Æsthetics is the study and practice of art for art’s sake, that is, for
the pleasurable sensations which are induced by certain combinations
of form, line, and colour. It does not signify for our purpose how the
feeling for art has been obtained, nor is an analysis of the sensations
necessary. All men have this sense, varying from a rudimentary to an
exalted extent. Though it is naturally the basis of all art work, it
does not follow that the æsthetic sense has been the sole cause of
decorative work. Religion and the desire to convey information have
both imitated and controlled pictorial and decorative art, but the
artistic sense has all along exerted its influence to a greater or
less extent. The artistic feeling has endeavoured to cast a glamour of
beauty over the crude efforts of religion and science.
In the scheme of the life-history of pictorial or decorative designs
given on p. 8, I have considered only those which have originated from
various combinations of originally solitary figures. Separate portraits
whether of men or animals, either in the flat or in the round, have
been omitted as they remain in the lowest place of development,
though they may attain to the highest excellence of art. Those who
have followed the brilliant researches in classical archæology will
appreciate what I mean by the life-history of representations. The
origin, rise, glorious consummation, and decadence of Greek statuary is
a striking illustration of my theme.
Figures may be grouped not only to convey a sentiment, as in a picture,
but merely for decorative effect. The artist in this case usually at
once adopted a conventional treatment. In some instances strict realism
may be appropriate, but in the greater number of conditions it is most
inappropriate.
Walls, fabrics, and platters have from time immemorial been decorated
in this manner. Many books have been written illustrating this branch
of art and laying down principles of design, and the reader is referred
to these, as this subject does not fall within the scope of the present
essay.
I would like to point out in this place that there is a very
instructive field for study in the consideration of the decorative
methods of various peoples. The way in which areas are decorated, the
idea of symmetry, and such-like subjects; for example, the essence of
Japanese decorative art is asymmetry, and the results are charming to
our eyes although we have been reared amongst symmetrical designing.
Symmetry may be exhibited in the equal balancing of dissimilar
designs, as is commonly done by Oriental artists, or in the mechanical
duplication in relation to a median line which is so dear to European
decorators.
The style of the decorative art of a savage or barbaric people is
a legacy and its perpetuation is usually binding, not merely by
custom but more frequently by religion. When all the various factors
are taken into account, one finds that the æsthetic sense of a
savage artist is not so very different after all from that of his
civilised fellow-craftsman, and one can see in the disposition or the
introduction of certain elements in a design, that both are actuated by
the same æsthetic sense of what is suitable,—both are, in fact, artists.
In the section on Physicomorphs I allude to the rarity of landscape
drawing among savage peoples, and give an illustration (Fig. 66) of
one, from Torres Straits, which occurred casually on a bamboo pipe;
there is another but poorer landscape from the same locality in the
Oxford University Museum. Early attempts, such as these, at pictures
are especially interesting as illustrating the working of the mind of
the artists.
It is not within the scope of this book to trace the history either of
pictorial art or of individual pictures. The genesis of a great picture
is most interesting, and it may occasionally be traced owing to the
fortunate preservation of the artist’s sketches and studies. It often
happens that some of the figures in the finished picture have lost the
vitality which they had in the sketch stage, even such a great artist
as Raffael could not always reproduce the spirit of his own work.
If the originating artist lost something out of his own handiwork,
it is no wonder that a copyist should lose more, especially when the
latter may not have access to the original, but base his reproductions
on copies several times removed from it. A late stage of degeneration
of pictorial art, through more or less incompetent copying, is seen
in the cheap lithographs which occupy, without adorning, the walls of
houses of the country folk, many of which, like the analogous frescoes
of Pompeii, are the pictorial echoes of the works of masters of the
craft.