The Sun.
London, England, 1854-05-04 00:00:00

VIE ROYAL ACADEMY.

The opening of the Exhibition of the "Royal Academy
of Painting, Sculpture, and Architecture," is something
more than the inauguration of the full royalty of the
London season. To spend an annual shilling at what
will long be called by elderly people the "Somerset-house
Exhibition," and "the Exhibition," is nearly all the art
patronage and art study which the middle classes yet
compass. Apart from this traditionary importance of
May-day to the world of art, the Royal Academy has
very large national associations.. It is an accredited and
chartered institution, in the fame and usefulness of which
great public interests are involved. It is more than a
voluntary association of artists. It is not only a Royal
foundation, but a national institution. George 111.
lent a certain body of painters a few rooms in a Royal
palace ; and, in course of time, this body has contrived
we are not complaining of the process —to tenant,
rent-free, a sumptuous public building, and not only
levy a vast income from the public through volun
tary contributions, but to . obtain the chartered
right of conferring degrees which are of
im-
mense pecuniary advantage. The decoration of
R.A. is a certain income. If we view the Royal
Academy as an Art University, it is a seminary sup-
ported chiefly by the public, but not governed by any
statutes—if we regard it as a corporation, it is a self-
renewing body, with no constituency to control it—if
we look at it as an ordinary trust, it presents the anomaly
of having large trust moneys, but no trust deed. When
treated as a public body, it falls, back, as in the case of
Mr. Hume's motions for making its exhibitions gratui-
tous—with which, by the way, we by no means coincide
—on its voluntary character. When, on the other
hand, we attempt to place it on a parity with its rivals
in Suffolk-street and Pall-mall, we are reminded of its
charter and its corporate privileges. _

But, apart from its I aspect, what is the scientific
status of the body of wh `,s‘ we are speaking ? It styles
itself "the Royal Academy of Arts." Its theoretical
completeness is equal to that of Solomon's house, as
elaborated by Bacon. It exhausts the circle of fine
arts. It has Professors, and, we suppose, lectures, in
painting, sculpture,architecture, perspective and anatomy.
It adopts all the ancillary and preliminary duties,
studies, accomplishments, and relations, which can
adorn the artist and exalt the citizen and scholar. It

has its chaplain, who is no less a personage than the
Bishop of London himself ; and for its •` professors of
ancient history and ancient literature," it has affiliated
the honoured names of Hallam and Macaulay. Sir

Robert Inglis is its antiquary, and Sir George Staunton
its foreign secretary. These last functionaries are
honorary, by which we presume we are to understand
that they receive no salaries ; for it cannot be supposed
that these high-sounding offices are mere moonshine and
humbug. .We cannot conceive of a chaplain who never
says prayers, of professors who never lecture or teach,
or of a foreign secretary who conducts no foreign corre-
spondence. Doubtless, therefore, the Bishop of London
repeats to his academical brethren the lessons which
were practised by the saintly Angelico ; Mr. Hallam
teaches his artist students from Muller and the wsthetic
criticism of ancient art ; and Sir George Staunton keeps
the council ell rapport with the academies of Brussels,

Munich, and Seville.

Theoretically, the Royal Academy of Arts is perfect.
It fills the complete cycle. It is armed at all points. It
only wants a professor of modern literature to correct
the grammar of its catalogue, and then it would
approach an ideal perfection. It is curious that, with
all this, tne world only takes it for a shilling-collecting,
voluntary association, invested with a high traditional
character, and occupying a good set of rooms furnished
to it gratuitou,ly... Of its services to art, and of its high
didactic results, we are far less able to speak confidently
than of• the fact that, during three months of every
year, it throws open its rooms at the moderate charge
of. one shilling, and constitutes the central sun of the
London system of sights. As an exhibition of pictures
we consider the Academy's the cheapest an most amusing
in the world. We never grudge our shilling.. It really
does distance all its compeers. both in value and extent.
As an exhibition it will be, and deserves to be, very
popular. But the institution claims much more' than
this. It is an academy, and professes to educate. It
takes high grmind—it affects to embrace the largest
range of subsidiary studies, and the most eminent pro-
fessors are nominally attached to it. Its object is to en-
courage art—it sets up fur being a national source of in-
struction. How far does it fulfil those lofty aims ?

We shall be told that its professors are no fiction—
that lectures are delivered—that schools are kept open,
prizes given, and students sent to travel—and that in
these, the legitimate objects of an academy, its funds are
spent. But it is indisputable that, in every one of these
objects, the Academy meets with successful rivals. It
has five nominal professorships. The first, that of paint-
ing, is vacant. In sculpture, it is represented by an
accomplished academician, Sir Robert Westmacott.
As to architecture, it is notorious that the architects
who aie members of the Academy never exhibit— that
the Institute of British Architects has entirely super-
seded the work which the Academy professes to do—
and that the architectural drawings displayed are meagre
in number and miserable in quality. A clever portrait
painter is professor of perspective ; and if the professor
of anatomy ever lectures, we can only say that we
never heard of his prolusions. Are not these appoint-
ments, like that of the chaplain, honorary ? Is the
Academy an art school ? Reynolds and Fuseli used to
publish their lectures—Sir Charles Eastlake's accomplish-
ments in the literature of art are not expended on the stu-
dents of the institution of which he is president—we
have not met with Mr. Knight's disquisitions on optics
—and if, as we suppose, both colour and composition fall
within the department of the Professor of Painting, it is
curious that that important office should be vacant even
for a week. Yet it is the fashion of the day to require
work, in return not only for pay, but for corporate dis-
tinctions. In Oxford, we are taking care that, for fel-
lowships, fellows should do the work of education. Is it
too much to inquire whether R.A.'s, and how many
R.A.'s, teach in the Academy of Arts to which they be-
long
•

But we had forgotten one corporate—not to say con
poreal—function of the Royal Academy of Arts. They
give an annual dinner to celebrate their own success.
That is to say, the public gives the dinner out of its shil-
liegs, and the R.A.'s invite the celebrities of the dly—
her Majesty's Ministers„ and the like—to their festive
hoard. We quito sympathise with the English taste for
dinner-giving, but the Royal Academy feast has this pe-
culiarity—that it celebrates the triumph of the hosts
rather than of the guests. We give a dinner to a mili-
tary or naval commander when he has won a victory ;
but a conquering general seldom asks all the world to
eat and drink when he is mentioned in the Gazette—
lea,t of all does he think of paying himself such a compli-
ment at other people's expense. We cannot quite grasp
the rationale of the Royal Academy dinner. If it were
a banquet given to the patrons of art, that would be a dis-
tinct purpose—not a high one, nor one in perfect taste.
but an intellieible one. The affair would then be of
the nature of a pecuniary investment—it would be an
invitation to purchasers warmed with good fare.
This would be a practical, if not a high aim—pre•
cisely analogous to that which is often pursued by an
enterprising baker when, on opening a new shop, he
gives every customer a glass of gin. But, on looking
over the list of the guests, we meet with names whim
have no connection whatever with art. Grouped around
Sir C. Eastlake's hospitable board, on Saturday, we
find noblemen and gentlemen who do not know a Titian
from a Claude. The feast is an occasion, like the Easter
dinner at the Mansion house, for neat spat ches frem
practised speakers about the war ; and it affords
an admirable opportunity for pleasant postprandial
political skirmishing—to which we may add that, on
Saturday last, it was signalised by the display of novel
pyrotechnical effects, and also by a brilliant experiment
in gas lighting. It has also its value in correlative din-
ners—au object appreciable enough, for it is notorious
that for years the R.A.'s kept on their list a wealthy in-
dividual, who never exhibited a picture, but who gave a
series of dinners to his brethren.
What claims have the present body of R.A.'s to take
thin lofty ground of giving a dinner to celebrate the
successes of their own handiwork ? Ten Royal Aca-
demicians do not contribute to the Trafalgar-square
walls at all. The painter of Irene is President of the
Academy and chairman of the dinner ; the author of
" My Two Boys" is a professor ; and the painters of
Nos. 449, 13, 925, and -alas ! that we should have to
place him in such company—even of 63, would have done
more wisely had they not asked for such very public feli-
citations as the dinner implies on their academical tri-
umphs in high art. If the Royal Academy has higher
aims than that of a mercantile concern, it would, we
think, better consult the true dignity of art in not giving
an occasion for critical persons to suggest that its
annual dinner is persisted in only as a convenient means
for forcing on the public its social, apart from its artistic,
claims. The two or three hundred pounds lavished on
this vain and senseless display of luxury would be better
expended on an exhibition to a poor student—on its
library—on its lectures in the purchase of casts or
pictures—or, if its object is to popularise art and to
e the English mind, even in reducing the charge
for admission. This dinner suggests that the Academy
postpones its corporate duties to the pecuniary chances
of its own members--that it prefers the social counte-
nance of the rich to the claims of what ought to be a noble
and disinterested profession. We cannot forget that the
object of incorporating this institution was an educational
and scientific one—that it professes to collect a gallery
of its own, each Academician being bound to present one
of his own works on admission. And its members will
do well to remember that an institution whose profes-
sion is to teach, but which contents itself with selfish
nod personal aims, is likely, in these days—especially
when it draws largely on public funds and public confi-
dence—to find inconvenient inquiries carried into its
services to art and its results on national tasto.-21forn-
ing Chronicle.

SoLDIIRS' FAMILIES.—Major Powys, recretary to
the Central As-nciation for Soldiers' Families, writes to
state that as yet no money has reached the association
from the treasurer of the funds raised at the Drury•lane
demonstration and fancy fair. Two hundred pounds
was raised. but the Lord Mayor has no;, been as yet
convinced that " the Mansion•house is not the best
place for administering Teligt to every porwu
herolf a goliiiveta