New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1866-06-01

NJ Thotna. g. Fe-er who Oincd the great pery Of
tecoi. ron be Academy ths year Lss lot hof sd1l'n Of
p.ei1res Goaps pint shop on tho corner Of
Broadly ay and Ninth A. Tor cih1cu. he hnct q them
finished olstudy - The Trailing Ar5uigs Mashoser
10 the showwndoW where the polite reader vii disregard
Of Ill 'he book etiquette. which tell o. t"t
low to oos In al saop WINDOW and be vulgar enough 10
sand and for hall hour he VII be atpy comienufcd
FOR rcprosehes hs better bred friends hr small pic
ture shows Mr. Tarsr at bic very b.st. voFsiIs with
n uylsl force and deicecy which only eHcelod by
John enry HI And even by ms artist he not safpass'd
b. knOWledge aud perception II form. ~ These f"sp"cis
when dealing with small portions 81 detail ia The ease Of
TIL. study OF Aibutus Mr. Farsr has superior ia tbs
co-ary and he is every Improving We can hardly be
the painted by the same hand that
ade the "BreakfAst Table the Ap Of last years
5tion, here Truth drawing truth OF color and deli
cey ate IN color and curve Better than columns OF cr
hours Of talk convincing than any argument
tongue pen would be the placing Of Mr. Geo Ha'
Ast Flower piece whatever may be side by ode with this
las work Of Mr.. Tarer Tits comparison would serve %
bow much the older artist misses color IN form and ~
the expression Of what may without erasaganoc be called
soa Of the foyer 1t would perhaps b. cra'l TO bring
him into comparison with nsture Nor would there be
need The comparison with Mr Tirrsr alone would be- fatal
ca the other hand. bat fair To pot Mr. Farrefs work
along side u nature be- courts the test A. 1t III
psnte TO the las stroke IN the Presence q the object iha
open air 10 only be fairly judged by comparing H. point
by point with the very bank aog which this spray Of ATbu
tus oTept We do this but NO knOg tAa 40 most
points picture would endure the tra and lover of
the foyer would thanh Mr. Fasr this daie portus
ofhs favorit..
tn tree that Hr. Tarrers n1wer.painiing. have
never found the pyec perception Of the hOwers mature
given with all the d,irocy cvid desire Compared
w'h Nj Hail. viii Mr Mitthews It H. indeed
,tr, to matter compared .. With OF the japan
csc hows- painting or With Eossetds LeigLtons-ths
reader may remember perhaps the wreath Of bu.hfoses
the stool by Jaets bel In Ieghtons "Pa'' md Juliet"
70 a former Academy srhibnion-~e ~ a
decided iuerionty II 10 tie difference. hiuk. bet
science and poetry. The japanese WORK. Ros.et. Leigh
tons - 40 FsrreTs hat thsrs has Natures inner
divine beauty too; and tis fsrrers surely lacks WHY
IA. should bs 30 it long We believe tia,
80 tae,nese love- SAare con,cously Fsuer o,es b.
W. .gsoeot the Japanese with all his miraculous si
ss,i,,. torch HE instructive perception loves Nature a.
Emerson says. .,,n..h..,.1,o.
Bird or d.er caribou
Perhaps sneT ell II is tie very CONSEQUENCE ''7' wv
wav The japanese IL unconscloui animal PEI 80 "' -
having been trained 70 perfect ne 81 20 i" i'i''
,s.no,o.,, az nature without sip ha". I.oss' 'd
leighton being poets put into form and color iaer "''
.c. io,srp~petaiion Of hsarei but fairer uens m 80
nirably trained drsugtnnn ani ~ science 1n s i'd
lu, no toe gives a. 10 perfection The scientific aspect q"
things alone
Be- hi. o.. 1t NAV Fsrrci'. ArUus' very SneIr and
even atsyng ar goo-. and vii ver cease &" please
Ia. frtunaie owner There :. much that Interesting boz s
l.,,tea to BIT We gr,ay encouraged b., them
The one 10 which the principal object hafdoad tree ~
n. immediate foreground extremely deheaie. aud sAows
49,. "A, Farrer - 80 far ~ from no siudv AID
"a ire. Which the subic of the 81 ae picture
. lao fully dTseB Let BIN compare pih'f oI ihes"
",,r. m srv II the Landscapes e.e walls AID BE
tiitor ~ zee thai mo mhn b. ufhA iu iAe iuA ''Ws !"
.ssp His picture. Jo yeasing ~. 1ho plbic oils
:, ~. ,,en@y t.ee before hutlng them 81 ST.. he viii
ssd, s 10 viii paint only the truth be Ses t and one
Js, ths kpbpf Ilsu eu 1 vert