CHAPTER XVIII.

OF THE TEACHERS OF TURNER.

Sec. 1. The first step to the understanding either the mind or position

of a great man ought, I think, to be an inquiry into the elements of

his early instruction, and the mode in which he was affected by the

circumstances of surrounding life. In making this inquiry, with

respect to Turner, we shall be necessarily led to take note of the

causes which had brought landscape-painting into the state in which

he found it; and, therefore, of those transitions of style which, it

will be remembered, we overleaped (hoping for a future opportunity

of examining them) at the close of the fifteenth chapter.

Sec. 2. And first, I said, it will be remembered, some way back, that

the relations between Scott and Turner would probably be found to

differ very curiously from those between Dante and Giotto. They

differ primarily in this,--that Dante and Giotto, living in a

consistent age, were subjected to one and the same influence, and

maybe reasoned about almost in similar terms. But Scott and Turner,

living in an inconsistent age, became subjected to inconsistent

influences; and are at once distinguished by notable contrarieties,

requiring separate examination in each.

Sec. 3. Of these, the chief was that Scott, having had the blessing of

a totally neglected education, was able early to follow most of his

noble instincts; but Turner, having suffered under the instruction

of the Royal Academy, had to pass nearly thirty years of his life in

recovering from its consequences;[97] this permanent result

following for both,--that Scott never was led into any fault

foreign to his nature, but spoke what was in him, in rugged or idle

simplicity; erring only where it was natural to err, and failing

only where it was impossible to succeed. But Turner, from the

beginning, was led into constrained and unnatural error; diligently

debarred from every ordinary help to success. The one thing which

the Academy _ought_ to have taught him (namely, the simple and safe

use of oil color), it never taught him; but it carefully repressed

his perceptions of truth, his capacities of invention, and his

tendencies of choice. For him it was impossible to do right but in

the spirit of defiance; and the first condition of his progress in

learning, was the power to forget.

Sec. 4. One most important distinction in their feelings throughout

life was necessitated by this difference in early training. Scott

gathered what little knowledge of architecture he possessed, in

wanderings among the rocky walls of Crichtoun, Lochleven, and

Linlithgow, and among the delicate pillars of Holyrood, Roslin, and

Melrose. Turner acquired his knowledge of architecture at the desk,

from academical elevations of the Parthenon and St. Paul's; and

spent a large portion of his early years in taking views of

gentlemen's seats, temples of the Muses, and other productions of

modern taste and imagination; being at the same time directed

exclusively to classical sources for information as to the proper

subjects of art. Hence, while Scott was at once directed to the

history of his native land, and to the Gothic fields of imagination;

and his mind was fed in a consistent, natural, and felicitous way

from his youth up, poor Turner for a long time knew no inspiration

but that of Twickenham; no sublimity but that of Virginia Water. All

the history and poetry presented to him at the age when the mind

receives its dearest associations, were those of the gods and

nations of long ago; and his models of sentiment and style were the

worst and last wrecks of the Renaissance affectations.

Sec. 5. Therefore (though utterly free from affectation), his early

works are full of an _enforced_ artificialness, and of things

ill-done and ill-conceived, because foreign to his own instincts;

and, throughout life, whatever he did, because he thought he _ought_

to do it, was wrong; all that he planned on any principle, or in

supposed obedience to canons of taste, was false and abortive: he

only did right when he ceased to reflect; was powerful only when he

made no effort, and successful only when he had taken no aim.

Sec. 6. And it is one of the most interesting things connected with the

study of his art, to watch the way in which his own strength of

English instinct breaks gradually through fetter and formalism; how

from Egerian wells he steals away to Yorkshire streamlets; how from

Homeric rocks, with laurels at the top and caves in the bottom, he

climbs, at last, to Alpine precipices fringed with pine, and fortified

with the slopes of their own ruins; and how from Temples of Jupiter

and Gardens of the Hesperides, a spirit in his feet guides him, at

last, to the lonely arches of Whitby, and bleak sands of Holy Isle.

Sec. 7. As, however, is the case with almost all inevitable evil, in

its effect on great minds, a certain good rose even out of this

warped education; namely, his power of more completely expressing

all the tendencies of his epoch, and sympathizing with many feelings

and many scenes which must otherwise have been entirely profitless

to him. Scott's mind was just as large and full of sympathy as

Turner's; but having been permitted always to take his own choice

among sources of enjoyment, Scott was entirely incapable of entering

into the spirit of any classical scene. He was strictly a Goth and a

Scot, and his sphere of sensation may be almost exactly limited by

the growth of heather. But Turner had been forced to pay early

attention to whatever of good and right there was even in things

naturally distasteful to him. The charm of early association had

been cast around much that to other men would have been tame: while

making drawings of flower-gardens and Palladian mansions, he had

been taught sympathy with whatever grace or refinement the garden or

mansion could display, and to the close of life could enjoy the

delicacy of trellis and parterre, as well as the wildness of the

wood and the moorland; and watch the staying of the silver fountain

at its appointed height in the sky, with an interest as earnest, if

not as intense, as that with which he followed the crash of the

Alpine cataract into its clouds of wayward rage.

Sec. 8. The distinct losses to be weighed against this gain are, first,

the waste of time during youth in painting subjects of no interest

whatsoever,--parks, villas, and ugly architecture in general:

secondly, the devotion of its utmost strength in later years to

meaningless classical compositions, such as the Fall and Rise of

Carthage, Bay of Baiae, Daphne and Leucippus, and such others, which,

with infinite accumulation of material, are yet utterly heartless and

emotionless, dead to the very root of thought, and incapable of

producing wholesome or useful effect on any human mind, except only as

exhibitions of technical skill and graceful arrangement: and, lastly,

his incapacity, to the close of life, of entering heartily into the

spirit of any elevated architecture; for those Palladian and classical

buildings which he had been taught that it was right to admire, being

wholly devoid of interest, and in their own formality and barrenness

quite unmanageable, he was obliged to make them manageable in his

pictures by disguising them, and to use all kinds of playing shadows

and glittering lights to obscure their ugly details; and as in their

best state such buildings are white and colorless, he associated the

idea of whiteness with perfect architecture generally, and was

confused and puzzled when he found it grey. Hence he never got

thoroughly into the feeling of Gothic; its darkness and complexity

embarrassed him; he was very apt to whiten by way of idealizing it,

and to cast aside its details in order to get breadth of delicate

light. In Venice, and the towns of Italy generally, he fastened on the

wrong buildings, and used those which he chose merely as kind of white

clouds, to set off his brilliant groups of boats, or burning spaces of

lagoon. In various other minor ways, which we shall trace in their

proper place, his classical education hindered or hurt him; but I feel

it very difficult to say how far the loss was balanced by the general

grasp it gave his mind; nor am I able to conceive what would have been

the result, if his aims had been made at once narrower and more

natural, and he had been led in his youth to delight in Gothic legends

instead of classical mythology; and, instead of the porticos of the

Parthenon, had studied in the aisles of Notre Dame.

Sec. 9. It is still more difficult to conjecture whether he gathered

most good or evil from the pictorial art which surrounded him in his

youth. What that art was, and how the European schools had arrived

at it, it now becomes necessary briefly to inquire.

It will be remembered that, in the 14th chapter, we left our

mediaeval landscape (Sec. 18.) in a state of severe formality, and

perfect subordination to the interest of figure subject. I will now

rapidly trace the mode and progress of its emancipation.

Sec. 10. The formalized conception of scenery remained little altered

until the time of Raphael, being only better executed as the

knowledge of art advanced; that is to say, though the trees were

still stiff, and often set one on each side of the principal

figures, their color and relief on the sky were exquisitely

imitated, and all groups of near leaves and flowers drawn with the

most tender care, and studious botanical accuracy. The better the

subjects were painted, however, the more logically absurd they

became: a background wrought in Chinese confusion of towers and

rivers, was in early times passed over carelessly, and forgiven for

the sake of its pleasant color; but it appealed somewhat too far to

imaginative indulgence when Ghirlandajo drew an exquisite

perspective view of Venice and her lagoons behind an Adoration of

the Magi;[98] and the impossibly small boats which might be pardoned

in a mere illumination, representing the miraculous draught of

fishes, became, whatever may be said to the contrary, inexcusably

absurd in Raphael's fully realized landscape; so as at once to

destroy the credibility of every circumstance of the event.

Sec. 11. A certain charm, however, attached itself to many forms of

this landscape, owing to their very unnaturalness, as I have

endeavored to explain already in the last chapter of the second

volume, Sec.Sec. 9. to 12.; noting, however, there, that it was in no wise

to be made a subject of imitation; a conclusion which I have since

seen more and more ground for holding finally. The longer I think

over the subject, the more I perceive that the pleasure we take in

such unnatural landscapes is intimately connected with our habit of

regarding the New Testament as a beautiful poem, instead of a

statement of plain facts. He who believes thoroughly that the events

are true will expect, and ought to expect, real olive copse behind

real Madonna, and no sentimental absurdities in either.

[Illustration: 11. Latest Purism.]

Sec. 12. Nor am I at all sure how far the delight which we take (when I

say _we_, I mean, in general, lovers of old sacred art) in such

quaint landscape, arises from its peculiar _falsehood_, and how far

from its peculiar _truth_. For as it falls into certain errors more

boldly, so, also, what truth it states, it states more firmly than

subsequent work. No engravings, that I know, render the backgrounds

of sacred pictures with sufficient care to enable the reader to

judge of this matter unless before the works themselves. I have,

therefore, engraved, on the opposite page, a bit of the background

of Raphael's Holy Family, in the Tribune of the Uffizii, at

Florence. I copied the trees leaf for leaf, and the rest of the work

with the best care I could; the engraver, Mr. Armytage, has

admirably rendered the delicate atmosphere which partly veils the

distance. Now I do not know how far it is necessary to such pleasure

as we receive from this landscape, that the trees should be both so

straight and formal in stem, and should have branches no thicker

than threads; or that the outlines of the distant hills should

approximate so closely to those on any ordinary Wedgewood's china

pattern. I know that, on the contrary, a great part of the pleasure

arises from the sweet expression of air and sunshine; from the

traceable resemblance of the city and tower to Florence and Fesole;

from the fact that, though the boughs are too thin, the lines of

ramification are true and beautiful; and from the expression of

continually varied form in the clusters of leafage. And although all

lovers of sacred art would shrink in horror from the idea of

substituting for such a landscape a bit of Cuyp or Rubens, I do not

think that the horror they feel is because Cuyp and Rubens's

landscape is _truer_, but because it is _coarser_ and more vulgar in

associated idea than Raphael's; and I think it possible that the

true forms of hills, and true thicknesses of boughs, might be

tenderly stolen into this background of Raphael's without giving

offence to any one.

Sec. 13. Take a somewhat more definite instance. The rock in Fig. 5.,

at the side, is one put by Ghirlandajo into the background of his

Baptism of Christ. I have no doubt Ghirlandajo's own rocks and trees

are better, in several respects, than those here represented, since

I have copied them from one of Lasinio's execrable engravings;

still, the harsh outline, and generally stiff and uninventful

blankness of the design are true enough, and characteristic of all

rock-painting of the period. In the plate below I have etched[99]

the outline of a fragment of one of Turner's cliffs, out of his

drawing of Bolton Abbey; and it does not seem to me that, supposing

them properly introduced in the composition, the substitution of the

soft natural lines for the hard unnatural ones would make

Ghirlandajo's background one whit less sacred.

[Illustration: FIG. 5.]

Sec. 14. But be this as it may, the fact is, as ill luck would have it,

that profanity of feeling, and skill in art, increased together; so

that we do not find the backgrounds rightly painted till the figures

become irreligious and feelingless; and hence we associate

necessarily the perfect landscape with want of feeling. The first

great innovator was either Masaccio or Filippino Lippi: their works

are so confused together in the Chapel of the Carmine, that I know

not to whom I may attribute,--or whether, without being immediately

quarrelled with, and contradicted, I may attribute to anybody,--the

landscape background of the fresco of the Tribute Money. But that

background, with one or two other fragments in the same

chapel, is far in advance of all other work I have seen of the

period, in expression of the rounded contours and large slopes of

hills, and the association of their summits with the clouds. The

opposite engraving will give some better idea of its character than

can be gained from the outlines commonly published; though the dark

spaces, which in the original are deep blue, come necessarily

somewhat too harshly on the eye when translated into light and

shade. I shall have occasion to speak with greater speciality of

this background in examining the forms of hills; meantime, it is

only as an isolated work that it can be named in the history of

pictorial progress, for Masaccio died too young to carry out his

purposes; and the men around him were too ignorant of landscape to

understand or take advantage of the little he had done. Raphael,

though he borrowed from him in the human figure, never seems to have

been influenced by his landscape, and retains either, as in Plate

11., the upright formalities of Perugino; or, by way of being

natural, expands his distances into flattish flakes of hill, nearly

formless, as in the backgrounds of the Charge to Peter and Draught

of Fishes; and thenceforward the Tuscan and Roman schools grew more

and more artificial, and lost themselves finally under round-headed

niches and Corinthian porticos.

[Illustration: 12. The Shores of Wharfe.]

[Illustration: 13. First Mountain Naturalism.]

[Illustration: 14. The Lombard Apennine.]

[Illustration: 15. St. George of the Seaweed.]

Sec. 15. It needed, therefore, the air of the northern mountains and of

the sea to brace the hearts of men to the development of the true

landscape schools. I sketched by chance one evening the line of the

Apennines from the ramparts of Parma, and I have put the rough note

of it, and the sky that was over it, in Plate 14., and next to this

(Plate 15.) a moment of sunset, behind the Euganean hills at Venice.

I shall have occasion to refer to both hereafter; but they have some

interest here as types of the kind of scenes which were daily set

before the eyes of Correggio and Titian, and of the sweet free

spaces of sky through which rose and fell, to them, the colored rays

of the morning and evening.

Sec. 16. And they are connected, also, with the forms of landscape

adopted by the Lombardic masters, in a very curious way. We noticed

that the Flemings, educated entirely in flat land, seemed to be

always contented with the scenery it supplied; and we should

naturally have expected that Titian and Correggio, living in the

midst of the levels of the lagoons, and of the plain of Lombardy,

would also have expressed, in their backgrounds, some pleasure in

such level scenery, associated, of course, with the sublimity of the

far-away Apennine, Euganean, or Alp. But not a whit. The plains of

mulberry and maize, of sea and shoal, by which they were surrounded,

never occur in their backgrounds but in cases of necessity; and both

of them, in all their important landscapes, bury themselves in wild

wood; Correggio delighting to relieve with green darkness of oak and

ivy the golden hair and snowy flesh of his figures; and Titian,

whenever the choice of a scene was in his power, retiring to the

narrow glens and forests of Cadore.

Sec. 17. Of the vegetation introduced by both, I shall have to speak at

length in the course of the chapters on Foliage; meantime, I give in

Plate 16. one of Titian's slightest bits of background, from one of

the frescoes in the little chapel behind St. Antonio, at Padua,

which may be compared more conveniently than any of his more

elaborate landscapes with the purist work from Raphael. For in both

these examples the trees are equally slender and delicate, only the

formality of mediaeval art is, by Titian, entirely abandoned, and the

old conception of the aspen grove and meadow done away with for

ever. We are now far from cities: the painter takes true delight in

the desert; the trees grow wild and free; the sky also has lost its

peace, and is writhed into folds of motion, closely impendent upon

earth, and somewhat threatening, through its solemn light.

Sec. 18. Although, however, this example is characteristic of Titian in

its wildness, it is not so in its _looseness_. It is only in the

distant backgrounds of the slightest work, or when he is in a hurry,

that Titian is vague: in all his near and studied work he completes

every detail with scrupulous care. The next Plate, 17., a background

of Tintoret's, from his picture of the Entombment at Parma, is more

entirely characteristic of the Venetians. Some mistakes made in the

reduction of my drawing during the course of engraving have cramped

the curves of the boughs and leaves, of which I will give the true

outline farther on; meantime the subject, which is that described in

Sec. 16. of the chapter on Penetrative Imagination, Vol. II., will just

as well answer the purpose of exemplifying the Venetian love of

gloom and wildness, united with perfect definition of detail. Every

leaf and separate blade of grass is drawn; but observe how the

blades of grass are broken, how completely the aim at expression of

faultlessness and felicity has been withdrawn, as contrary to the

laws of the existent world.

[Illustration: 16. Early Naturalism.]

[Illustration: 17. Advanced Naturalism.]

Sec. 19. From this great Venetian school of landscape Turner received

much important teaching,--almost the only healthy teaching which he

owed to preceding art. The designs of the Liber Studiorum are founded

first on nature, but in many cases modified by _forced_ imitation of

Claude, and _fond_ imitation of Titian. All the worst and feeblest

studies in the book--as the pastoral with the nymph playing the

tambourine, that with the long bridge seen through trees, and with the

flock of goats on the walled road--owe the principal part of their

imbecilities to Claude; another group (Solway Moss, Peat Bog,

Lauffenbourg, &c.) is taken with hardly any modification by pictorial

influence, straight from nature; and the finest works in the book--the

Grande Chartreuse, Rizpah, Jason, Cephalus, and one or two more--are

strongly under the influence of Titian.

Sec. 20. The Venetian school of landscape expired with Tintoret, in the

year 1594; and the sixteenth century closed, like a grave, over the

great art of the world. There is _no_ entirely sincere or great art

in the seventeenth century. Rubens and Rembrandt are its two

greatest men, both deeply stained by the errors and affectations of

their age. The influence of the Venetians hardly extended to them;

the tower of the Titianesque art fell southwards; and on the dust of

its ruins grew various art-weeds, such as Domenichino and the

Carraccis. Their landscape, which may in few words be accurately

defined as "Scum of Titian," possesses no single merit, nor any

ground for the forgiveness of demerit; they are to be named only as

a link through which the Venetian influence came dimly down to

Claude and Salvator.

Sec. 21. Salvator possessed real genius, but was crushed by misery in his

youth, and by fashionable society in his age. He had vigorous animal

life, and considerable invention, but no depth either of thought or

perception. He took some hints directly from nature, and expressed

some conditions of the grotesque of terror with original power; but

his baseness of thought, and bluntness of sight, were unconquerable;

and his works possess no value whatsoever for any person versed in the

walks of noble art. They had little, if any, influence on Turner; if

any, it was in blinding him for some time to the grace of tree trunks,

and making him tear them too much into splinters.

Sec. 22. Not so Claude, who may be considered as Turner's principal

master. Claude's capacities were of the most limited kind; but he

had tenderness of perception, and sincerity of purpose, and he

effected a revolution in art. This revolution consisted mainly in

setting the sun in heaven.[100] Till Claude's time no one had

seriously thought of painting the sun but conventionally; that is to

say, as a red or yellow star, (often) with a face in it, under which

type it was constantly represented in illumination; else it was kept

out of the picture, or introduced in fragmentary distances, breaking

through clouds with almost definite rays. Perhaps the honor of

having first tried to represent the real effect of the sun in

landscape belongs to Bonifazio, in his pictures of the camps of

Israel.[101] Rubens followed in a kind of bravado, sometimes making

the rays issue from anything but the orb of the sun;--here, for

instance, Fig. 6., is an outline of the position of the sun (at _s_)

with respect to his own rays, in a sunset behind a tournament in the

Louvre: and various interesting effects of sunlight issuing from the

conventional face-filled orb occur in contemporary missal-painting;

for instance, very richly in the Harleian MS. Brit. Mus. 3469. But

all this was merely indicative of the tendency to transition which

may always be traced in any age before the man comes who is to

_accomplish_ the transition. Claude took up the new idea seriously,

made the sun his subject, and painted the effects of misty shadows

cast by his rays over the landscape, and other delicate aerial

transitions, as no one had ever done before, and, in some respects,

as no one has done in oil color since.

Sec. 23. "But, how, if this were so, could his capacities be of the

meanest order?" Because doing _one_ thing well, or better than others

have done it, does not necessarily imply large capacity. Capacity

means breadth of glance, understanding of the relations of things, and

invention, and these are rare and precious; but there are very few men

who have not done _something_, in the course of their lives, better

than other people. I could point out many engravers, draughtsmen, and

artists, who have each a particular merit in their manner, or

particular field of perception, that nobody else has, or ever had. But

this does not make them great men, it only indicates a small special

capacity of some kind: and all the smaller if the gift be very

peculiar and single; for a great man never so limits himself to one

thing, as that we shall be able to say, "That's all he can do." If

Claude had been a great man he would not have been so steadfastly set

on painting effects of sun; he would have looked at all nature, and at

all art, and would have painted sun effects somewhat worse, and nature

universally much better.

[Illustration: FIG. 6.]

Sec. 24. Such as he was, however, his discovery of the way to make

pictures look warm was very delightful to the shallow connoisseurs

of the age. Not that they cared for sunshine; but they liked seeing

jugglery. They could not feel Titian's noble color, nor Veronese's

noble composition; but they thought it highly amusing to see the sun

brought into a picture: and Claude's works were bought and

delighted in by vulgar people then, for their real-looking suns, as

pictures are now by vulgar people for having real timepieces in

their church towers.

Sec. 25. But when Turner arose, with an earnest desire to paint the

whole of nature, he found that the existence of the sun was an

important fact, and by no means an easily manageable one. _He_ loved

sunshine for its own sake; but he could not at first paint it. Most

things else, he would more or less manage without much technical

difficulty; but the burning orb and the golden haze could not,

somehow, be got out of the oil paint. Naturally he went to Claude,

who really had got them out of oil paint; approached him with great

reverence, as having done that which seemed to Turner most difficult

of all technical matters, and he became his faithful disciple. How

much he learned from him of manipulation, I cannot tell; but one

thing is certain, that he never quite equalled him in that

particular forte of his. I imagine that Claude's way of laying on

oil color was so methodical that it could not possibly be imitated

by a man whose mechanism was interfered with by hundreds of thoughts

and aims totally different from Claude's; and, besides, I suppose

that certain useful principles in the management of paint, of which

our schools are now wholly ignorant, had come down as far as Claude,

from the Venetians. Turner at last gave up the attempt, and adopted

a manipulation of his own, which indeed effected certain objects

attainable in no other way, but which still was in many respects

unsatisfactory, dangerous, and deeply to be regretted.

Sec. 26. But meantime his mind had been strongly warped by Claude's

futilities of conception. It was impossible to dwell on such works for

any length of time without being grievously harmed by them; and the

style of Turner's compositions was for ever afterwards weakened or

corrupted. For, truly, it is almost beyond belief into what depth of

absurdity Claude plunges continually in his most admired designs. For

instance; undertaking to paint Moses at the Burning Bush, he

represents a graceful landscape with a city, a river, and a bridge,

and plenty of tall trees, and the sea, and numbers of people going

about their business and pleasure in every direction; and the bush

burning quietly upon a bank in the corner; rather in the dark, and

not to be seen without close inspection. It would take some pages of

close writing to point out, one by one, the inanities of heart, soul,

and brain which such a conception involves; the ineffable ignorance of

the nature of the event, and of the scene of it; the incapacity of

conceiving anything even _in_ ignorance, which should be impressive;

the dim, stupid, serene, leguminous enjoyment of his sunny

afternoon--burn the bushes as much as they liked--these I leave the

reader to think over at his leisure, either before the picture in Lord

Ellesmere's gallery, or the sketch of it in the Liber Veritatis. But

all these kinds of fallacy sprung more or less out of the vices of the

time in which Claude lived; his own peculiar character reaches beyond

these, to an incapacity of understanding the _main point_ in anything

he had to represent, down to the minutest detail, which is quite

unequalled, as far as I know, in human nugatoriness. For instance;

here, in Fig. 7., is the head, with half the body, of Eneas drawing

his Bow, from No. 180. of the Liber Veritatis. Observe, the string is

too long by half; for if the bow were unbent, it would be two feet

longer than the whole bow. Then the arrow is too long by half, has too

heavy a head by half; and finally, it actually is _under_ the

bow-hand, instead of above it. Of the ideal and heroic refinement of

the head and drapery I will say nothing; but look only at the wretched

archery, and consider if it would be possible for any child to draw

the thing with less understanding, or to make more mistakes in the

given compass.[102]

[Illustration: FIG. 7.]

Sec. 27. And yet, exquisite as is Claude's instinct for blunder, he has

not strength of mind enough to blunder in a wholly original manner,

but he must needs falter out of his way to pick up other people's

puerilities, and be absurd at second-hand. I have been obliged to

laugh a little--though I hope reverently--at Ghirlandajo's

landscapes, which yet we saw had a certain charm of quaintness in

them when contrasted with his grand figures; but could any one have

believed that Claude, with all the noble landscapes of Titian set

before him, and all nature round about him, should yet go back to

Ghirlandajo for types of form. Yet such is the case. I said that the

Venetian influence came dimly down to Claude; but the old Florentine

influence came clearly. The Claudesque landscape is not, as so

commonly supposed, an idealized abstract of the nature about Rome.

It is an ultimate condition of the Florentine conventional

landscape, more or less softened by reference to nature. Fig. 8.,

from No. 145. of the Liber Veritatis, is sufficiently characteristic

of Claude's rock-drawing; and compared with Fig. 5. (p. 314), will

show exactly the kind of modification he made on old and received

types. We shall see other instances of it hereafter.

[Illustration: FIG. 8.]

Imagine this kind of reproduction of whatever other people had done

worst, and this kind of misunderstanding of all that he saw himself

in nature, carried out in Claude's trees, rocks, ships--in

everything that he touched,--and then consider what kind of school

this work was for a young and reverent disciple. As I said, Turner

never recovered the effects of it; his compositions were always

mannered, lifeless, and even foolish; and he only did noble things

when the immediate presence of nature had overpowered the

reminiscences of his master.

Sec. 28. Of the influence of Gaspar and Nicolo Poussin on Turner, there

is hardly anything to be said, nor much respecting that which they

had on landscape generally. Nicolo Poussin had noble powers of

design, and might have been a thoroughly great painter had he been

trained in Venice; but his Roman education kept him tame; his

trenchant severity was contrary to the tendencies of the age, and

had few imitators compared to the dashing of Salvator, and the mist

of Claude. Those few imitators adopted his manner without possessing

either his science or invention; and the Italian school of landscape

soon expired. Reminiscences of him occur sometimes in Turner's

compositions of sculptured stones for foreground; and the beautiful

Triumph of Flora, in the Louvre, probably first showed Turner the

use of definite flower, or blossom-painting, in landscape. I doubt

if he took anything from Gaspar; whatever he might have learned from

him respecting masses of foliage and golden distances, could have

been learned better, and, I believe, _was_ learned, from Titian.

Sec. 29. Meantime, a lower, but more living school had developed itself

in the north; Cuyp had painted sunshine as truly as Claude, gilding

with it a more homely, but far more honestly conceived landscape; and

the effects of light of De Hooghe and Rembrandt presented examples of

treatment to which southern art could show no parallel. Turner

evidently studied these with the greatest care, and with great benefit

in every way; especially this, that they neutralized the idealisms of

Claude, and showed the young painter what power might be in plain

truth, even of the most familiar kind. He painted several pictures in

imitation of these masters; and those in which he tried to rival Cuyp

are healthy and noble works, being, in fact, just what most of Cuyp's

own pictures are--faithful studies of Dutch boats in calm weather, on

smooth water. De Hooghe was too precise, and Rembrandt too dark, to be

successfully or affectionately followed by him; but he evidently

learned much from both.

Sec. 30. Finally, he painted many pictures in the manner of Vandevelde

(who was the accepted authority of his time in sea painting), and

received much injury from him. To the close of his life, Turner

always painted the sea too grey, and too opaque, in consequence of

his early study of Vandevelde. He never seemed to perceive color so

truly in the sea as he saw it elsewhere. But he soon discovered the

poorness of Vandevelde's forms of waves, and raised their meanly

divided surfaces into massive surge, effecting rapidly other

changes, of which more in another place.

Such was the art to which Turner, in early years, devoted his most

earnest thoughts. More or less respectful contemplation of Reynolds,

Loutherbourg, Wilson, Gainsborough, Morland, and Wilkie, was

incidentally mingled with his graver study; and he maintained a

questioning watchfulness of even the smallest successes of his

brother artists of the modern landscape school. It remains for us

only to note the position of that living school when Turner, helped

or misled, as the case may be, by the study of the older artists,

began to consider what remained for him to do, or design.

Sec. 31. The dead schools of landscape, composed of the works we have

just been examining, were broadly divisible into northern and

southern: the Dutch schools, more or less natural, but vulgar; the

Italian, more or less elevated, but absurd. There was a certain

foolish elegance in Claude, and a dull dignity in Gaspar; but then

their work resembled nothing that ever existed in the world. On the

contrary, a canal or cattle piece of Cuyp's had many veracities

about it; but they were, at best, truths of the ditch and dairy. The

grace of nature, or her gloom, her tender and sacred seclusions, or

her reach of power and wrath, had never been painted; nor had

_anything_ been painted yet in true _love_ of it; for both Dutch and

Italians agreed in this, that they always painted for the

_picture's_ sake, to show how well they could imitate sunshine,

arrange masses, or articulate straws,--never because they loved the

scene, or wanted to carry away some memory of it.

And thus, all that landscape of the old masters is to be considered

merely as a struggle of expiring skill to discover some new

direction in which to display itself. There was no love of nature in

the age; only a desire for something new. Therefore those schools

expired at last, leaving the chasm of nearly utter emptiness between

them and the true moderns, out of which chasm the new school rises,

not engrafted on that old one, but, from the very base of all

things, beginning with mere washes of Indian ink, touched upon with

yellow and brown; and gradually feeling its way to color.

But this infant school differed inherently from that ancienter one,

in that its motive was love. However feeble its efforts might be,

they were _for the sake of the nature_, not of the picture, and

therefore, having this germ of true life, it grew and throve. Robson

did not paint purple hills because he wanted to show how he could

lay on purple; but because he truly loved their dark peaks. Fielding

did not paint downs to show how dexterously he could sponge out

mists; but because he loved downs.

This modern school, therefore, became the only true school of

landscape which had yet existed; the artificial Claude and Gaspar

work may be cast aside out of our way,--as I have said in my

Edinburgh lectures, under the general title of "pastoralism,"--and

from the last landscape of Tintoret, if we look for _life_, we must

pass at once to the first of Turner.

Sec. 32. What help Turner received from this or that companion of his

youth is of no importance to any one now. Of course every great man is

always being helped by everybody,[103] for his gift is to get good out

of all things and all persons; and also there were two men associated

with him in early study, who showed high promise in the same field,

Cousen and Girtin (especially the former), and there is no saying what

these men might have done had they lived; there might, perhaps, have

been a struggle between one or other of them and Turner, as between

Giorgione and Titian. But they lived not; and Turner is the only great

man whom the school has yet produced,--quite great enough, as we shall

see, for all that needed to be done. To him, therefore, we now finally

turn, as the sole object of our inquiry. I shall first reinforce, with

such additions as they need, those statements of his general

principles which I made in the first volume, but could not then

demonstrate fully, for want of time to prepare pictorial illustration;

and then proceed to examine, piece by piece, his representations of

the facts of nature, comparing them, as it may seem expedient, with

what had been accomplished by others.

* * * * *

I cannot close this volume without alluding briefly to a subject of

different interest from any that have occupied us in its pages. For

it may, perhaps, seem to a general reader heartless and vain to

enter zealously into questions about our arts and pleasures in a

time of so great public anxiety as this.

But he will find, if he looks back to the sixth paragraph of the

opening chapter of the last volume, some statement of feelings,

which, as they made me despondent in a time of apparent national

prosperity, now cheer me in one which, though of stern trial, I will

not be so much a coward as to call one of adversity. And I derive

this encouragement first from the belief that the War itself, with

all its bitterness, is, in the present state of the European

nations, productive of more good than evil; and, secondly, because I

have more confidence than others generally entertain, in the justice

of its cause.

I say, first, because I believe the war is at present productive of

good more than of evil. I will not argue this hardly and coldly, as

I might, by tracing in past history some of the abundant evidence

that nations have always reached their highest virtue, and wrought

their most accomplished works, in times of straitening and battle;

as, on the other hand, no nation ever yet enjoyed a protracted and

triumphant peace without receiving in its own bosom ineradicable

seeds of future decline. I will not so argue this matter; but I will

appeal at once to the testimony of those whom the war has cost the

dearest. I know what would be told me, by those who have suffered

nothing; whose domestic happiness has been unbroken; whose daily

comfort undisturbed; whose experience of calamity consists, at its

utmost, in the incertitude of a speculation, the dearness of a

luxury, or the increase of demands upon their fortune which they

could meet fourfold without inconvenience. From these, I can well

believe, be they prudent economists, or careless pleasure-seekers,

the cry for peace will rise alike vociferously, whether in street or

senate. But I ask _their_ witness, to whom the war has changed the

aspect of the earth, and imagery of heaven, whose hopes it has cut

off like a spider's web, whose treasure it has placed, in a moment,

under the seals of clay. Those who can never more see sunrise, nor

watch the climbing light gild the Eastern clouds, without thinking

what graves it has gilded, first, far down behind the dark

earth-line,--who never more shall see the crocus bloom in spring,

without thinking what dust it is that feeds the wild flowers of

Balaclava. Ask _their_ witness, and see if they will not reply that

it is well with them, and with theirs; that they would have it no

otherwise; would not, if they might, receive back their gifts of

love and life, nor take again the purple of their blood out of the

cross on the breastplate of England. Ask them: and though they

should answer only with a sob, listen if it does not gather upon

their lips into the sound of the old Seyton war-cry--"Set on."

And this not for pride--not because the names of their lost ones

will be recorded to all time, as of those who held the breach and

kept the gate of Europe against the North, as the Spartans did

against the East; and lay down in the place they had to guard, with

the like home message, "Oh, stranger, go and tell the English that

we are lying here, having obeyed their words;"--not for this, but

because, also, they have felt that the spirit which has discerned

them for eminence in sorrow--the helmed and sworded skeleton that

rakes with its white fingers the sands of the Black Sea beach into

grave-heap after grave-heap, washed by everlasting surf of

tears--has been to them an angel of other things than agony; that

they have learned, with those hollow, undeceivable eyes of his, to

see all the earth by the sunlight of deathbeds;--no inch-high stage

for foolish griefs and feigned pleasures; no dream, neither, as its

dull moralists told them;--_Any_thing but that: a place of true,

marvellous, inextricable sorrow and power; a question-chamber of

trial by rack and fire, irrevocable decision recording continually;

and no sleep, nor folding of hands, among the demon-questioners;

none among the angel-watchers, none among the men who stand or fall

beside those hosts of God. They know now the strength of sacrifice,

and that its flames can illumine as well as consume; they are bound

by new fidelities to all that they have saved,--by new love to all

for whom they have suffered; every affection which seemed to sink

with those dim life-stains into the dust, has been delegated, by

those who need it no more, to the cause for which they have expired;

and every mouldering arm, which will never more embrace the beloved

ones, has bequeathed to them its strength and its faithfulness.

For the cause of this quarrel is no dim, half-avoidable involution

of mean interests and errors, as some would have us believe. There

never was a great war caused by such things. There never can be. The

historian may trace it, with ingenious trifling, to a courtier's

jest or a woman's glance; but he does not ask--(and it is the sum of

questions)--how the warring nations had come to found their

destinies on the course of the sneer, or the smile. If they have so

based them, it is time for them to learn, through suffering, how to

build on other foundations--for great, accumulated, and most

righteous cause, their foot slides in due time; and against the

torpor, or the turpitude, of their myriads, there is loosed the

haste of the devouring sword and the thirsty arrow. But if they have

set their fortunes on other than such ground, then the war must be

owing to some deep conviction or passion in their own hearts,--a

conviction which, in resistless flow, or reckless ebb, or consistent

stay, is the ultimate arbiter of battle, disgrace, or conquest.

Wherever there is war, there _must_ be injustice on one side or the

other, or on both. There have been wars which were little more than

trials of strength between friendly nations, and in which the

injustice was not to each other, but to the God who gave them life.

But in a malignant war of these present ages there is injustice of

ignobler kind, at once to God and man, which _must_ be stemmed for

both their sakes. It may, indeed, be so involved with national

prejudices, or ignorances, that neither of the contending nations

can conceive it as attaching to their cause; nay, the constitution

of their governments, and the clumsy crookedness of their political

dealings with each other, may be such as to prevent either of them

from knowing the actual cause for which they have gone to war.

Assuredly this is, in a great degree, the state of things with _us_;

for I noticed that there never came news by telegraph of the

explosion of a powder-barrel, or of the loss of thirty men by a

sortie, but the Parliament lost confidence immediately in the

justice of the war; reopened the question whether we ever should

have engaged in it, and remained in a doubtful and repentant state

of mind until one of the enemy's powder-barrels blew up also; upon

which they were immediately satisfied again that the war was a wise

and necessary one. How far, therefore, the calamity may have been

brought upon us by men whose political principles shoot annually

like the leaves, and change color at every autumn frost:--how loudly

the blood that has been poured out round the walls of that city, up

to the horse-bridles, may now be crying from the ground against men

who did not know, when they first bade shed it, exactly what war

was, or what blood was, or what life was, or truth, or what anything

else was upon the earth; and whose tone of opinions touching the

destinies of mankind depended entirely upon whether they were

sitting on the right or left side of the House of Commons;--this, I

repeat, I know not, nor (in all solemnity I say it) do I care to

know. For if it be so, and the English nation could at the present

period of its history be betrayed into a war such as this by the

slipping of a wrong word into a protocol, or bewitched into

unexpected battle under the budding hallucinations of its sapling

senators, truly it is time for us to bear the penalty of our

baseness, and learn, as the sleepless steel glares close upon us,

how to choose our governors more wisely, and our ways more warily.

For that which brings swift punishment in war, must have brought

slow ruin in peace; and those who have now laid down their lives for

England, have doubly saved her; they have humbled at once her

enemies and herself; and have done less for her, in the conquest

they achieve, than in the sorrow that they claim.

But it is not altogether thus: we have not been cast into this war

by mere political misapprehensions, or popular ignorances. It is

quite possible that neither we nor our rulers may clearly understand

the nature of the conflict; and that we may be dealing blows in the

dark, confusedly, and as a soldier suddenly awakened from slumber by

an unknown adversary. But I believe the struggle was inevitable, and

that the sooner it came, the more easily it was to be met, and the

more nobly concluded. France and England are both of them, from

shore to shore, in a state of intense progression, change, and

experimental life. They are each of them beginning to examine, more

distinctly than ever nations did yet in the history of the world,

the dangerous question respecting the rights of governed, and the

responsibilities of governing, bodies; not, as heretofore; foaming

over them in red frenzy, with intervals of fetter and straw crown,

but in health, quietness, and daylight, with the help of a good

Queen and a great Emperor; and to determine them in a way which, by

just so much as it is more effective and rational, is likely to

produce more permanent results than ever before on the policy of

neighboring States, and to force, gradually, the discussion of

similar questions into their places of silence. To force it,--for

true liberty, like true religion, is always aggressive or

persecuted; but the attack is _generally_ made upon it by the nation

which is to be crushed,--by Persian on Athenian, Tuscan on Roman,

Austrian on Swiss; or, as now, by Russia upon us and our allies: her

attack appointed, it seems to me, for confirmation of all our

greatness, trial of our strength, purging and punishment of our

futilities, and establishment for ever, in our hands, of the

leadership in the political progress of the world.

Whether this its providential purpose be accomplished, must depend

on its enabling France and England to love one another, and teaching

these, the two noblest foes that ever stood breast to breast among

the nations, first to decipher the law of international charities;

first to discern that races, like individuals, can only reach their

true strength, dignity, or joy, in seeking each the welfare, and

exulting each in the glory, of the other. It is strange how far we

still seem from fully perceiving this. We know that two men, cast on

a desert island, could not thrive in dispeace; we can understand

that four, or twelve, might still find their account in unity; but

that a multitude should thrive otherwise than by the contentions of

its classes, or _two_ multitudes hold themselves in anywise bound by

brotherly law to serve, support, rebuke, rejoice in one another,

this seems still as far beyond our conception, as the clearest of

commandments, "Let no man seek his own, but every man another's

wealth," is beyond our habitual practice. Yet, if once we comprehend

that precept in its breadth, and feel that what we now call jealousy

for our country's honor, is, so far as it tends to other countries'

_dis_honor, merely one of the worst, because most complacent and

self-gratulatory, forms of irreligion,--a newly breathed strength

will, with the newly interpreted patriotism, animate and sanctify

the efforts of men. Learning, unchecked by envy, will be accepted

more frankly, throned more firmly, guided more swiftly; charity,

unchilled by fear, will dispose the laws of each State without

reluctance to advantage its neighbor by justice to itself; and

admiration, unwarped by prejudice, possess itself continually of new

treasure in the arts and the thoughts of the stranger.

If France and England fail of this, if again petty jealousies or

selfish interests prevail to unknit their hands from the armored

grasp, then, indeed, their faithful children will have fallen in

vain; there will be a sound as of renewed lamentation along those

Euxine waves, and a shaking among the bones that bleach by the

mounds of Sebastopol. But if they fail not of this,--if we, in our

love of our queens and kings, remember how France gave to the cause

of early civilization, first the greatest, then the holiest, of

monarchs;[104] and France, in her love of liberty, remembers how

_we_ first raised the standard of Commonwealth, trusted to the grasp

of one good and strong hand, witnessed for by victory; and so join

in perpetual compact of our different strengths, to contend for

justice, mercy, and truth throughout the world,--who dares say that

one soldier has died in vain? The scarlet of the blood that has

sealed this covenant will be poured along the clouds of a new

aurora, glorious in that Eastern heaven; for every sob of wreck-fed

breaker round those Pontic precipices, the floods shall clap their

hands between the guarded mounts of the Prince-Angel; and the

spirits of those lost multitudes, crowned with the olive and rose

among the laurel, shall haunt, satisfied, the willowy brooks and

peaceful vales of England, and glide, triumphant, by the poplar

groves and sunned coteaux of Seine.

[97] The education here spoken of is, of course, that bearing on

the main work of life. In other respects, Turner's education

was more neglected than Scott's, and that not beneficently.

See the close of the third of my Edinburgh Lectures.

[98] The picture is in the Uffizii of Florence.

[99] This etching is prepared for receiving mezzotint in the next

volume; it is therefore much heavier in line, especially in

the water, than I should have made it, if intended to be

complete as it is.

[100] Compare Vol. I. Part II. Sec. I. Chap. VII. I repeat here

some things that were then said; but it is necessary now to

review them in connection with Turner's education, as well

as for the sake of enforcing them by illustration.

[101] Now in the old library of Venice.

[102] My old friend Blackwood complains bitterly, in his last

number, of my having given this illustration at one of my

late lectures, saying, that I "have a disagreeable knack of

finding out the joints in my opponent's armor," and that "I

never fight for love." I never do. I fight for truth,

earnestly, and in no wise for jest; and against all lies,

earnestly, and in no wise for love. They complain that "a

noble adversary is not in Mr. Ruskin's way." No; a noble

adversary never was, never will be. With all that is noble

I have been, and shall be, in perpetual peace, with all that

is ignoble and false everlastingly at war. And as for these

Scotch _bourgeois gentilshommes_ with their "Tu n'as pas la

patience que je pare," let them look to their fence. But

truly, if they will tell me where Claude's strong points

are, I will strike there, and be thankful.

[103] His first drawing master was, I believe, that Mr. Lowe,

whose daughters, now aged and poor, have, it seems to me,

some claim on public regard, being connected distantly with

the memory of Johnson, and closely with that of Turner.

[104] Charlemagne and St. Louis.

APPENDIX.

I. CLAUDE'S TREE-DRAWING.

The reader may not improbably hear it said, by persons who are

incapable of maintaining an honest argument, and therefore incapable

of understanding or believing the honesty of an adversary, that I

have caricatured, or unfairly chosen, the examples I give of the

masters I depreciate. It is evident, in the first place, that I

could not, if I were even cunningly disposed, adopt a worse policy

than in so doing; for the discovery of caricature or falsity in my

representations, would not only invalidate the immediate statement,

but the whole book; and invalidate it in the most fatal way, by

showing that all I had ever said about "truth" was hypocrisy, and

that in my own affairs I expected to prevail by help of lies.

Nevertheless it necessarily happens, that in endeavors to facsimile

any work whatsoever, bad or good, some changes are induced from the

exact aspect of the original. These changes are, of course,

sometimes harmful, sometimes advantageous; the bad thing generally

gains; the good thing _always_ loses: so that I am continually

tormented by finding, in my plates of contrasts, the virtue and vice

I exactly wanted to talk about, eliminated from _both_ examples. In

some cases, however, the bad thing will lose also, and then I must

either cancel the plate, or increase the cost of the work by

preparing another (at a similar risk), or run the chance of

incurring the charge of dishonest representation. I desire,

therefore, very earnestly, and once for all, to have it understood

that whatever I say in the text, bearing on questions of comparison,

refers _always_ to the _original_ works; and that, if the reader has

it in his power, I would far rather he should look at those works

than at my plates of them; I only give the plates for his immediate

help and convenience: and I mention this, with respect to my plate

of Claude's ramification, because, if I have such a thing as a

prejudice at all, (and, although I do not myself think I have,

people certainly say so,) it is against Claude; and I might,

therefore, be sooner suspected of some malice in this plate than in

others. But I simply gave the original engravings from the Liber

Veritatis to Mr. Le Keux, earnestly requesting that the portions

selected might be faithfully copied; and I think he is much to be

thanked for so carefully and successfully accomplishing the task.

The figures are from the following plates:--

No. 1. Part of the central tree in No. 134. of the Liber Veritatis.

2. From the largest tree " 158.

3. Bushes at root of tree " 134.

4. Tree on the left " 183.

5. Tree on the left " 95.

6. Tree on the left " 72.

7. Principal tree " 92.

8. Tree on the right " 32.

If, in fact, any change be effected in the examples in this plate, it

is for the better; for, thus detached, they all look like small

boughs, in which the faults are of little consequence; in the original

works they are seen to be intended for large trunks of trees, and the

errors are therefore pronounced on a much larger scale.

The plate of mediaeval rocks (10.) has been executed with much less

attention in transcript, because the points there to be illustrated

were quite indisputable, and the instances were needed merely to show

the _kind_ of _thing_ spoken of, not the skill of particular masters.

The example from Leonardo was, however, somewhat carefully treated.

Mr. Cuff copied it accurately from the only engraving of the picture

which I believe exists, and with which, therefore, I suppose the world

is generally content. That engraving, however, in no respect seems to

me to give the look of the light behind Leonardo's rocks; so I

afterwards darkened the rocks, and put some light into the sky and

lily; and the effect is certainly more like that of the picture than

it is in the same portion of the old engraving.

Of the other masters represented in the plates of this volume, the

noblest, Tintoret, has assuredly suffered the most (Plate 17.);

first, in my too hasty drawing from the original, picture; and,

secondly, through some accidental errors of outline which occurred

in the reduction to the size of the page; lastly, and chiefly, in

the withdrawal of the heads of the four figures underneath, in the

shadow, on which the composition entirely depends. This last evil is

unavoidable. It is quite impossible to make _extracts_ from the

great masters without partly spoiling every separated feature; the

very essence of a noble composition being, that none should bear

separation from the rest.

The plate from Raphael (11) is, I think, on the whole, satisfactory.

It cost me much pains, as I had to facsimile the irregular form of

every leaf; each being, in the original picture, executed with a

somewhat wayward pencil-stroke of vivid brown on the clear sky.

Of the other plates it would be tedious to speak in detail.

Generally, it will be found that I have taken most pains to do

justice to the masters of whom I have to speak depreciatingly; and

that, if there be calumny at all, it is always of Turner, rather

than of Claude.

The reader might, however, perhaps suspect me of ill-will towards

Constable, owing to my continually introducing him for depreciatory

comparison. So far from this being the case, I had, as will be seen

in various passages of the first volume, considerable respect for

the feeling with which he worked; but I was compelled to do harsh

justice upon him now, because Mr. Leslie, in his unadvised and

unfortunate _rechauffe_ of the fallacious art-maxims of the last

century, has suffered his personal regard for Constable so far to

prevail over his judgment as to bring him forward as a great artist,

comparable in some kind with Turner. As Constable's reputation was,

even before this, most mischievous, in giving countenance to the

blotting and blundering of Modernism, I saw myself obliged, though

unwillingly, to carry the suggested comparison thoroughly out.

II. GERMAN PHILOSOPHY.

The reader must have noticed that I never speak of German art, or

German philosophy, but in depreciation. This, however, is not

because I cannot feel, or would not acknowledge, the value and

power, within certain limits, of both; but because I also feel that

the immediate tendency of the English mind is to rate them too

highly; and, therefore, it becomes a necessary task, at present, to

mark what evil and weakness there are in them, rather than what

good. I also am brought continually into collision with certain

extravagances of the German mind, by my own steady pursuit of

Naturalism as opposed to Idealism; and, therefore, I become

unfortunately cognizant of the evil, rather than of the good; which

evil, so far as I feel it, I am bound to declare. And it is not to

the point to protest, as the Chevalier Bunsen and other German

writers have done, against the expression of opinions respecting

their philosophy by persons who have not profoundly or carefully

studied it; for the very resolution to study any system of

metaphysics profoundly, must be based, in any prudent man's mind, on

some preconceived opinion of its worthiness to be studied; which

opinion of German metaphysics the naturalistic English cannot be led

to form. This is not to be murmured against,--it is in the simple

necessity of things. Men who have other business on their hands must

be content to choose what philosophy they have occasion for, by the

sample; and when, glancing into the second volume of "Hippolytus,"

we find the Chevalier Bunsen himself talking of a "finite

realization of the infinite" (a phrase considerably less rational

than "a black realization of white"), and of a triad composed of

God, Man, and Humanity[105] (which is a parallel thing to talking of

a triad composed of man, dog, and canineness), knowing those

expressions to be pure, definite, and highly finished nonsense, we

do not in general trouble ourselves to look any farther. Some one

will perhaps answer that if one always judged thus by the

sample,--as, for instance, if one judged of Turner's pictures by the

head of a figure cut out of one of them,--very precious things might

often be despised. Not, I think, often. If any one went to Turner,

expecting to learn figure-drawing from him, the sample of his

figure-drawing would accurately and justly inform him that he had

come to the wrong master. But if he came to be taught landscape, the

smallest fragment of Turner's work would justly exemplify his power.

It may sometimes unluckily happen that, in such short trial, we

strike upon an accidentally failing part of the thing to be tried,

and then we may be unjust; but there is, nevertheless, in multitudes

of cases, no other way of judging or acting; and the necessity of

occasionally being unjust is a law of life,--like that of sometimes

stumbling, or being sick. It will not do to walk at snail's pace all

our lives for fear of stumbling, nor to spend years in the

investigation of everything which, by specimen, we must condemn. He

who seizes all that he plainly discerns to be valuable, and never is

unjust but when he honestly cannot help it, will soon be enviable in

his possessions, and venerable in his equity.

Nor can I think that the risk of loss is great in the matter under

discussion. I have often been told that any one who will read Kant,

Strauss, and the rest of the German metaphysicians and divines,

resolutely through, and give his whole strength to the study of them,

will, after ten or twelve years' labor, discover that there is very

little harm in them; and this I can well believe; but I believe also

that the ten or twelve years may be better spent; and that any man who

honestly wants philosophy not for show, but for _use_, and knowing the

Proverbs of Solomon, can, by way of Commentary, afford to buy, in

convenient editions, Plato, Bacon, Wordsworth, Carlyle, and Helps,

will find that he has got as much as will be sufficient for him and

his household during life, and of as good quality as need be.

It is also often declared necessary to study the German

controversialists, because the grounds of religion "must be inquired

into." I am sorry to hear they have not been inquired into yet; but

if it be so, there are two ways of pursuing that inquiry: one for

scholarly men, who have leisure on their hands, by reading all that

they have time to read, for and against, and arming themselves at

all points for controversy with all persons; the other,--a shorter

and simpler way,--for busy and practical men, who want merely to

find out how to live and die. Now for the learned and leisurely men

I am not writing; they know what and how to read better than I can

tell them. For simple and busy men, concerned much with art, which

is eminently a practical matter, and fatigues the eyes, so as to

render much reading inexpedient, I _am_ writing; and such men I do,

to the utmost of my power, dissuade from meddling with German books;

not because I fear inquiry into the grounds of religion, but because

the only inquiry which is _possible_ to them must be conducted in a

totally different way. They have been brought up as Christians, and

doubt if they should remain Christians. They cannot ascertain, by

investigation, if the Bible be true; but _if it be_, and Christ ever

existed, and was God, then, certainly, the Sermon which He has

permitted for 1800 years to stand recorded as first of all His own

teaching in the New Testament, must be true. Let them take that

Sermon and give it fair practical trial: act out every verse of it,

with no quibbling or explaining away, except the reduction of such

_evidently_ metaphorical expressions as "cut off thy foot," "pluck

the beam out of thine eye," to their effectively practical sense.

Let them act out, or obey, every verse literally for a whole year,

so far as they can,--a year being little enough time to give to an

inquiry into religion; and if, at the end of the year, they are not

satisfied, and still need to prosecute the inquiry, let them try the

German system if they choose.

III. PLAGIARISM.

Some time after I had written the concluding chapter of this work,

the interesting and powerful poems of Emerson were brought under my

notice by one of the members of my class at the Working Men's

College. There is much in some of these poems so like parts of the

chapter in question, even in turn of expression, that though I do

not usually care to justify myself from the charge of plagiarism, I

felt that a few words were necessary in this instance.

I do not, as aforesaid, justify myself, in general, because I know

there is internal evidence in my work of its originality, if people

care to examine it; and if they do not, or have not skill enough to

know genuine from borrowed work, my simple assertion would not

convince them, especially as the charge of plagiarism is hardly ever

made but by plagiarists, and persons of the unhappy class who do not

believe in honesty but on evidence. Nevertheless, as my work is so

much out of doors, and among pictures, that I have time to read few

modern books, and am therefore in more danger than most people of

repeating, as if it were new, what others have said, it may be well

to note, once for all, that any such apparent plagiarism results in

fact from my writings being more original than I wish them to be,

from my having worked out my whole subject in unavoidable, but to

myself hurtful, ignorance of the labors of others. On the other

hand, I should be very sorry if I had _not_ been continually taught

and influenced by the writers whom I love; and am quite unable to

say to what extent my thoughts have been guided by Wordsworth,

Carlyle, and Helps; to whom (with Dante and George Herbert, in olden

time) I owe more than to any other writers;--most of all, perhaps,

to Carlyle, whom I read so constantly, that, without wilfully

setting myself to imitate him, I find myself perpetually falling

into his modes of expression, and saying many things in a "quite

other," and, I hope, stronger, way, than I should have adopted some

years ago; as also there are things which I hope are said more

clearly and simply than before, owing to the influence upon me of

the beautiful _quiet_ English of Helps. It would be both foolish and

wrong to struggle to cast off influences of this kind; for they

consist mainly in a real and healthy help;--the master, in writing

as in painting, showing certain methods of language which it would

be ridiculous, and even affected, not to employ, when once shown;

just as it would have been ridiculous in Bonifacio to refuse to

employ Titian's way of laying on color, if he felt it the best,

because he had not himself discovered it. There is all the

difference in the world between this receiving of guidance, or

allowing of influence, and wilful imitation, much more, plagiarism;

nay, the guidance may even innocently reach into local tones of

thought, and must do so to some extent; so that I find Carlyle's

stronger thinking coloring mine continually; and should be very

sorry if I did not; otherwise I should have read him to little

purpose. But what I have of my own is still all there, and, I

believe, better brought out, by far, than it would have been

otherwise. Thus, if we glance over the wit and satire of the popular

writers of the day, we shall find that the _manner_ of it, so far as

it is distinctive, is always owing to Dickens; and that out of his

first exquisite ironies branched innumerable other forms of wit,

varying with the disposition of the writers; original in the matter

and substance of them, yet never to have been expressed as they now

are, but for Dickens.

Many people will suppose that for several ideas in the chapters on

Landscape I was indebted to Humboldt's Kosmos, and Howitt's Rural

Scenery. I am indebted to Mr. Howitt's book for much pleasure, but

for no suggestion, as it was not put into my hands till the chapters

in question were in type. I wish it had been; as I should have been

glad to have taken farther note on the landscape of Theocritus, on

which Mr. Howitt dwells with just delight. Other parts of the book

will be found very suggestive and helpful to the reader who cares to

pursue the subject. Of Humboldt's Kosmos I heard much talk when it

first came out, and looked through it cursorily; but thinking it

contained no material (connected with my subject)[106] which I had

not already possessed myself of, I have never since referred to the

work. I may be mistaken in my estimate of it, but certainly owe it

absolutely nothing.

It is also often said that I borrow from Pugin. I glanced at Pugin's

Contrasts once, in the Oxford architectural reading-room, during an

idle forenoon. His "Remarks on Articles in the Rambler" were brought

under my notice by some of the reviews. I never read a word of any

other of his works, not feeling, from the style of his architecture,

the smallest interest in his opinions.

I have so often spoken, in the preceding pages, of Holman Hunt's

picture of the Light of the World, that I may as well, in this

place, glance at the envious charge against it, of being plagiarized

from a German print.

It is indeed true that there was a painting of the subject before;

and there were, of course, no paintings of the Nativity before

Raphael's time, nor of the Last Supper before Leonardo's, else those

masters could have laid no claim to originality. But what was still

more singular (the verse to be illustrated being, "Behold, I stand

at the door and knock"), the principal figure in the antecedent

picture was knocking at a door, knocked with its right hand, and had

its face turned to the spectator! Nay, it was even robed in a long

robe, down to its feet. All these circumstances were the same in Mr.

Hunt's picture; and as the chances evidently were a hundred to one

that if he had not been helped to the ideas by the German artist, he

would have represented the figure as _not_ knocking at any door, as

turning its back to the spectator, and as dressed in a short robe,

the plagiarism was considered as demonstrated. Of course no defence

is possible in such a case. All I can say is, that I shall be

sincerely grateful to any unconscientious persons who will adapt a

few more German prints in the same manner.

Finally, touching plagiarism in general, it is to be remembered that

all men who have sense and feeling are being continually helped:

they are taught by every person whom they meet, and enriched by

everything that falls in their way. The greatest is he who has been

oftenest aided; and, if the attainments of all human minds could be

traced to their real sources, it would be found that the world had

been laid most under contribution by the men of most original power,

and that every day of their existence deepened their debt to their

race, while it enlarged their gifts to it. The labor devoted to

trace the origin of any thought, or any invention, will usually

issue in the blank conclusion that there is nothing new under the

sun; yet nothing that is truly great can ever be altogether

borrowed; and he is commonly the wisest, and is always the happiest,

who receives simply, and without envious question, whatever good is

offered him, with thanks to its immediate giver.

[105] I am truly sorry to have introduced such words in an

apparently irreverent way. But it would be a guilty

reverence which prevented us from exposing fallacy,

precisely where fallacy was most dangerous, and shrank from

unveiling an error, just because that error existed in

parlance respecting the most solemn subjects to which it

could possibly be attached.

[106] See the Fourth Volume.

* * * * * * * *

Transcriber's Notes (continued from top of text):

Typographical changes to the original work are as follows:

Minor punctuation changes have been made without annotation.

pg 242 paus/pause: Matilda pause where ...

pg 277 charater/character: the character of this ...

pg 330 cloads/clouds: clouds of rage ...

End of Project Gutenberg's Modern Painters Vol. III., by John Ruskin

Modern Painters, Volume 3 (of 5) · 第 18 / 18 章