New-York tribune., 1868-05-04
THE NAroN4L ACADEMY OF DESIGN.
FoRTY-TH1Rp ANNUAL EXHIBITION.

than positive. There are not so many more gOOu
pictures in 1868 than there in 1861 but there are
perhaps fewer Of the extremely bad-certanly fewer
of the species before which used TO stand in won
der that artists could be found to paint them, and
that any Committee of Artists could be found to ad-
init them to the honor of place the Academy
walls. Yes, it is certainly true that if the great
pictures, the pictures that excite enthusiasm, that
fill us with delight that take place in the memory,
have not yet appeared, the pictures that made the
names of their authors Synonymous with ignorance
and childish folly have almost wholly dlsap
peared. Mr.. d. NJ Carter sends but one PIC
ture, Mr.. John Carn but two Mr.. Louis
Lang but two, Mr.. Rossiter bnt one, ana MI
Hicks, though he oJliges us to look at no less
than seven productions of his pencil-it was always
prolific one-has not made his usual demand upon
our patience and charity by any attempts al I'M
arinative historical or playful painting but has
sought safety from criticism in what Is called pOi-
traiture appareny for no other than because
ii is thought necessary to call it something Anu as
we shall not have any occasion TO alude 10 MI cAS
further in olr review of the exhi btiOn, may say
TINT if there is nothing else about these portraits 10
mention approvingly, we can at least be glad that
the crowded and gaudy backgrounds in which he
ussd TO indulge are not be found in them. No one
of these pictures-wanting as they are III all the
Qualities alike of noble pOTtraituIe and OF noble
painting-in individual character, in refinement IN
drawing and in color no one of them screams from
the walls as did his DR.. Kane, and his Edmund
Booth and obiges us to look at it, whether we VIII
OF no. With the exception of No. 526, which
is one Of the worst pictures in the gallery
and bad even for him, all the pictures
in the present exhibition by Mr. Hicks as unpre-
tending they ought TO de- and If II were not Tor
the telale catalogue, might go through the gal
lery and indulge The hope that this artist had fol
lowed the example of the gentlemen we nave already
named and withdrawn altogether from the eXhlbl-
tiOn. The Exhibitions of the last five years have
given evidence that the Fine Arts III this country are
in a state of revolution. There was TO those who
took the trouble 10 look for It, evidence enough OF
this fact outside the walls OF the Academy but here
il has been concentrated and patent Ihe names
that, ten years ago, made the leading atracnon OF
the Exhibition have long ceased 10 ngre IN the cat
aOgue and long ceased TO hold the place that was
once accorded to them without dispute Who does
not remember the time when the pictures OF RoSSl-
ter, and Hicks and Durand and Lang. ana hunting
ton, and kCnsett were considered as sulncent eN-
hibitien i'm themselves3 Debate waXed warm over
in America, Rossiter or HICKS me ITayoh,
an artjoTnal published IN NeW;10rk at
the time we speak of constantly in the habit OF
illustrating its criticisms and clnehing its arguments
by reference to the pictures of Mr. DuTand, then
President of the Academy, as standard, ana maj
authority in the absence of nature. One met these
names at every turn, and we should not be lqsined
in saying that the echo of this admiration, which 1t
is no longer eccenricty to declare misplaced has
entirely died away lu certain quarters II Will prob
ably lnger for few years longer and while at least
one journal remains faithful to its ancient friend
blow weak blasts of praise from his nonotonous
horn shall not cease to be reminded occasionally
of a public opinion which once existed, but which
exists no longer.
Why the tide of public favor which once set freely
toward these men and bade fair to lead them on 10
fortune turned, and set away, leaylng theIn mus
stranded them, 1t would be hard to say.
Certainly, it not because any painters greatly
superior to them appeared, to draw away the public
admiration. lt is true that number of young men
began to exhibit about that time whose work prom
iSed greater truth to nature than that of their prede
cessOT and who seemed to have higher artistic aims.
There were COman and Shattuck McEntee and
Bellows Inness and Hart, and Others whose names
we do not now readily recall. But some of these
failed to keep their morning promise, and not one
ocrty. We suppose the real reason for the decline
Of the men are speaking of in the public eshma-
ton was OWING 10 the opp4L t wS @ Deea @ 70
foreign artists The Dusseldorf Gallery was opened
on Broadway, and made an impression that IS hardly
effaced to-day The house of GOupl imported
Horace Vemet's Joseph and his Brethren" Della,
roche's H@micycle," reduced by his own hand and
his " Marie AntOinette" with AIRY SChefters " Dante
aud Beatrice and the Temptation of Christ" VIII
liams aud Stevens imported one OF Landseers best
which these pictures were greeted encouraged e the
importation of many more. We have not at hand
the means of ascertainlng the year when what was
called the International Gallery was established III
this city: it consisted largely of French pictures,
among them, Sche1eT's Dead Christ; but the lniiu.
this gallery eXerted was much less than that OF
the Dusseldorf collection, though 1t deserves 10 he
remembered the first important step taken IN the
among us than the German. -
sufficient reason for the decline in public favor Of
such pictures as were painted in America ten years
doubt TO be found in the fact that they sud
denly found themselves obliged TO stand the brunt
of comparison with works by men who whether
they were great artists OF not-and TINS they
We're not all. by, any means-were at least
for the most part, skillful and accomplished work
Aud it was just here that our Americans were
iamentaby wanting at that time, as the greater
number of them are to-day. 10 the great majority
of our men, young and old the labor the perseverng,
heroic labor, undergone by French orGerman artist
who has achieved any considerable distinction,
seems penance appalling, price so cruel, TO pay
for that distinction, that he shrinks from entering
upon it. We say, to the great majority; but who
shall say how few, how lalnentably few, have ever
even proposed to themselves in dream OF youth,
such labor DelarOche or MeissOnieT, or Holman
Hunt, or Henri Legs. or Miilais, must have gone
through 10 stand where they stand to-day. Some
hing-whetheT it be the climate or the condition OF
society, or lack Of capacity IN the man himself
makes labor distasteful 20 the American artist On
these Academy walls how slight is the evidence OF
any profound study OF any devotion But
how the evidence abounds OF vanity,
that hastens TO show its crude produc-
tiOns of presumption that essays the most dlicult
tasks with the hands of infancy of laziness, that
will not wTeste with a difficulty; OF matured but
sefcOmpiacent Ignorance, that paIades lts detects
as if they were accomplishments. These things, we
saw abound and abound to that extent that man
might well despair the condition of art among
us If he did not remember that even 10 or ID years
ago the condition of affairs very much worse IL
il were not evident that the profound public dissas
faction with the state of American art has begun 70
tell at last upon the artists themselves. Some of the
men whose works have done us most dlScredlt have
voluntarily withdrawn from the field so far as the
public concerned and will do us dlScredt no more
Others of perhaps not more ability bnt OF more mod
estV continue TO work, and even 10 exhibit,
but feel that their hold upon the public is
lost and Others, having succeeded IN happy
moment in aTTesting the halt-aycIted eye by
some truthful record or hall-poeuc t9uch, re-
peat the lucky strain year after year, and fear TO
change It, lest their hold upon the pubic heat sOuid