New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1852-06-07
THE FINE ARTS.
v.,,,s,,,ou of the National ..endemy'
VII.

,h.t .s Art deals with Nature, and as man
b;ghestform Of visible life, the representation
the loftiest, instead Of the lowest, aim OF
o LII rI;s,oy;esl painting, TO which common con-
'' IT.. the first position in the various Depart
-. Of art, is justly first because it represents
- y action. II seizes moments of admirable
.:.., or reveals the stately spectacle OF the
.ale action Of men, as beheld by the magma
r., That there are many portraits, thereiore's
r.x,.ce 10 an exhibition-if the portraits are
good. 81 No So,o f6, nv MIR. WHITE.
~ certain yigor is yet an unsatisfactory PIC
n ;san incident which admits Of poetic and
...n,ssou. treatment, but the Imagination of the
l,.;.t has accepted rather a commonplace idea oil
:, The Galiantry Of Raleigh (29l is picture OF
N, LtUrzE's, painted some ten years since. The
-.n.tnoyn incident is treated in the most obvious
.n.,rsr. II is costume picture, and would COM
Ind little notice except from the fact that 1t IS
I,rrzs's and has vigor and brlancy. For the
.-r,,,rouspess of Elizabeth's Court--for the inn
,0,;og snle,dor Of her aristocracy-lor the impe-
,;sl richness instinctivsly demanded, the eye
ss.,chss the canvas in vain. Elizabeth IS
,.s ,eas, striking of all the figures. The eye
Sins off directly upon the pert little page, be
hind. The prime difficulty of the picture is this
that IL throw no new meaning or beauty upon the
seepe. OF any artist like LEUTZE we naturally
e,pect some justification OF the subject selected, IN
tbs picture itself Tmmbull's Congressional pic
lures were dCrisiycly called " shn-pieces" because
the mind disdained to see nothing but row of So
Ismn gentlemen in tight black small clothes, when
4 looked to see the men who laid the foundation
oftherep,g5c. hose eonscrpt fathers did, indeed,
wear knee sreeches and buckles, but when we
think Of them, they have an air OF lofsy and de-
voted manhood. IF an artist cannot deepen this
feeling. he ought not to paint the p;cture,-unless
he can content himself with that success which
renders satin, velvet and feathers with deceptive
imitation. The defect of No. p is analogous to
this The spectator does not find as much in the
pieture as he brings to it, Over it, in No. 81, Mr.
HUsrIseToN introduces US to proiusion OF adj
mirubly rendered velvet, lawn, silk, damask and
plush, in, on, under, and by which sits his present
Grace of Canterbury. 1t is u very effective pic
lure. with the air Of a good likeness. We can
only heartily sympathze with the artist that he
was necessarily confronted with such mass OF
hsberdashtry that when he was obliged to add
the horse hair wig, his picture could only result
in representation of the pontiicals of the Arch
bishop.
Jacobs Dream 1881 is one of the most popu-
lar pictures of Mr.. J.. TERRY. Without any
claim to exactness of drawing, or richness OF
color, or to anything suggestive in its conception
Of the Scnptural story, this picture has yet an
air Of purity, and grace and sweetness Viewing
the composition as it stands its most palpable de-
feet is the apparition at the top of the steps.
This instantly limits what should have been
infinite. The vista should not have been closed
the radiant avenue of the Angels should have
vanished in the supreme splendor Of Heaven. MIR.
MULLrR's VALLEY az DE Als (37l like his No l4l,
a Canadian scene, convey good impression OF
wild passages Of landscape. But with great IL
deity in handling, we cannot find them interest
ing. They seem rather the landscapes as the hand
mes It'll we may say so-than as the head and
heart feel it.
In No. -. we have one OF MIR. ELLIOTT
best portraits, although No. 4l9 seems to
az his fine I contribution to the Exhibition. There
is a remarkable uniformity of excellence IN ms
works. They Impress us always with sense oil
facility almost of carelessness, in the execution,
as il no could eur lily do all that he wished to do.
Unhsppil, this leaves us with the desire that he
would wish 10 DO more. Certain pointsare carefully
elaborated, the likeness is always admirable,
an exquisite grace is impaired to the form,
ssd u great satisfaction to the friends OF the
subject, but they yet lack some essential charms.
II IS because they are good, probably, that the
wonder is suggested why they are not better.
There is ono point that we remark in MIR. ELL
Orr's portraits, and that is, want of glow. There
is plenty Of LEGAL color strongly laid on--there IS
vermon enough in the lips, &c, but 1t Is not the
natural hue, it is too brilliant il you please, and
therefore the ensemble suffers. Thus in No. %,
despite the lips, there seems positive want oil
color. Hence the general impression OF ms Pic.
lures left upon the mind, is that of great white
ness or bckness, and they derive from it an air OF
mreolity, which is prejudcial, while they have an
instructive feeling ofpropriety in the highest sense,
which is most admirable. Thus again, TO illustrate
this No. 53, at the first glance would seem,
from the popularity of the position represented,
,stmDge, and even little grotesque, figure
for the walls of drawmg-room or chamber
1t would seem almost an ahectation, suggest
GeOf ladies' of qsality in ANNALS. But tins
has been naturally and beautifully obvated by
the slight bit of landscape introduced Its rustic
ease inyoluatarily reminds the spectator that the
posture !, dcated is under the circumstances
among the most natural and graceful.
Mr. MArHEws portrait Of gentleman l9ll IS
one Of the hest in the gallery. 1t is simple and
strong, admirably moulded and we'll colored. Mr.
BOrTElII's Landscape C96l near by, Is too con-
fused, but has certain boldness which is pleasant
to see, because it shows the artist IS not airaid'o
spalette aud brushes. Mr.. CRANoH's Castle
Rock, NoLaat, (99l is fine study OF rocks, and
has great local truth. So with his Clean Of L'ShI
tss9l in the next room. They have bota the
breezy sentiment Of the northern coast, and IN
No y 4. l.. 80. b., kas Of