Evening star., 1894-04-07

I do not remember whether they were de-
signed by me or by NJ. Mercie who was
joint author with me of the group. / have
kept no model or sketch of it. But, If
mistake not, these two little figures hold
UP between them a shield on which there
should be an inscription. 1t is a common
enough decorative artifice in such groups
of Statuary."
what do you call the figures? Are they
angels or simply babies?"
You can call them what you please
They are certainly not cherubs. We usu-
ally say Amours. They are like the puzzi
SO common in Italian art. In Raphaels
Sistine Madonna figures serving the same
purpose stand for little angels. In all such
cases they are merely decorative. and are
modelled from real children"
The Big Heads.
THAT is one of the difficulties with the
figures in question. A great many people
think that the heads are far too large for
the bodies, If they are intended to repre-
sent real children"
The foremost sculptor of Paris again
looked puzzled A certain Indifference
which had distinguished his demeanor until
now, was lighted up by temporary gleam
Of curiosity.
THAT ought not to be the case, for they
were made from actual models. However
1 have always found in my experience as
sculptor that the impression made on the
public is good criticism of my work"
rs Ii not possible that the general pub
lie, not being accustomed as you artists are
to observe closely the proportions of nude
babes. may mistake the relative dimensions
Of the head?
The Public n Good Critic.
TT is possible. but the eye is the best
test If the people of Washington all think
that the heads are too big. should be in
clined to think there is truth in the criti-
cism."
"Stil, the figures were made from mod
els. measured and marked out?'
Certainly. They were"
''Then, how can they be wrong?"
81 do not know"
His interest lapsed again.
/ could not help admiring the matter-of-
fact fairness with which a sculptor, whose
work has stood the test of thirty years,
contemplated the popular criticism OF q
monument for which he Is responsible in
chief. To the end he came back on his
fundamental principle, that the impression
made onthe general public by work Of
art Is q valid and valuable criticism.
Meanwhile the great artist continued re-
moving the wet cloths from the clay on
which he was at work, commenting on its
destiny and meaning. The subject of the
babies heads he seemed to think dis
posed Of.
In answer to an observation of my own
regarding the prevalence of French art in
the United States. NJ. Falguiere remarked
that there was not now the same necessity
for Americans to seek their high art at for
eign hands
You have now many American sculptors
of great merit. Some of them have been
my own pupils, SO l am able to pronounce
on their work"
Fnlgufere on American SculptOrs.
NJ Falguiere is one of the three instruc-
tors in sculpture at the government school
OF the Beaux-Arts. He was specially warm
in his praise of Frederick Mac Monnies who
had the designing of the fountain at the
pills had an honorable mention at the Paris
Salon of 1889, and medal of the second
class two years later. He also spoke of
Daniel French (third-class medal of lS92),
and ne had an appreciative word for Mr..
Paul Bartlett, who was not his pupil. l
ventured to doubt inwardly, from a knowl-
edge OF the American art market whether
our felIow-countrymen Will be content to give
their own artists all the patronage which
NJ. Falguiere thinks they deserve. Things
strange and rare and from foreign lands
seem still chiefly in demand among us. But
1t was comfort to hear from such man
a sincere and unsolicited tribute to the
merits Of the Americans who have applied
themselves to the study Of high art, with SO
little announcement at home.
Without having seen the Lafayette mon
urnent. or even a photograph of it, 1 am
still inclined to think the babies heads are
right. NJ. Falguiere's whole career is an ex-
ample OF painstaking labor, and it has been
crowned with success. He is from Tolouse
In the south of France. When barely
twenty he won in the Paris schools the
coveted Prix de Rome. This was in 1859.