Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1872-10-25
FOR VISITOR
Nude srt at tbe EzpOsiuOn-The Pro
and Con Of IL.

We willingly make place for the fol-
lowing from Mr.. Hart, written, as it is,
in a spirit of badinage that will no doubt
be acceptable even to "VisitOr,n whose
structures We're not so much even upon
Objectionable art as upon the o~bjectiona-
BILE criticisms which it gives rise to.
Nudity in art is not Objectionable, iftbat
were so much that we now have of high
art, indeed the highest, would not have
existence, or having it, would be hidden
out of sight. But there is a class of
paintings in which nude fignres, grossly
~sensuous, or painted to excite sensuOus-
ness, are the center of attraction, it is
to one of this class that F" Visitor OBJ
jects, and which he asks may be re-
moved from u Exposition collection:
EDITORS APP Ais see by this morn
ing's APPEALt at VISITOR is shocked
at an indecorou painting in the fine
art department the Exposition. Per-
haps / may he the offender. If he
mean the champion Chess-Player, "
the figure is stark naked-it shall be
removed; O the "Cherubs, "perfeetly des-
titute of drapery, let Mr.. Hainer con-
sign them to the furnace that sets the
engines in motion. "Our own fine arts7
must be like Cesar's wife.
Yours under a cloud, b. HART.
Since the above was prepared for pub
LEGATION the following has been received:
EDITORS APPEAI-Your impression
of this morning contains a note bearing
the signature Visitor" pleading in be-
half Of the general modesty of the gene
raj public now crOwding the gorgeous
aisles and splendid ~promenades of the
Exposition. +" Visitor assumes a hyper
critical analysis of the department APP
prOpriated to the fine art OF painting,
and becomes uncO-indignant over a
chef IL auUJc in oil which he is too
modest even to name. The omission is
supplied by yourselves in a suppository
reference TO a " Nymph Of the Woods .
in the act of raising from an al frescO
couch, attracted By tn billing and COO
ing Of q turtle-dOve. II your guess hits
the mark, the fragmentaFy gem, which
was the innocent aus Of (" Nisitor'sn
prudish purism, is the finest painting at
the Exposition. An exquisitely beauti-
full semi-nude female figure, with limbs
so splendidly modelled as to cheat one
into the idea that it is nature and not
art that moulded the divine proportions.
Surely" Visitor would remove all nude
or semi-nUde paintings from the eye
of the deUetdHti of either sex who visit
the Exposition, if he would taboo the
petite gem in question, substituting the
glory of dry goods for the peerless work
of God in man or woman! The senti-
ment of the note of ''Visitor" smacks of
the fierce iconoclastic purism of John
Knox, but is not by any means in har-
mony with the advanced spirit and love
of progressive civilization of his de-
scendants, among whom the fine arts
have many warm supporters. We be-
lieve the offending picture has been
removed; why not next 1.-THE Awaken
ing of Spring." and several others we
name, certes obnoxious to the
species of criticism INDUCED in by
"VisitOr?u ART.
Overton Hotel, october q, 1872,
"Artr is in error. Admittingthe little
painting in question: to bea gem of purest
ray serene, it were better it waste
its sweetness, as "Visitor'' suggested,
in the chamber where it has, judging by
the frame, long done duty. Whatever
the ideas of "Artn may be, however so
pure, he does injustice in his remarks to
one who is equally removed from purism
and above iconoclasm. We think "Vis-
is but Just when he objects to the
jdiHIlilg III questiOht because IL w
no purpose in art and is only valuable
for an exceedingly vulgar Obtrusion of
unreIieved either by the cooling
doves or the little bit of words in the
perspective. Nudity in art is only de
iensible as it is expressive of an idea,
he mere mention of which is sufficient
enable all beholders to recognize it.
this there is only a fundamentally
broad idea, as naked as plain, and as
disgusting as nature itself.