The new Northwest. [volume] (Portland, Or.) 1871-1887, 1878-06-07
Artists and Critics.

Everybody can understand denuncia-
tion and enjoy ridicule, but not every
body knows anything about painting.
Indeed, cart" is so deep a mystery 10
most persons that there is a general
shyness OF trusting ones own judgment
against a vigorous aud aggressive
opinion. 4 loiterer in the present exhi-
bition Of the National Academy may
secretly like a picture, but he is not at
all sure that he ought to like il, and If
be hears the excellence of the work
challenged with fine air Of superior
knowledge, he makes no fight, because
to plead his taste may be merely to dis
close what a horrible taste il is. Stri-
dent, thacking, resounding criticism
has undoubtedly a great effect. When
an article begins: "This will never do"
the reader is at once prepared to see i'm
pOtence and absurdity wherever the
guide points them out. a late writer
says of Tom Moore, who had as little
conscience in literature as elsewhere !:
"He reviewed the poems of Lord Thur
low in that slashing, hectOring, Omnip-
otent way which Jeffrey thought the
ideal of criticism, and which our fathers
liked, as they did boxing, bull-baiting
aud cock-fighting. A glance at the re-
d view II VIC LA4A ~ AEA II a AAAtA0oa+e-N -
which no quarter is given-will satisfy
one that Moore was as clever and unfair
as could be desired in an Edinburgh re-
viewer, A. D. lSl4.n Macaulay whacked
and smashed in the same way, and in
I Bidck1UOOd and Fraser criticism was
often a mere pretense for deXtrous aud
/ laughable sarcasm and ridicule, In
which the sole consideration was the
amusement of the reader. Truth, JUS
/ tice, the encouragement of literature
and art, were no more considered than
the feelings of the victim, who was
/ deftly butchered to make an English
| holiday.
/ This is a business which no honorable
or generous man will excuse. But the
reason that fOrbids il imposes the su-
preme condition in the tone OF all criti-
cism, that il shall be humane. A man
who goes TO the Academy exhibition
intending to write about the pictures Ia
a newspaper, can, Of course, write as he
chooses. But there is none the less q
way in which he ought to choose tC
write. He ought, for instance, TO cou'
slider the immense power at his dis
I pOsal. He has the opportunity Of speak
| ing to thousands and thousands Of per.
Sous more than can see the pictures, Ol
. WHO Will nave dug oLueI dssoclalloL
with most of the painters names THAI
such as the article gives them. On tn,
other hand, the artists are men hon
esty aud faithfully engaged in a pursuit.
by which they hope to make a living
They may have mistaken their vOca
tion. They may be conceited aud igno
rant. They may paint very bad pic
lures, in the opinion Of the critic. Blu
the offender against the critics cOncep
J tiOn Of what true art is aud what tn
: true canOns Of art ought to be Is no
) like an offender against the moral law
J whose eanOns are engraved upon th
) common consciousness OF men. SO ia
5 as canOns of art are concerned, il is
r difference Of opinion, aud the made
e quate performance is at least an homes
{ intention. To be smart at the eXpens
3 Of the painter, who cannot defend him
: self, and whose work does not defen
= him, because those who laugh at th
= ridicule do not know whether tn
picture be good or bad, is merely to be
4 literary bully, and to lose the respect q
r those who love fair play.-EditOT's Eds
J Chair, in HarPer's Magazine for June.