The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-06-21
and the polyglot system Of education take the
place Of the English fundamentals in the
primary schools.
THE NUDE IN ART.


the proprietor of the Girard House because Of
the introduction Of oil paintings of four fe-
male figures, which have been placed in posi-
ton in the arcade entrance Of that hotel.
These figures are said to represent the four
seasons but have been declared 'tmore snowy
than artistic" The picture of Spring repre-
| sents young woman, from whose naked
ness q group Of cherubs are unwrap-
| ping the thinnest of thin wells, and
who is falling over backward, much as Venus
is described to have fallen in Shakspeares
poem of Venus and Adonis." Summer" is
depicted by means of three nl-shapen females
about to take bath. In the foreground one
of them entirely nude stands with an apology
for garment, which she has just removed
held high above her head, while in the back
ground the other two sit upon a messy bank
and dangle their toes in the water. eau
tumn' shows group of nude females and
cherubs reveling among punches of grapes
with impossible leaves, while winter is repre-
sented by an entirely nude young woman sit
ting half frozen upon pile of snow; her
guitar, with broken string, she has thrown
away, her fingers being too cold to play.
These members she holds to her mouth and
crouches down within herself apparently un-
mindful of little naked cherub who is offer
ing her muff.
The pictures, aside from the artistic license,
are said to be very ''cheap," and have been
laughed at by all the artists in the city save
he who painted them. The Girard House has
long been family hotel Of good reputation,
but the innovation here named has threat
ened to destroy it's prestige. One gentleman,
who has wife and daughters there, indig
nantly declares that he will not keep his
family in house where the proprieties are
outraged in this manner. 'Those paintings"
he said, 'tare fit for bar-room, possibly, but
such vulgar things are out of place in the en-
trance lobby of a respectable hotel. 1t gives
the place disreputable appearance as soon as
you enter the door, and the impression that a
visitor gains of the character Of the house
from looking upon them is such as do not
care house to have in which my wife and
daughters reside"
The picture that has started public dis
cussion on the other side of the ocean
is one now on exhibition in the Gros-
venor Gallery, London. "a British Matron"
attacked it sharply in a letter to the Times,
and from that the discussion has become gen
eral widespread feeling prevailing that de-
cency and modesty are outraged by the display
Of such productions. The arguments presented
for and against the nude in art are not new.
1t is an old-new question that never has been
settled, and probably never will be. The
chief danger in this matter is that the divid-
ing line between the chaste and the vulgar
is so hard to draw. Those who stand up for
nude art argue that flesh of itself cannot be
immoral, nor can it's display be immoral, if
done by an artist. Certain it is that no one
thus far has stultifed himself by declaring
that all nude pictures not licentious are toler-
able. For, if there be no offense in nudity in
cart" then the exposure Of what some feel
obliged to denounce as the indecent
paper" of disreputable female min
strels, and the like, cannot be crit
icized, and bar-room "art' is not
Objectionable except to prudes. The Journal
does not argue that art is not excusable in
presenting the human form divine unadorned;
but it does insist that those who object to
such exposure have grounds for objection in
that no man can draw the line where the pro-
duction of decent nude figures is to stop.
AS it is, the youth of the world are
growing up with their eyes greeted
upon every side with pictures of great
er or less merit exposing unclothed human
forms. Manufacturers Of wine use elegantly
colored cards Of the kind. So have brewers,
and makers of every kind of drink. And
now the proprietors of patent medicines,
taking the hint, call attention to their rene
dies by means of flashy and vulgar displays CT
nude women. The windows of shops, the
walls of stores the waiting-rooms of
hotels and railways, the very fences
along the highways are illustrated
with such productions of Fart" No
one could escape if he would. Is it, as claimed
by New York paper, that ''the best that can
be said for clothes, outside of their necessity
as protection, is that their use is polite,
and art has nothing to do with the polity of
society" 1t may be, however, that the in
terests of society have somewhat to do with art,
and that landlords cannot plaster their walls
with questionable pictures "typifyingy the