New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1852-06-12
NETWORK DAILY TRIBUNE SATURDAY, JUNE 1s, 1859

not satisfy him. that be could easily fancy Ksnlbsch
treating the theme more satisfactorily Thus TO put At
rest the ppant sheer of IAN Artist sbou, "luggog In
Raphael and Karbach, and dismssing an artist with
flea in HE ear say distinctly that it Is always en-
trey legitimate and inevitable in order TO Sc. in relief
feeling concerning work. TO illustrate how that
work fails of being truly great BY suggesting the suPe
rior manner In which subjects Of similar scope have
been treated by other artists
Blu. we have not quite done with "An Artist" Hav'
ing shown how utterly futile Is bis insinuation that Il Is
criticism Judge one picture by another-snce not
our wills, but nature does II for us-we will look
moment at his claim that every thing should be judged
b. what inirinsicaIy and not by foreign standards
This assertion has sensible sound but pure non
What is the intrinsic character o. thing, as
a mater ofoommendation or eeas1s' Nothing at all
As there are not things alike in the Universe to say
that thing must be judged simply BY whatis, merely
to cay that it is what II is "An Artist hands Us
peach, for instance We say 70 him, Artist, this Is
not good peach" lie responds, But why won't yos
judge by its Intrinsic excellence Your mind Is poi
sOned by the images of other peaches This is not an
other peach take it therefore for what 1t Is don't lug
In the idea Of ripe, rich, sunnycheeked fruit to try
this by" Now, inrinsicsy green Is a. good as ripe
the rpeness is rpeness But when eat fruit weare
conscious of something which whether Is
good or not and that not the intrinsic character OF
the individual specimen, but experience and idea
Of excellent fruit 1t Is the with pictures. To
speak Of what picture Is ntrnscay, Is to use words
without meaning For what does IAN Artist In
tend by it In the present cssel If he intends any
thing, he means that 10 looking at the Cog, are not
- of hO
other men might have treated it, of he manner in
which we think it ought be treated including our
view of the conception Of the scope Of the event But
If we may net think Of the thought and composition OF
other similar pictures then must not refer 10 their
color then we must exclude everything else except
this canvas until we have omitted nature altogether
We 60 not see how we can take it in any other way
than intrinsicaly Il was only because we considered
the work "nirncaly" defective, and yet recognized
what great excellence there was in IL that we spok
Of il so carefully.
We here take leave of the subject An Artist writes
"smartly" and has much greater fuency and felicity Of
expression than cur friend Of The Post. The FAULT OF
his communication is that the ephets are too strong.
They turn back upon themselves, and he did unwsely
IN prefxpg to his article the extract from our t9He,
because il stands there In all mems sight refuting every,
thing he proceeds to say These wr,ersn The EoenfnS
Post and Home Journal have thought ct to descend to
The most odous personality they have aimed to destroy
the force of a crique in public estimation, by striving
TO cast contempt upon the critic az citing distinguished
men before him and clubbing them respectable, and they
have thus dragged into unseemly position two names
dear to every American. Three motives have prompted
our long reply st the desire to vndcste the principles
upon which alone unprecedented criticism is possible and
which should forever hush in silence such correspon-
dents as those who have elected remarks 3D. 10
expose the bopeessness Of that cause which had no an
twer for criticism but personal insult of the critic and
3d. the anxiety not to seem willing to remain silent I'M
der an accusation Of hostility toward an artist whose
posion is already assured and nowhere more securely
than in our respect