[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF A LADY.--[JOHN SINGLETON COPLEY.]]
ART IN AMERICA
A CRITICAL AND HISTORICAL SKETCH
BY
S. G. W. BENJAMIN
AUTHOR OF "CONTEMPORARY ART IN EUROPE" "WHAT IS ART" &c.
_ILLUSTRATED_
[Illustration]
NEW YORK
HARPER & BROTHERS, PUBLISHERS
FRANKLIN SQUARE
1880
Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1879, by
HARPER & BROTHERS,
In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington.
ERRATUM.
The cut on page 28, attributed to Rembrandt Peale, should be credited to
John T. Peele.
PREFACE.
The aim of this book has been to give a historical outline of the growth
of the arts in America. But while this has been the dominating idea in
the mind of the writer, criticism has necessarily entered, more or less,
into the preparation of the work, since only by weighing the differences
or the comparative merits of those artists who seemed best to illustrate
the various phases of American art has it been possible to trace its
progress from one step to another.
It is from no lack of appreciation of their talents that the author has
apparently neglected mention of the American artists resident in foreign
capitals--like Bridgman, Duveneck, Wight, Neal, Bacon, Benson, Ernest
Parton, Millet, Whistler, Dana, Blashfield, Miss Gardner, Miss Conant,
and many others who have done credit to American æsthetic culture. But
it was necessary to draw the line somewhere; and to discuss what our
artists are painting abroad would have at once enlarged the scope of the
work beyond the limits of the plan adopted. An exception has been made
in the case of our sculptors, because they have so uniformly lived and
wrought in Europe, and so large a proportion of them are still resident
there, that, were we to confine this branch of the subject only to the
sculptors now actually in America, there would be little left to say
about their department of our arts.
The author takes this occasion cordially to thank the artists and
amateurs who have kindly permitted copies of their paintings and
drawings to be engraved for this volume.
CONTENTS.
PAGE
I.
EARLY AMERICAN ART 13
II.
AMERICAN PAINTERS (1828-1878) 39
III.
AMERICAN PAINTERS (1828-1878) 66
IV.
AMERICAN PAINTERS (1828-1878) 97
V.
SCULPTURE IN AMERICA 134
VI.
PRESENT TENDENCIES OF AMERICAN ART 164
ILLUSTRATIONS.
SUBJECT. ARTIST. PAGE.
PORTRAIT OF A LADY _John Singleton Copley_ _Frontispiece_
FAMILY OF BISHOP BERKELEY _John Smybert_ 16
DEATH ON THE PALE HORSE _Benjamin West_ 19
DEATH OF MONTGOMERY _John Trumbull_ 23
GENERAL KNOX _Gilbert Stuart_ 25
"BEGGAR'S OPERA" _G. Stuart Newton_ 27
"BABES IN THE WOOD" _Rembrandt Peale_ 28
FANNY KEMBLE _Thomas Sully_ 29
ARIADNE _John Vanderlyn_ 30
THE HOURS _E. G. Malbone_ 32
JEREMIAH _Washington Allston_ 34
DYING HERCULES _Samuel F. B. Morse_ 35
"MUMBLE THE PEG" _Henry Inman_ 40
PORTRAIT OF PARKE GODWIN _Thomas Le Clear_ 43
PORTRAIT OF FLETCHER HARPER _C. L. Elliott_ 45
AN IDEAL HEAD _G. A. Baker_ 48
THE JUDGEMENT OF PARIS _Henry Peters Grey_ 50
MIRANDA _Daniel Huntington_ 53
A SURPRISE _William Sidney Mount_ 55
TAKING THE VEIL _Robert Weir_ 57
DESOLATION. FROM "THE COURSE OF EMPIRE"_Thomas Cole_ 59
A STUDY FROM NATURE _A. B. Durand_ 61
NOON BY THE SEA-SHORE.--BEVERLY BEACH _J. F. Kensett_ 63
ALTORF, BIRTH-PLACE OF WILLIAM TELL _George L. Brown_ 64
BROOK IN THE WOODS _Worthington Whittredge_ 67
LANDSCAPE COMPOSITION _R. W. Hubbard_ 70
"THE VASTY DEEP" _William T. Richards_ 72
HIGH TORN, ROCKLAND LAKE _Jasper F. Cropsey_ 74
THE PARSONAGE _A. F. Bellows_ 75
LANDSCAPE WITH CATTLE _James Hart_ 77
SUNSET ON THE HUDSON _Sandford R. Gifford_ 80
A COMPOSITION _Frederick E. Church_ 82
A WINTER SCENE _Louis R. Mignot_ 84
SHIP OF "THE ANCIENT MARINER" _James Hamilton_ 85
"WHOO!" _William H. Beard_ 87
LAFAYETTE IN PRISON _E. Leutze_ 89
PORTRAIT OF A LADY _William Page_ 91
THE REFUGE _Elihu Vedder_ 93
CARTOON SKETCH: CHRIST AND NICODEMUS _John Lafarge_ 95
VIEW ON THE KERN RIVER _A. Bierstadt_ 99
THE YOSEMITE _Thomas Hill_ 100
THE BATHERS _Thomas Moran_ 101
LANDSCAPE _Jervis M'Entee_ 104
COUNTY KERRY _A. H. Wyant_ 105
THE ADIRONDACKS _Homer Martin_ 107
A LANDSCAPE _J. W. Casilear_ 109
SHIP ASHORE _M. F. H. De Haas_ 111
A FOGGY MORNING _W. E. Norton_ 112
A MARINE _Arthur Quartley_ 114
ARGUING THE QUESTION _T. W. Wood_ 116
THE ROSE _B. F. Mayer_ 118
DRESS PARADE _J. G. Brown_ 120
A BED-TIME STORY _S. J. Guy_ 121
THE MOTHER _Eastman Johnson_ 123
SAIL-BOAT _Winslow Homer_ 124
THE SCOUT _Wordsworth Thompson_ 126
ON THE OLD SOD _William Magrath_ 127
"A MATIN SONG" _Fidelia Bridges_ 129
STUDY OF A DOG _Frank Rogers_ 130
LOST IN THE SNOW _A. F. Tait_ 132
EVE BEFORE THE FALL _Hiram Powers_ 135
ORPHEUS _Thomas Crawford_ 137
COLUMBUS BEFORE THE COUNCIL. }
FROM THE BRONZE DOOR } _Randolph Rogers_ 139
OF THE CAPITOL AT WASHINGTON }
THE GHOST IN "HAMLET" _Thomas R. Gould_ 141
GEORGE WASHINGTON _J. Q. A. Ward_ 143
MEDEA _William Wetmore Story_ 146
THE PROMISED LAND _Franklin Simmons_ 147
LATONA AND HER INFANTS _W. H. Rinehart_ 150
ZENOBIA _Harriet Hosmer_ 152
EVENING _E. D. Palmer_ 153
BUST OF WILLIAM PAGE _William R. O'Donovan_ 155
ABRAHAM PIERSON _Launt Thompson_ 157
THE CHARITY PATIENT _John Rogers_ 158
THE WHIRLWIND _J. S. Hartley_ 159
ADORATION OF THE CROSS BY}
ANGELS. ST. THOMAS'S } _Augustus St. Gaudens_ 160
CHURCH, NEW YORK }
THOMAS JEFFERSON'S IDEA OF A MONUMENT 162
THE MOWING _Alfred Fredericks_ 165
BIRDS IN THE FOREST _Miss Jessie Curtis_ 169
REPRESENTING THE MANNER OF
PETER'S COURTSHIP _Howard Pyle_ 171
SOME ART CONNOISSEURS _W. Hamilton Gibson_ 173
WASHINGTON OPENING THE BALL _C. S. Reinhart_ 175
MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS, BOSTON 178
THE ASTONISHED ABBÉ _E. A. Abbey_ 181
A CHILD'S PORTRAIT _B. C. Porter_ 184
A BIT OF VENICE _Samuel Colman_ 185
THE OLD ORCHARD _R. Swain Gifford_ 187
A LANDSCAPE _George Inness_ 188
LA MARGUERETTE--THE DAISY _William M. Hunt_ 189
MOONLIGHT _John J. Enneking_ 191
HAVING A GOOD TIME _Louis C. Tiffany_ 192
SOUTHAMPTON, LONG ISLAND _C. H. Miller_ 193
A STUDY _Frederick Dielman_ 195
THE BURGOMASTER _H. Muhrman_ 197
BURIAL OF THE DEAD BIRD _J. Alden Wier_ 200
THE APPRENTICE _William M. Chase_ 201
THE PROFESSOR _Thomas Eakins_ 204
THE GOOSE-HERD _Walter Shirlaw_ 205
A SPANISH LADY _Mary S. Cassatt_ 208
STUDY OF A BOY'S HEAD _W. Sartain_ 209
ART IN AMERICA.
I.
_EARLY AMERICAN ART._
The art of a nation is the result of centuries of growth; its crowning
excellence does not come except when maturity and repose offer the
occasion for its development. But while, therefore, it is yet too soon
to look for a great school of art in America, the time has perhaps
arrived to note some of the preliminary phases of the art which, we have
reason to hope, is to dawn upon the country before long.
As the heirs of all the ages, we had a right to expect that our
intellectual activity would demand art expression; while the first
efforts would naturally be imitative rather than original. The
individuality which finds vent in the utterance of truth under new
conditions is not fully reached until youth gives place to the vigorous
self-assertion of a manhood conscious of its resources and power. Such
we find to have been the case in the rise of the fine arts in this
country, which up to this time have been rather an echo of the art of
the lands from which our ancestors came, than distinctively original.
Our art has been the result of affectionate remembrance of foreign
achievement more than of independent observation of nature; and while
the number of artists has been sufficiently large, very few of them
stand forth as representatives or types of novel methods and ideas; and
those few, coming before their time, have met with little response in
the community, and their influence has been generally local and
moderate, leading to the founding of nothing like a school except in one
or two isolated cases. But many of them, especially in the first period
of our art, have shared the strong, active character of their time;
and, like the heroes of the Revolution, presented sturdy traits of
character. And thus, while the society in which they moved was not
sufficiently advanced to appreciate the quality of their art, they were
yet able to stamp their names indelibly upon the pages of our history.
But within the last few years the popular interest in art has grown so
rapidly in the country--as indicated by the establishment of numerous
art schools and academies, art galleries, and publications treating
exclusively of art subjects, together with many other significant proofs
of concern in the subject--that it seems safe to assume that the first
preparatory period of American art, so brilliant in many respects, is
about closing, and that we are now on the threshold of another, although
it is only scarcely three centuries since the first English colonists
landed on our shores. The first professional artist of whom there seems
to be any record in our colonial history was possessor of a title that
does not often fall to the lot of the artist: he was a deacon. This fact
indicates that Deacon Shem Drowne, of Boston town, was not only a
cunning artificer in metals and wood-carving, as the old chronicles
speak of him, but also a man addicted to none of the small vices that
are traditionally connected with the artistic career; for people were
very proper in that vicinage in those days of austere virtue and
primness, and deacons were esteemed the very salt of the earth.
During the first century of our colonial existence local painters, often
scarcely deserving the name, are also known to have gained a precarious
livelihood by taking meagre portraits of the worthies of the period, in
black and white or in color. We should know this to have been the fact
by the portraits--quaint, and often rude and awkward--which have come
down to us, without anything about them to indicate who the artists
could have been who painted them. Occasionally a suggestion of talent is
evident in those canvases from which the stiff ruffles and bands of the
Puritans stare forth at us. Cotton Mather also alludes to a certain
artist whom he speaks of as a limner. But in those times there was,
however, at best no art in this country, except what was brought over
occasionally in the form of family portraits, painted by Vandyck,
Rembrandt, Lely, or Kneller. These precious heirlooms, scarcely
appreciated by the stern theologians of the time, were, however, not
without value in advancing the cause of civilization among the wilds of
the Western world. Unconsciously the minds of coming generations were
influenced and moulded by these reminders of the great art of other
lands and ages. No human effort is wasted; somewhere, at some time, it
appears, as the seed sown in October comes forth anew in April,
quickened into other forms, to sustain life under fresh conditions.
The first painter in America of any decided ability whose name has
survived to this day was John Watson, who executed portraits in
Philadelphia in 1715. He was a Scotchman. It is to another Scotchman,
who married and identified himself with the rising fortunes of the
colonies, that we are perhaps able to assign the first distinct and
decided art impulse in this country. And for this we are directly
indebted to Bishop Berkeley, whose sagacious eye penetrated so far
through the mists of futurity, and realized the coming greatness of the
land.
[Illustration: FAMILY OF BISHOP BERKELEY.--[JOHN SMYBERT.]]
Berkeley is associated with the literature and arts of America in
several ways. He aided the advance of letters by a grant of books to
Yale College, and by founding the nucleus of what later became the
Redwood Library at Newport; thus indirectly suggesting architectural
beauty to a people without examples of it, for in 1750 a building was
erected for the library that sprang from his benefactions. The design
was obtained from Vanbrugh, one of the greatest architects of modern
times; and although the little library is constructed only of wood and
mortar, its plan is so pleasing, tasteful, and harmonious, that it long
remained the most graceful structure in the colonies; and even at this
day is scarcely equalled on the continent as a work of art by many far
more costly and ambitious constructions after the Renaissance order.
And, finally, we owe to Bishop Berkeley the most notable impulse which
the dawning arts received in this country when he induced John Smybert,
the Scotchman, to leave London in 1725 and settle in Boston, where he
had the good fortune to marry a rich widow, and lived prosperous and
contented until his death, in 1751. Smybert was not a great painter. If
he had remained in Europe his position never would have been more than
respectable, even at an age when the arts were at a low ebb. But he is
entitled to our gratitude for perpetuating for us the lineaments of many
worthies of the period, and for the undoubted impetus his example gave
to the artists who were about to come on the scene and assert the right
of the New World to exercise its energies in the encouragement of the
fine arts. It is by an apparently unimportant incident that the
influence of Smybert to our early art is most vividly illustrated. He
brought with him to America an excellent copy of a Vandyck, executed by
himself; and several of our artists, including Allston, acknowledged
that a sight of this copy affected them like an inspiration. The most
important work of Smybert in this country is a group representing the
family of Bishop Berkeley, now in the art gallery at New Haven. A flock
of foreign portrait-painters, following the example of Smybert, now came
over to this country, and rendered good service in perpetuating the
faces of the notable characters and beauties of the time; but none of
them were of special moment, excepting, perhaps, Blackburn and
Alexander. But their labor bore fruit in preparing the way for the
successes of Copley. The first native American painter of merit of whom
there is any authentic record was Robert Feke, who was of Quaker
descent, and settled in Newport, where portraits of his are still to be
seen, notably that of the beautiful wife of Governor Wanton, which is
preserved in the Redwood Library. What little art-education he received
resulted from his being taken prisoner at sea and carried to Spain,
where he contrived to acquire a few hints in the use of pigments. Feke
was a man of undoubted ability; and the same may be said of Matthew
Pratt, of Philadelphia, who was born in 1734, in respect of age
antedating both Copley and West, although not known until after they
had acquired fame, because for many years he contented himself with the
painting of signs and house decorations.
But the latent æsthetic capacity of the colonies displayed itself
suddenly when John Singleton Copley, at the early age of seventeen,
after only the most rudimentary instruction, adopted art as a
profession. But, although a professional and successful artist at so
early an age, Copley seems to have been preceded in assuming the calling
of artist by a Quaker lad of Pennsylvania, one year his junior, but
evincing a turn for art at an earlier age, when hardly out of the
cradle.
The birth of a national art has scarcely ever been more affecting or
remarkable than that recorded in the first efforts of Benjamin West. He
was born at Springfield, Pennsylvania, in 1738, a year after Copley. The
scientist of the future may perhaps show us that it was something more
than a coincidence that the six leading painters of the first period of
American art came in pairs: Copley and West in 1737 and 1738; Stuart and
Trumbull were born in 1756; Vanderlyn arrived in 1776; and Allston
followed only three years later.
The descendants of the iconoclasts who had beaten down statues and
burned masterpieces of art, who had cropped their hair and passed
sumptuary laws to fulfil the dictates of their creed, and had sought a
wilderness across the seas where they could maintain their rigid
doctrines unmolested, were now about to vindicate the character of their
fathers. They were now to prove that the love of beauty is universal and
unquenchable, and that sooner or later every people, kindred, and tongue
seeks to utter its aspirations after the ideal good by art forms and
methods; and that the sternness of the Puritans had been really
directed, not so much against art and beauty legitimately employed, as
against the abuse of the purest and noblest emotions of the soul by a
debasing art.
As if to emphasize the truth of these observations, as well as of the
famous prophecy of Bishop Berkeley, the artist to whom American art owes
its rise, and for many years its greatest source of encouragement, was
named West, and was of Quaker lineage. Such was the rude condition of
the arts in the neighborhood at that time that the first initiation of
West into art was as simple as that of Giotto. At nine years of age he
drew hairs from a cat's tail and made himself a brush. Colors he
obtained by grinding charcoal and chalk, and crushing the red blood out
from the blackberry. His mother's laundry furnished him with indigo,
and the friendly Indians who came to his father's house gave him of the
red and yellow earths with which they daubed their faces. With such rude
materials the lad painted a child sleeping in its cradle; and in that
first effort of precocious genius executed certain touches which he
never surpassed, as he affirmed long after, when at the zenith of his
remarkable career.
How, from such primitive efforts, the Quaker youth gradually worked into
local fame, went to Italy and acquired position there, and then settled
in England, became the favorite _protégé_ of the king for forty years,
and the President of the National Academy of Great Britain--these are
all matters of history, and, as West never forgot his love for his
native land, entitle him to the respectful remembrance not only of
artists, but of all his countrymen. American art has every reason, also,
to cherish his memory with profound gratitude, for no painter ever
conducted himself with greater kindness and generosity to the rising,
struggling artists of his native land. No sooner did our early painters
reach London but they resorted, for aid and guidance, to West, and found
in him a friend who lent them his powerful influence without grudging,
or allowed them to set up their easels in his studio, and gave them all
the instruction in his power. Trumbull, Stuart, Dunlap, and many others,
long after they had forgotten the natural foibles of West, had reason to
remember how great had been the services he had rendered to the aspiring
artists of his transatlantic home.
Since the death of West--whom we must consider one of the greatest men
our country has produced--it has become the fashion to decry his art and
belittle his character. This seems to be a mistake which reflects
discredit upon his detractors. Men should be judged not absolutely, but
relatively; not compared with perfection, but with their contemporaries
and their opportunities. In estimating men of the past, also, we need to
put ourselves in their places, rather than to regard them by the
standard of the age in which we live. In no pursuit are men more likely
to be misjudged than in art; for artists are liable to be guided by
impulse rather than judgment, and the very vehemence of their likes and
dislikes renders their opinions intense rather than broad and
charitable. Benjamin West appears to have been born with great natural
powers, which matured rapidly, and early ceased to develop in excellence
proportionate to his extraordinary industry and fidelity to art.
[Illustration: "DEATH ON THE PALE HORSE."--[BENJAMIN WEST.]]
But while a general evenness of quality rather than striking excellence
in any particular works was the characteristic of the art of West,
together with a certain brick-red tone in his colors not always
agreeable, yet a share of genius must be granted to the artist who
painted the "Departure of Regulus," "Death on the Pale Horse," and "The
Death of Wolfe." It unquestionably implied daring and consciousness of
power to brave the opposition of contemporary opinions and abandon
classic costume in historical compositions as he did; to win to his side
the judgment of Sir Joshua Reynolds, and create a revolution in certain
phases of art. Notwithstanding this, however, West was emphatically a
man of his time, moulded by it rather than forming it, and inclined to
conventionalism. When he entered the arena, art was in a depressed
condition both in Italy, where he studied, and in England. But while
Reynolds and Gainsborough gave a fresh impulse to art, West's genius,
ripening precociously, early became incapable of achieving further
progress.
West established himself as a portrait-painter at the age of fifteen;
and in the following year--1755--Copley also engaged in the same
pursuit, when only seventeen. The former lived to be seventy-nine; the
latter was seventy-eight at his death. The art-life of Copley must be
considered the most indigenous and strictly American of the two.
Although receiving some early instruction from his step-father, Pelham,
and enjoying opportunities denied to West, of studying portraits by
foreign artists, yet Copley's advantages were excessively meagre; and
whatever successes he achieved with his brush, until he finally settled
in England at the age of thirty-nine, were entirely his own, and can be
proudly included among the most valued treasures of our native art. So
highly were the abilities of Copley esteemed in his day, that years
before he crossed the Atlantic his reputation had preceded him, and
assured him ready patronage in London.
It is said that Copley was a very slow and laborious worker. The
elaboration he gave to the details of costume doubtless required time.
But if the popular opinion was correct, we must assume that many of the
paintings now reputed to be by his hand are spurious. It is a common
saying that a Copley in a New England family is almost equivalent to a
title of nobility; and this very fact would lead many to attribute to
him family portraits by forgotten artists, who had, perhaps, caught the
trick of his style. But there yet remain enough well authenticated
portraits by this great painter, in excellent preservation, to render
the study of his works one of great interest to the art student. There
is no mistaking the handling of Copley. Self-taught, his merits and
defects are entirely his own. His style was open to the charge of
excessive dryness; the outlines are sometimes hard, and the figures
stiff almost to ungracefulness. The last fault was, however, less
noticeable in the formal, stately characters and costumes of the time
than it would be under different conditions. In Copley's best
compositions these errors are scarcely perceptible. He was far superior
to West as a colorist, and was especially felicitous in catching the
expression of the eye, and reproducing the elegant dress of the period;
while we have had no artist who has excelled him in perceiving and
interpreting the individuality and character of the hand. A very fine
example of his skill in this respect is seen in the admirable portrait
of Mrs. Relief Gill, taken when she was eighty years old. Gilbert Stuart
remarked of the hand in the portrait of Colonel Epes Sargent, "Prick
that hand, and blood will spurt out." It is indeed a masterpiece. No
painter was ever more in sympathy with his age than Copley; and thus,
when we look at the admirable portraits in which his genius commemorated
the commanding characters of those colonial days, in their brilliant and
massive uniforms, their brocades and embroidered velvets, and choice
laces and scarfs, the imagination is carried back to the past with
irresistible force, while, at the same time, we are astonished at the
ability which, with so little training, could give immortality both to
his contemporaries and his own pencil.
While the fame of Copley will ultimately rest on the masterly portraits
which he bequeathed to posterity, yet it will not be forgotten that he
was one of the ablest historical painters of his time. The compositions
entitled the "Boy and the Squirrel," painted in Boston, the "Death of
Major Pierson," and the "Death of Chatham," will contribute for ages to
the fame of one of the most important American artists of the last
century.
Charles Wilson Peale, the next artist of reputation in the colonies,
owes his celebrity partly to accidental circumstances. Of course a
certain degree of ability is implied in order that one may know how to
turn the winds of fortune to the best account when they veer in his
favor. But in some cases, as with Copley and West, man seems to wrest
fate to his advantage; while in others she appears actually to throw
herself in his way, and offer him opportunities denied to others. At any
rate it seems no injustice to ascribe the continued fame of Charles
Wilson Peale to the fact that he was enabled to associate his art with
the name of Washington: and that his son, Rembrandt, by also following
art pursuits, was able to emphasize the fame of the family name. Peale
the elder was not a specialist; he was rather, like so many born in
America, gifted with a general versatility that enabled him to succeed
moderately well in whatever he undertook, without achieving the highest
excellence in any department. Inclining alternately to science and
mechanics, he finally drifted into art, went over to England and studied
with West, and returned to America in time to enter the army and rise to
the rank of colonel. His versatile turn of mind is well illustrated by
one who says that "he sawed his own ivory for his miniatures, moulded
the glasses, and made the shagreen cases."
It was the good fortune of Peale to paint several excellent portraits of
Washington, representing him during the military part of his career,
both before and during the Revolution. Lacking many of the qualities of
good art, these portraits are yet faithful and characteristic likenesses
of the Father of his Country, and as such are of great interest and
value.
It is to another Revolutionary soldier of superior natural ability,
Colonel John Trumbull, that the country is indebted for a proof of the
national turn for the fine arts. The son of Jonathan Trumbull, Colonial
Governor of Connecticut, he received a classical education at Harvard
University. But here, again, observe the far-reaching influence of one
act. That copy, already alluded to, which was executed by Smybert after
a work of Vandyck--the great painter who was welcomed to the banqueting
halls of merry England by Charles I. and Henrietta Maria--was again to
bear fruit. It inspired the genius of Trumbull with a passion for color
while yet in his youth, and ultimately led to his becoming a great
historical painter.
But first he had to undergo the discipline of war, which gave him that
experimental knowledge of which he afterward made such good use. Of a
high spirit and proud, irascible temper, Trumbull served with
distinction; first as aid to Washington, then as major at the storming
of the works of Burgoyne at Saratoga; and he had reached a colonelcy,
when he threw up his commission and went over to England, and became a
student of West, whose style is perceptible in many of the works of the
younger artist.
If inequality is one sign of genius, then Trumbull possessed it to a
marked degree. The difference in merit between his best paintings, which
were chiefly composed in England, and those he executed in this country,
in the later years of his life, is remarkable. This probably was due in
part to the lack of any appreciable art influences or patronage in his
own country to stimulate the artistic afflatus. The talents of Trumbull
were conspicuous in portraiture and historical painting. The energy of
his nature is illustrated in such powerful portraits as those of
Washington and Hamilton. Deficient in drawing, and unlike in details of
feature, they are life-like in their general resemblance, and seem to
thrill with the spirit of the original. We see before us the heroes who
conducted the struggling colonies successfully to military independence
and political freedom. Trumbull's miniatures in oil of many of the men
who were prominent in the Revolution are also very spirited and
characteristic, and of inestimable historic value. He was less
successful in the representation of feminine beauty. His talents moved
within a limited range, but within that narrow circle displayed certain
excellences quite rare in the Anglo-Saxon art of that period, exhibiting
a correct feeling for color, keen perception of character, and great
force of expression. But let him stray beyond the compass of his powers,
as in the representation of woman, and his coloring becomes unnatural
and his drawing inexpressive.
The art of this great painter, for so we must call him in view of some
of his works, culminated in the historical compositions entitled "The
Signing of the Declaration of Independence," "The Siege of Gibraltar,"
and the immortal compositions representing the "Death of Montgomery" and
the "Battle of Bunker Hill." The last two were not surpassed by any
similar works in the last century, and thus far stand alone in American
historical painting.
[Illustration: DEATH OF MONTGOMERY.--[JOHN TRUMBULL.]]
Cabinet in size, they combine breadth and detail to an unusual degree.
The faces are in miniature, in many cases portraits from life. They
could be cut out and framed as portraits; each also is stamped with the
individual passions of that terrible hour--hate, exultation, pain,
courage, sorrow, despair. And yet with all this truth of detail the
general spirit and effort of the scene is preserved. The onward
movement, the rush, the onset of war, the harmony of lines, the massing
of _chiaro-oscuro_, the brilliance and truth of color, are all there.
One first gazes astonished at the skill of the artist, and ends by
feeling his heart stirred and his emotions shaken as the leaves of the
forest are blown by the winds of October, and his sympathies carried
away by the grandeur and the terror of battle. Yes, when John Trumbull
painted those two pictures, he was inspired by the fires of genius for
once in his life. His later historical works are so inferior in all
respects as scarcely to seem to be by the same hand.
Trumbull lived to see a taste for the arts growing up among his
fellow-countrymen, and the awakening of the first feeble attempts to
furnish art instruction in his native land to the artists of the future.
He was President of the Academy of Fine Arts, of which he was one of the
founders.
In the same year with Trumbull was born the greatest colorist and
portrait-painter we have seen on this side of the Atlantic, Gilbert
Stuart. The town of Narragansett, in the little State of Rhode Island,
was the birth-place of this painter, who came of Scotch and Welsh
descent, an alliance of blood whose individual traits were well
illustrated in the life and character of the painter.
Fortune was becoming a little kinder to our artists. Stuart's dawning
genius was directed at Newport by Cosmo Alexander, a Scotch
portrait-painter of some merit, who took his pupil to Scotland and
placed him in charge of Sir George Chambers. After various vicissitudes,
comprising, as with so many of our early painters, an art apprenticeship
in the studio of West, the young American artist settled for awhile
abroad, and acquired such repute that he rivalled Sir Joshua Reynolds in
the popular esteem: his brush was in demand by the first in the land;
and the unfortunate Louis XVI. was included among his sitters. After
this, in 1793, Stuart returned to America, painted the portraits of the
leading citizens in our chief cities, and finally settled in Boston. The
most important works he executed in this country were his well-known
portraits of Washington, including the famous full-length painting,
which represents the great man, not in the prime of his active days, as
represented by Peale and Trumbull, but when, crowned with glory and
honor in the majesty of a serene old age, he was approaching the sunset
of life.
The character of Stuart was one of marked peculiarities, and offers
points of interest scarcely equalled by that of any other American
artist. The canny shrewdness and penetrating perception of the Scotchman
was mellowed almost to the point of inconsistency by the warm and supple
traits of his Welsh ancestry. An admirable story-teller himself, he in
turn gave rise, by his oddities, to many racy anecdotes, some of which
have been treasured up and well told by Dunlap, who, although inferior
as a painter, deserves to be cordially remembered for his discursive but
valuable book on early American painting.
[Illustration: GENERAL KNOX.--[GILBERT STUART.]]
As regards the art of Stuart, it can be safely affirmed that America has
produced no painter who has been more unmistakably entitled to rank
among men of genius as distinguished from those of talent. We assume
that the difference between the two is not one of degree, but of kind.
In the intellectual progress of the world the first leads, the other
follows. One may have great talents, and yet really not enrich the world
with a single new idea. He simply assents to the accepted, and lends it
the aid of his powers. But genius, not content with things as they are,
either gives us new truths or old truths in a new form. The greatest
minds--Cæsar, Shakspeare, Goethe, Franklin--present us with a just
combination of genius and talent: they both create and organize. Now,
one may have great or little genius, but so far as he tells us
something worth knowing in his own way, it is genius as distinguished
from talent.
And this is why we say that Stuart had genius. He followed no beaten
track, he gave in his allegiance to no canons of the schools. His eagle
eye pierced the secrets of nature according to no prescribed rules. Not
satisfied with surfaces or accessories, he gave us character as well.
Nor did he rest here. In the technical requirements of his art he stands
original and alone. That seemingly hard, practical Scotch nature of his
was yet attuned like a delicate chord to the melody of color. Few more
than he have felt the subtle relation between sound and color--for he
was also a musician. In the handling of pigments, again, he stands
pre-eminent among the artists of his generation. Why is it that his
colors are as brilliant, as pure, as forcible, as harmonious, to-day as
when he laid them on the canvas nearly a century ago? If you carefully
examine his pictures you shall see one cause of the result explained. He
had such confidence in his powers, and such technical mastery, that he
needed not to experiment with treacherous vehicles; and, rarely mixing
tints on the palette, laid pure blues, reds, or yellows directly on the
canvas, and slightly dragged them together. Thus he was able to render
the stippled, mottled semblance of color as it actually appears on the
skin; to suggest, also, the prismatic effect which all objects have in
nature; and, at the same time, by keeping the colors apart, to insure
their permanence. Stuart generally painted thinly, on large-grained
canvas, which gave the picture the softness of atmosphere. But
sometimes, as in the case of the powerful portrait of General Knox, he
loaded his colors. But even in that work he did not depart from his
usual practice in rendering the flesh tints.
It has been alleged by some that Stuart was unable to do justice to the
delicate beauty of woman, especially the refined type which is
characteristic of the United States. He may have more often failed in
this regard than in other efforts; but the force of the accusation
disappears when one observes the extraordinary loveliness of such
portraits as that of Mrs. Forrester, the sister of Judge Story, at
Salem. But, indeed, it seemed to make little difference to him who the
sitter happened to be. He entered into the nature of the individual,
grasped the salient traits of his character, and, whether it was a
seaman or a statesman, a triumphant general or a reigning belle, his
unerring eye and his matchless brush rendered justice to them all.
Gilbert Stuart Newton, the nephew of Stuart, is a painter well known in
England, where he early established himself; and, having been born at
Halifax, and always remained a British subject, he more properly belongs
to foreign art. But his education was gained in the studio of his uncle
in Boston, and his style shows unmistakable traces of the teacher's
methods. Newton executed some good portraits before abandoning his
native land, including one of John Adams, which is in the Massachusetts
Historical Society. He is known abroad chiefly as a _genre_ painter of
semi-literary compositions.
[Illustration: "BEGGAR'S OPERA.--[G. STUART NEWTON.]]
James Frothingham was also a pupil, and in some degree an imitator, of
Stuart, who possessed unusual ability in portraiture, but it was
confined to the painting of the head. Whether from the lack of early
advantages--which was so remarkable that he had not even seen a palette
when, self-taught, he was able to execute a very tolerable likeness--or
because of natural limitation of power, Frothingham's talent seemed to
stop with the neck of the sitter. The face would perhaps be reproduced
with a force, a beauty of color, and a truth of character that
oftentimes suggested the art of Stuart; while the hands or shoulders
were almost ludicrously out of drawing and proportion.
[Illustration: "BABES IN THE WOOD."--[REMBRANDT PEALE.]]
Besides Frothingham, there were a number of American painters of
celebrity, contemporaries of Stuart, but of unequal merit. Colonel
Sargent acquired a repute in his time which it is difficult to
understand at present. He seems to have been more of an amateur than a
professional artist. His ablest work is the "Landing of the Pilgrims,"
of which a copy is preserved at Plymouth. Rembrandt Peale obtained a
permanent reputation for his very able and truthful portrait of
Washington. He bestowed upon it the best efforts of his mature years,
and it received the compliment of being purchased by Congress for
$2000--a large sum for an American painting in those days, when the
purchasing power of money was greater than it is now. His "Court of
Death" is a vast composition, that must candidly be considered more
ambitious than successful. In such works as the "Babes in the Wood,"
Peale seems to foreshadow the _genre_ art which has been so long coming
to us. John Wesley Jarvis, a native of England, also enjoyed at one time
much popularity as a portrait-painter. He was possessed of great
versatility; was eccentric; a _bon vivant_, and excelled at telling a
story. It is melancholy to record that, after many vicissitudes, he
ended his days in poverty.
Thomas Sully was also a native of England, who came to this country in
childhood, and lived to such a great age that it is difficult to realize
that he was the contemporary of Trumbull and Stuart. Sully had great
refinement of feeling, and reminds us sometimes of Sir Thomas Lawrence.
This is shown in a certain favorite ideal head of a maiden which he
reproduced in various compositions. One often recognizes it in his
works. His portraits are also pleasing; but in the treatment of a
masculine likeness the feebleness of his style and its lack of
originality or strength are too often apparent. John Naegle, of
Philadelphia, was a pupil of Sully, but first began his art career as
apprentice to a coach-painter. Like many of our artists of that time, he
tried his hand at a portrait of Washington; but he will be longest and
best remembered by his vivid and characteristic painting of Patrick
Lyon, the blacksmith, at his forge. This picture now hangs in the
elegant gallery of the Philadelphia Academy of Fine Arts, where several
of the masterpieces of our early painters may be seen hanging in company
with it, among them West's "Christ Rejected," Vanderlyn's "Ariadne," and
Allston's "Dead Man Restored to Life."
[Illustration: FANNY KEMBLE.--[THOMAS SULLY.]]
Born the year of the Declaration of Independence, John Vanderlyn, like
most of the leading artists of this period of whom we are writing, lived
to old age. His days were filled with hardships and vicissitudes: and,
unless he has since become aware of the fame he left behind, he was one
of many to whom life has been a very questionable boon.
[Illustration: ARIADNE.--[JOHN VANDERLYN.]]
Vanderlyn was a farmer's boy on the Hudson River. It was one of those
curious incidents by which Destiny sometimes makes us think there may
be, after all, something more than blind action in her ways, that Aaron
Burr, passing by his father's house, saw some rude sketches of the
rustic lad with that keen eye of his. Burr discerned in them signs of
promise, and invited him to come to New York. When Vanderlyn arrived
Burr treated him kindly. Eventually the painter made a portrait of
Theodosia, the beautiful and ill-fated daughter of his benefactor; and
when Burr was under a cloud and found himself destitute in Europe, it
was Vanderlyn who received and gave him shelter.
Much of the art-life of this painter was passed at Rome and in Paris.
His varied fortunes, and the constant adversity that baffled him at
every step, obliged him to resort to many a pitiful shift to keep soul
and body together. It is owing to this cause that he so rarely found
opportunity to do justice to the undoubted ability he possessed.
But Vanderlyn left at least two important creations, marked by genuine
artistic feeling and beauty, that will long entitle him to a favorable
position among American painters. "Marius Among the Ruins of Carthage" I
have never seen, and can only speak of it by report; but that it is a
work deserving to rank high in the art of the time seems to be proven
not only by the applause it received at Rome, but also by the fact that
it carried off the gold medal at the Salon in Paris. Such is the irony
of fate that the artist was twice forced to pawn this medal. The second
time he was unable to redeem it.
The "Ariadne" has unfortunately begun to show signs of age, and the
browns into which the flesh tints are painted are commencing to discolor
the delicate grays. An oil-painting, if properly executed, should hold
its qualities for a longer time; but unhappily the works of too many
good artists are affected in the same way. The "Ariadne" is, however, a
noble composition, quite in classic style; and if not strikingly
original, is a most creditable work for the early art of a young people.
Newport, Rhode Island's charming little city by the sea, once a thriving
commercial centre, but now a favorite resort of culture and gayety and
wealth, but always opulent in delightful Colonial and Revolutionary
associations, and doubly attractive for the artistic memories that cling
to it, and the treasures of our art which it contains--this was the
birth-place of Edward G. Malbone, who, after a successful art-life in
his native town and at Charleston, died at Newport, in 1807, at the
early age of thirty-two. Miniature-painting was a favorite pursuit of
our early artists. Some of our best portraits have been done by that
means; but among all who have followed it in the United States none have
excelled Malbone, although some, like John Fraser, of South Carolina,
have been very clever at it. He succeeded in giving character to his
faces to a degree unusual in miniature; while the coloring was rendered
at once with remarkable delicacy, purity, and fidelity. His best works
are probably the likeness of Ray Green, and the exquisitely beautiful
group called the "Hours," which is carefully preserved in the Athenæum
at Providence.
With the general public the name of no American artist of that time is
probably more widely known than that of Washington Allston. He owes this
in part, doubtless, to the fact that as a writer he also became
identified with the literary circle at that time prominent in Eastern
Massachusetts. He was born in 1779, at Waccamaw, South Carolina. Sent
at seven years of age to Newport, both for health and instruction, he
lived there ten years; and very likely associated with Malbone, and
perhaps met Stuart there.
[Illustration: "THE HOURS."--[E. G. MALBONE.] ORIGINAL SIZE.]
Subsequently Allston visited Italy, and then settled in London, where
his talents received such ample recognition as to gain him the position
of Academician. The mistake of his art-life--although it was perhaps
advantageous to his fame at home--was probably his return to the United
States while yet in his prime. The absence of influences encouraging to
art growth, and of that sympathy and patronage so essential to a
sensitive nature like that of Allston's, had a blighting effect on his
faculties; and the many years he passed in Boston were years of
aspiration rather than achievement. Allston has suffered from two
causes. Overrated as an artist in his day, his reputation is now
endangered from a tendency to award him less than justice. The latter
may be due in part to the fact that Allston himself adopted a course of
action that tended to repress rather than develop his art powers. In his
desire to give intellectual and moral value and permanent dignity to his
productions, and in his aversion to sensationalism in art, he treated
his subjects with a deliberate severity which takes away from them all
the feeling of spontaneity which is so delightful and important in works
of the imagination. If his genius had been of the high order claimed by
some, such a result would have been impossible. The emotional element
would have sometimes asserted itself, and given to his finished works
that warmth and attraction the lack of which, while they are
intellectually interesting and worthy of great respect, prevents them
from inspiring and winning our hearts, and has impaired the influence
they might have had in advancing the progress of art in America.
That Allston might have produced paintings of more absolute power, seems
evident from his numerous crayon sketches and studies for paintings,
which are full of fire, energy, and beauty, delicate fancy, and creative
power. One cannot wholly understand Allston's ability until he has seen
those studies; and it cannot be too much regretted that he did not allow
a freer rein to his brush when composing the works upon which he desired
to establish his fame. When he did so far forget himself, we get a
glimpse of the fervor and grandeur of the imagination that burned in
that brain, whose thoughts were greater than its capacity for
expression. It must also be granted that the works of Allston have the
quality peculiar to the productions of original minds: it is not until
they have been seen repeatedly that they reveal all that is in them.
"Uriel in the Sun," "Jeremiah," and "The Dead Man Restored to Life," are
probably the best of the finished works by which the solemn, mysterious,
and impressive imagination of Allston can be best estimated. Without
giving us new revelations regarding the secrets of color, as he was
rather an imitator of the Venetian school than an originator, Allston
can be justly considered one of the most agreeable colorists America has
produced.
[Illustration: "JEREMIAH."--[WASHINGTON ALLSTON.]]
[Illustration: "DYING HERCULES."--[SAMUEL F. B. MORSE.]]