THE SHRIMP GIRL

_National Gallery, London_]

first success in that art. I mean the full-length portrait of Captain

Keppel, painted in 1752. This originality and boldness in disregarding

the tame but universal convention in posing the sitter was peculiarly

Hogarth's own. With him it amounted almost to perverseness. He would not

let anybody "sit" to him, if he could help it. When he did, as in the

portraits of Quinn, the actor, and Hoadly, Bishop of Winchester, in the

National Gallery, the result is not the happiest; for, with all their

force, these portraits lack the grace that a conventional pose requires

to render it acceptable in the terms of its convention. If a man must

put on the accepted evening dress of his time, he must see that it

conforms in the spirit as well as in the letter of the fashion, or he

will only look like a dressed-up greengrocer. Hogarth was too sturdy and

too wilful to put on court clothes. If he had to, he struggled with

them.

Hogarth's father was a man of literary tastes, and a scholar. He had

written a supplement to Littleton's Latin Dictionary, but was unable to

get it published. "I saw the difficulties," writes the artist, "under

which my father laboured; the many inconveniences he endured from his

dependence, living chiefly on his pen, and the cruel treatment he met

with from booksellers and printers. I had before my eyes the precarious

situation of men of classical education; it was therefore conformable to

my wishes that I was taken from school and served a long apprenticeship

to a silver-plate engraver." This is printed in Allan Cunningham's _Life

of Hogarth_, together with many more extracts from autobiographical

memoranda, from which we may learn at first hand a great deal of

information bearing on the state of painting at this period, and the

circumstances under which it received such a stimulus from Hogarth,

before the sun had fully risen (in the person of Reynolds) to illumine

the whole period of British art.

"As I had naturally a good eye and fondness for drawing," Hogarth

continues, "_shows_ of all sorts gave me uncommon pleasure when young,

and mimicry, common to all children, was remarkable in me. An early

access to a neighbouring painter drew my attention from play, and I was

at every possible opportunity engaged in making drawings.... My

exercises at school were more remarkable for the ornaments which adorned

them than for the exercise itself. In the former I soon found that

blockheads with better memories would soon surpass me, but for the

latter I was particularly distinguished.

"The painting of St. Paul's and Greenwich Hospital, which were at that

time going on, ran in my head, and I determined that silver-plate

engraving should be followed no longer than necessity obliged me to it.

Engraving on copper was, at twenty years of age, my utmost ambition. To

attain that it was necessary that I should learn to draw objects

something like nature, instead of the monsters of heraldry, and the

common methods of study were much too tedious for one who loved his

pleasure and came so late to it.... This led me to consider whether a

shorter road than that usually travelled was not to be found.... I had

learned by practice to copy with tolerable correctness in the ordinary

way, but it occurred to me that there were many disadvantages attending

this method of study, as having faulty originals, etc.; and even when

the prints or pictures to be imitated were by the best masters, it was

little more than pouring water out of one vessel into another. Many

reasons led me to wish that I could find a shorter path--fix forms and

characters in my mind--and, instead of copying the lines, try to read

the language, and if possible find the grammar of the art, by bringing

into one focus the various observations I had made, and then trying by

my power on the canvas how far my plan enabled me to combine and apply

them to practice....

"I had one material advantage over my competitors, viz., the early habit

I acquired of retaining in my mind's eye, without coldly copying on the

spot, whatever I intended to imitate.... Instead of burdening the memory

with musty rules, or tiring the eye with copying dry or damaged

pictures, I have ever found studying from nature the shortest and safest

way of obtaining knowledge in my art...."

"I entertained some thoughts," he writes again, "of succeeding in what

the puffers in books call the great style of history painting, so that,

without having had a stroke of this grand business before, I quitted

small portraits and familiar conversations, and with a smile at my own

temerity commenced history painter, and on a great staircase at St.

Bartholomew's Hospital painted two Scripture stories, _The Pool of

Bethesda_ and _The Good Samaritan_, with figures seven feet high. These

I presented to the charity, and thought that they might serve as a

specimen to show that, were there an inclination in England for

encouraging historical pictures, such a first essay might prove the

painting them more easily attainable than is generally imagined. But as

Religion, the great promoter of this style in other countries, rejected

it in England, and I was unwilling to sink into a

portrait-manufacturer--and still ambitious of being singular, I soon

dropped all expectations of advantage from that source, and returned to

the pursuit of my former dealings with the public at large."

Few seemed disposed to recognise, in any of Hogarth's works, a higher

aim than that of raising a laugh. Somerville, the poet, dedicated his

_Rural Games_ to Hogarth in these words--"Permit me, Sir, to make choice

of you for my patron, being the greatest master in the burlesque way.

Your province is the town--leave me a small outride in the country, and

I shall be content." Fielding had a different opinion of his merits: "He

who would call the ingenious Hogarth a burlesque painter would in my

opinion do him very little honour, for sure it is much easier, much less

the subject of admiration, to paint a man with a nose, or any other

feature of a preposterous size, or to expose him in some absurd or

monstrous attitude, than to express the affections of man on canvas. It

hath been thought a vast commendation of a painter to say his figures

seem to breathe, but surely it is a much greater and nobler applause

that they appear to think."

In answer to criticism of his _Analysis of Beauty_, Hogarth writes:

"Among other crimes of which I am accused, it is asserted that I have

abused the 'Great Masters'; this is far from being just. So far from

attempting to lower the ancients, I have always thought, and it is

universally admitted, that they knew some fundamental principles in

nature which enabled them to produce works that have been the admiration

of succeeding ages; but I have not allowed this merit to those

leaden-headed imitators, who, having no consciousness of either symmetry

or propriety, have attempted to mend nature, and in their truly ideal

figures, gave similar proportions to a Mercury and a Hercules."

Another and a better spirit influenced him in the following passage--he

is proposing to seek the principles of beauty in nature instead of

looking for them in mere learning. His words are plain, direct, and

convincing. "Nature is simple, plain, and true in all her works, and

those who strictly adhere to her laws, and closely attend to her

appearances in their infinite varieties are guarded against any

prejudicial bias from truth; while those who have seen many things that

they cannot well understand, and read many books which they do not fully

comprehend, notwithstanding all their parade of knowledge, are apt to

wander about it and about it; perplexing themselves and their readers

with the various opinions of other men. As to those painters who have

written treatises on painting, they were in general too much taken up

with giving rules for the operative part of the art, to enter into

physical disquisitions on the nature of the objects."

After this it would be unfair to withhold the praise of Benjamin West

(who succeeded Reynolds as President of the Royal Academy)--a painter,

prudent in speech, and frugal in commendation. "I remember, when I was a

lad," says Smith, in his account of Nollekens, "asking the late

venerable President West what he thought of Hogarth's _Analysis of

Beauty_, and his answer was, 'It is a work of the highest value to

everyone studying the art. Hogarth was a strutting consequential little

man, and made himself many enemies by that book; but now that most of

them are dead, it is examined by disinterested readers, unbiassed by

personal animosities, and will be more and more read, studied and

understood.'"

In his memoranda respecting the establishment of an Academy of Art in

England, Hogarth writes well and wisely. Voltaire asserts that after

the establishment of the French Academy not one work of genius appeared,

for all the painters became mannerists and imitators. Hogarth agrees

with him, declaring that "the institution will serve to raise and

pension a few bustling and busy men, whose whole employment will be to

tell a few simple students when a leg is too long, or an arm too short.

More will flock to the study of art than genius sends; the hope of

profit, or the thirst of distinction, will induce parents to push their

offspring into the lecture-room, and many will appear and but few be

worthy. The paintings of Italy form a sort of ornamental fringe to their

gaudy religion, and Rome is the general storeshop of Europe. The arts

owe much to Popery, and Popery owes much of its universality to the

arts. The French have attained to a sort of foppish magnificence in art;

in Holland, selfishness is the ruling passion, and in England vanity is

united with selfishness. Portrait-painting, therefore, has succeeded,

and ever will succeed better in England than in any other country, and

the demand will continue as new faces come into the market.

"Portrait painting is one of the ministers of vanity, and vanity is a

munificent patroness; historical painting seeks to revive the memory of

the dead, and the dead are very indifferent paymasters. Paintings are

plentiful enough in England to keep us from the study of nature; but

students who confine their studies to the works of the dead, need never

hope to live themselves; they will learn little more than the names of

the painters: true painting can only be learnt in one school, and that

is kept by Nature."

Hogarth disliked a formal school, says Cunningham, because he was the

pupil of nature, and foresaw that students would flock to it from the

feeling of trade rather than the impulse of genius, and that it become a

manufactory for conventional forms and hereditary graces. Opulent

collectors were filling their galleries with the religious paintings of

the Romish Church, and vindicating their purchases by representing these

works as the only patterns of all that is noble in art and worthy of

imitation. Hogarth perceived that all this was not according to the

natural spirit of the nation; he well knew that our island had not yet

poured out its own original mind in art, as it had done in poetry; and

he felt assured that such a time would come, if native genius were not

overlaid systematically by mock patrons and false instructors.

"As a painter," says Walpole, "Hogarth has slender merit." "What is the

merit of a painter?" Cunningham concludes. "If it be to represent

life--to give us an image of man--to exhibit the workings of his

heart--to record the good and evil of his nature--to set in motion

before us the very beings with whom earth is peopled--to shake us with

mirth--to sadden us with woeful reflection--to please us with natural

grouping, vivid action, and vigorous colouring--Hogarth has done all

this--and if he that has done so be not a painter, who will show us

one?"

III

SIR JOSHUA REYNOLDS AND THOMAS GAINSBOROUGH

Whether or not SIR JOSHUA REYNOLDS is entitled to be ranked among the

very greatest painters, there can be no question that he has a place

among the most famous, not only on account of his actual painting, but

also because of the influence exerted by his whole-hearted devotion to

his art, and his strong character in forming, out of such unpromising

elements, a really vigorous school of painting in this country. The

example he set in the strenuous exercise of his profession, the precepts

he laid down for the guidance of students, and the dignity with which he

invested the whole practice of painting which, until he came, had

degenerated into a mere business, were of incalculable benefit to his

own and succeeding ages, and Edmund Burke was paying him no empty

compliment but only stating the bare truth when he said that Sir Joshua

Reynolds was the first Englishman who added the praise of the elegant

arts to the other glories of his country.

Joshua Reynolds was born at Plympton in Devonshire on the 16th July

1723; the son of the Rev. Samuel Reynolds and his wife Theophila Potter.

He was on every side connected with the Church, for both his father and

his grandfather were in holy orders, his mother was the daughter of a

clergyman, and his maternal grandmother also. His father's elder

brother, too, was a clergyman, a fellow of Eton College and Canon of St.

Peter's, Exeter. So that here, as in Italy, we start with a basis of

religion.

The young artist's first essays were made in copying several little

things done by his elder sisters, and he afterwards took great delight

in copying such prints as he met with in his father's books,

particularly those in Plutarch's _Lives_, and in Jacob Cats's _Book of

Emblems_, which his great-grandmother by his father's side, a Dutch

woman, had brought from Holland. When he was only eight years old he

read with great avidity a book called _The Jesuits Perspective_, an

architectural, not a religious work, and made himself so completely

master of it that he never afterwards had occasion to study any other

treatise on the subject. In fact, a drawing which he then made of

Plympton School so filled his father with wonder that he said to him,

"Now this exemplifies what the author of the _Perspective_ says in his

preface--that by observing the rules laid down in his book a man may do

wonders, for this is wonderful!"

From these attempts he proceeded to draw likenesses of his friends and

relations with tolerable success. But what most strongly confirmed him

in his love of the art was Richardson's _Treatise on Painting_, the

perusal of which so delighted and inflamed his mind, that Raphael

appeared to him superior to the most illustrious names of ancient or

modern times--a notion which he loved to indulge all the rest of his

life.

Before he was eighteen years old his father placed him as a pupil with

Thomas Hudson, who was then the most distinguished portrait-painter in

England; but having some disagreement with his master, the young man

returned to Devonshire, where he practised portrait painting with more

or less success until in 1749 he accompanied Admiral Keppel to the

Mediterranean, and remained for two or three years studying the old

masters in Italy.

As this period of Reynold's career had so determining an influence not

only on himself but on the whole course of the history of painting in

England--inasmuch as it formed the greater part of the groundwork of his

discourses when President of the Royal Academy, it is worth having an

account of it at first hand from the painter himself. "It has frequently

happened," he says, "as I was informed by the Keeper of the Vatican,

that many of those whom he had conducted through the various apartments

of that edifice when about to be dismissed, have asked for the works of

Raphael, and would not believe that they had already passed through the

room where they are preserved, so little impression had those

performances made on them. One of the first painters now in France once

told me that this circumstance happened to himself, though he now looks

on Raphael with that veneration which he deserves from all painters and

lovers of the art. I remember very well my own disappointment when I

first visited the the Vatican: but on confessing my feelings to a

brother student, of whose ingenuousness I had a high opinion, he

acknowledged that the works of Raphael had the same effect on him, or

rather that they did not produce the effect which he expected. This was

a great relief to my mind, and on inquiry further of other students I

found that those persons only who from natural imbecility appeared to be

incapable of ever relishing those divine performances, made pretensions

to instantaneous raptures on first beholding them.

"In justice to myself, however, I must add that though disappointed and

mortified at not finding myself enraptured with the works of this great

master, I did not for a moment conceive or suppose that the name of

Raphael, and those admirable paintings in particular, owed their

reputation to the ignorance and prejudice of mankind; on the contrary,

my not relishing them as I was conscious I ought to have done was one of

the most humiliating circumstances that ever happened to me. I found

myself in the midst of works executed upon principles with which I was

unacquainted: I felt my ignorance, and stood abashed. All the indigested

notions of painting which I had brought with me from England where the

art was in the lowest state it had ever been in (it could not indeed be

lower) were to be totally done away and eradicated from my mind. It was

necessary, as it is expressed on a very solemn occasion, that I should

become _as a little child_.

"Notwithstanding my disappointment, I proceeded to copy some of those

excellent works. I viewed them again and again; I even affected to feel

their merit and to admire them more than I really did. In a short time a

new taste and new perceptions began to dawn upon me, and I was convinced

that I had originally formed a false opinion of the perfection of art,

and that this great painter was well entitled to the high rank which he

holds in the estimation of the world."

"When I was at Venice," he writes in a note on Du Fresnoy's _Art of

Painting_ about the chiaroscuro of Titian, Paul Veronese and Tintoretto,

"the method I took to avail myself of their principles was this. When I

observed an extraordinary effect of light and shade in any picture, I

took a leaf of my pocket-book and darkened every part of it in the same

gradation of light and shade as the picture, leaving the white paper

untouched to represent the light, and this without any attention to the

subject or to the drawing of the figures. After a few experiments I

found the paper blotted nearly alike; their general practice appeared to

be to allow not above a quarter of the picture for the light, including

in this portion both the principal and secondary lights; another quarter

to be as dark as possible, and the remaining half kept in mezzotint or

half shadow.

"Rubens appears to have admitted rather more light than a quarter, and

Rembrandt much less, scarce an eighth; by this conduct Rembrandt's light

is extremely brilliant, but it costs too much, the rest of the picture

is sacrificed to this one object."

The results of these studies in Rome and Venice were at once observable

on his return to England in the beautiful portrait of _Giuseppe Marchi_,

one of the treasures belonging to the Royal Academy. It was altogether

too much for the ignorant British artists, and it excited lively

comment. What chiefly attracted the public notice, however, was the

whole-length portrait which he painted of his friend and patron Admiral

Keppel. On the appearance of this Reynolds was not only universally

acknowledged to be at the head of his profession, but to be the greatest

painter that England had seen since Van Dyck. The whole interval, as

Malone observes, between the time of Charles I. and the conclusion of

the reign of George II. seemed to be annihilated, and the only question

was whether the new painter or Van Dyck were the more excellent.

Reynolds very soon saw how much animation might be obtained by deviating

from the insipid manner of his immediate predecessors, and instead of

confining himself to mere likeness he dived, as it were, into the minds

and habits and manners of those who sat to him, and accordingly the

majority of his portraits are so appropriate and characteristic that the

many illustrious persons whom he has delineated are almost as well known

to us as if we had seen and conversed with them.

Very soon after his return from Italy his acquaintance with Dr Johnson

commenced, and their intimacy continued uninterrupted to the time of

Johnson's death. How much he profited thereby, especially in the

practice of art, he has recorded in a paper which was intended to form a

part of one of his discourses. "I remember," he writes, "Mr Burke

speaking of the _Essays_ of Sir Francis Bacon, said he thought them the

best of his works. Dr Johnson was of opinion 'that their excellence and

their value consisted in being the observations of a strong mind

operating upon life; and in consequence you find there what you seldom

find in other books,' It is this kind of excellence which gives a value

to the performances of artists also.... The observations which he made

on poetry, on life, and on everything about us, I applied to our art;

with what success others must judge. Perhaps an artist in his studies

should pursue the same conduct, and instead of patching up a particular

work on the narrow plan of imitation, rather endeavour to acquire the

art and power of thinking."

In another passage from his memoranda, quoted by Malone, Sir Joshua lets

us into some more of the secrets of his pre-eminence in his art, both of

painter and preceptor: for we are to remember that the British School of

painting owes more to the influence of Reynolds than perhaps any other

school to the example of one man:--

"I considered myself as playing a great game," he writes, "and instead

of beginning to save money, I laid it out faster than I got it in,

purchasing the best examples of art that could be procured; for I even

borrowed money for this purpose. The possessing portraits by Titian, Van

Dyck, Rembrandt, etc., I considered as the best kind of wealth. By

studying carefully the works of great masters, this advantage is

obtained--we find that certain niceties of expression are capable of

being executed, which otherwise we might suppose beyond the reach of

art. This gives us a confidence in ourselves, and we are thus incited to

endeavour at not only the same happiness of execution but also at other

congenial excellencies. Study indeed consists in learning to see nature,

and may be called the art of using other men's minds. By this kind of

contemplation and exercise we are taught to think in their way, and

sometimes to attain their excellence. Thus, for instance, if I had never

seen any of the works of Correggio, I should never perhaps have remarked

in nature the expression which I find in one of his pieces; or if I had

remarked it I might have thought it too difficult, or perhaps impossible

to be executed.

"My success and continual improvement in my art (if I may be allowed

that expression), may be ascribed in a good measure to a principle which

I will boldly recommend to imitation; I mean the principle of honesty;

which in this as in all other instances is according to the vulgar

proverb certainly the best policy: I always endeavoured to do my best.

"My principal labour was employed on the whole together, and I was never

weary of changing and trying different modes and different effects. I

had always some scheme in my mind, and a perpetual desire to advance. By

constantly endeavouring to do my best, I acquired a power of doing that

with spontaneous facility that which at first was the effort of my whole

mind."

Six Centuries of Painting · 第 19 / 24 段