New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1879-05-17
NEW PUBLICATIONS.

20 present Il self punctualy with all the eNeehenVo'o
paper print aud illustration with which II sareo oh "
career Although at home IL is published weekly " gen
orally appears on this side the water in volumes i"uo
Of the nars that have been issued during the previous
four months This makes stout folio OF some 4oo
OF text together with large number OF ful-p'so i"
tratons-etehings, wOod-engravugs, reproducuons W
nrocess OF original drawincs-nserted horS 'd"' u"
the technical phrase Is, that is without any text
upon the back so that these illustrations are sul@oe
for tho PORTFOLIO or for framing. The present Noiune
of IA docs not contain any striking or interest
tng fu-page illustration, being In TINS respect III soh
what marked contrast TO the volumes that nave pIo-
ceded It. As a chronicle with pen and peheii OF 'ne
passing show OF the hour In the woru ol "'
a. a. however, as lively and as full as
over and fills with much spirit and sense OF
tin,eness a place not occupied by any lourna'
class at home or abroad. The most striking pec
uarity Of Tart as review, consists IN lIs eno' "
break throu Oh that national self-estecm III iu"'''
Art which has hitherto made the French refuse 10 ao"
that any good thing in the domain of the Arts mas come
mt Of the Nazareth OF foreign country SINCE tue pes
ir, ~ the century Obliged Grudgngly TO admit that
Constable and some Of the other English andscapstso Oh
the earv wears Of this century did something 10 excite
ip France the reaction AGAINST the classic uoSfna'iS
then prevailing, French critics nave Jealo"eS
,oo,ntained that the service rendered was
merely such q mental flip as strong man
might receive from an intelligent child or
from savage OF exceptional parts, but that' ue
impulse once given the landscape art OF France hao "u
vanced with such rapldty and spendor as long ago u
have left its English godparents out oil sgh'' AS it
hrnre paiung the whole body of French critics IooA
upon it as litteless than mpernence Tor any iorosn
artst 10 name himself in the same day with theH Owl
I'm that field and so be that any outsider should force
his merit upon the public recognition, it would he GEM
opsrated TO the satisfaction of the whole critical "or"
nj France that while his defects were those incvltaDe
10 his race his merits such az they were must DC "s
eribed TO the influence of French teaching.
LArt has taken up the cyedable task OF traSersinG
mis- unhealthy Judgment and pleads with much amabe
condcension the cause II the poor and outcas artists
of England and the United states. 1t has even an Eng
sh editor Mr. j. COmyns Carr who LOOKS TO II that inc
French are kept informed of all that Is going on III inc
higf" OF English art while the base performances Vi
Pbilis.inism are steadily yelled from observation by
deem veil of silence Philistia, however has lis own
organs and is not wanting the power TO blow It's own
tumpet so that on the whole, injustice IS DONE al
Though IL must be confessed that from the pages OF
Fart we get but onesded and unphilosophicai re-
mort of the English studios. Americans VIII De more
concerned with the position taken by TINS important
formal toward their artists Several short articles
have appeared in its pages referring TO the condition OF
or in America but the most important reference 10 the
suect was contained in the issue for December 1873
in which the United States Art E1hlbl III inc frenc
Exposition Of that year criticised at length Dy one
of the editors Mr. Charles Tardeu. The article, While
81 was not very favorable, and spoke Win
commendable freedom Of the defects and short
cominrs of our exhibit they appeared TO TIE
writer was discriminating in It's Judgment and moder
ate I'm Tone and had every appearance OF being AMI
mated by good will ana desire to do Justice 1t was,
therefore The TO be regretted that the writer's
treatment Of American artist should nave peeh
sueh as to excite great deal OF discussion, and to neu
traize by its obvious unaness much of the good that
might have been accomplished by the article as whole
Mr. Elihu Vedder the artist question, in courteous
note replied to the aumadversions OF his cr1uc MS
reply was taken up and considered Dy
several American newspapers and Journals Of repue
ana finally III the weekly number OF LAH Tor
March %, 1879, his complaint was answered
by the editor IN an article OF two pages de-
voted TO the subject Mr. Vedder's complaint was
founded as it seems 70 u.s. on entirely reasonable
grounds and editor OF L Art neither defends HIM
self successfully beters his case By the manner In
which he attempts meet Mr. Vedder's objections The
facts stated as simply possible these Mr. Vedder
had two pictures in the Paris Exhibition Of 1873, The
Cum4an sbyl " and " The Young Marsyas." Tue editor
of u Art addressed polite note TO Mr.. Nedder
asking the artist furnish him with drawing OF one
OF his paintings which he would publish In fac-simile In
forthcoming lumber OF his journal In case MI we'd
der could not conveniently send drawing, permission
was requested TO make photograph Of one OF them.
from which a drawing might be made Mr. Vedder gave
the desired permission to make the photograph, natur
ally taking the request intended compliment on
the part Of the editor Of LAT On the appearance OF
the number Of journal for December l. Mr. Vedder
was astonshed find that his permission TO photograph
one of MS pictures had been extended to photographg
both and that the sole purpose Of reproducing the de-
signs had BEEN to the words Of the journal ITSELF
to point out how far sstray from the true path Ill
directed casscsm has led an artist whose education has
not been complete enough 10 enable him to digest tie
old traditions. and whose originality is not strong
enough TO embody those traditions in new FORMS
"Wnch of these pictures is the more fantastic"
the writer declared, at would be puzzng to decide"
And he toen proceeded length, TO praise the
eugraver Mr. Charles Kreuzberger, at the expense Of
Mr. yedder saying In effect, that whatever merit the
pictures might be found to have IN these reproductions
was due to the engrayer and not to the artist One
xould saw" wrote the critic Mr. Charles Tarden. "tha
Mr. Kreutzberger had amused himself with giving
body TO the dreams Of Mr.. Ehu Vedder If the lead is
moi here changed TO gold, II these two very
bad ctnvases not made masterpieces, at
least the forms have more sharpness In the
copies than in the originals AMI the values are moro
marked. The draug ltsman has SHOWN himself more of
colorst with his pen than the painter with his brush
Those who saw these strange griSaUeS paintings In
black and white in shades ofany one sOmbre huei IN
the Exhibition would recognize them In these
reproductions"
Wesay nothing of the injustice done TO Mr. Vedder by
this comparison with the engraver We. on the other
hand do not wish t. judge Mr.. Kreutz5ergers skin by
the dull and unnteresing appearance of his work
reurodueed in L'Art by one Of those processes
which have done much OF late years to spoil the
beauty Of art publications, such as among others, the
6d.ette deS Bedn Art, by all odds the most useful
and once the handsOmest Of our time, and which
have from the beginning detractei from the artistic
value OF LArt itsets only artistic value consisting in
fits etclugs and occasional woodcut stil, after all
allowance made for the defects OF the medium through
which Mr. Kreu:zberger addresses u.s. are compelled
20 assert that LArt unddy exaggerates the superior
ity OF the ensravers that OF the artist All
those who are familiar with Mr. Vedder's pictures
see that Mr. has translated him win great
fithfunes neither setting down his defects with NAL
ice nor on the hand turning them into beauties