wall space all to himself for the display of his
six most noticeable works: 'Nocturnes' in black and gold, in blue and
silver, 'Arrangements' in black and brown, and 'Harmonies' in amber
and black.
"These weird productions--enigmas sometimes so occult that OEdipus
might be puzzled to solve them--need much subtle explanation."--_Daily
Telegraph._
8.--ARRANGEMENT IN BLACK AND BROWN.
THE FUR JACKET.
"Mr. Whistler has whole-length portraits, or rather the shadows of
people, shapes suggestive of good examples of portraiture _when
completed_. They are exhibited to illustrate a theory peculiar to the
artist. One is entitled An Arrangement in 'Black and Brown.'"--_Daily
Telegraph._
"Mr. Whistler is anything but a robust and balanced genius."--_Times._