New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-03-04
THE ROYAL ACADEMY.
ITS RELATIONS WITH SIR EDWARD
BURNE-JONES. ITS ATTITUDE TO ART.
AND THE CRITICISMS OF SOME
OF Its MEMBERS


Jones 50 long ago as last summer. Mr.. Glad
stone offered him baronetcy at tha' time ana
he declined T.. lie f2lt that there was sort OF
inc0ngrIity between his art and the tribute 10
II. Carlyle felt the same thing about his Lltera-
ture when Lord Beaconsfeld dangled a Grand
Cross OF the Bath before the eyes of the grim oid
Scot. He was enchanted with the compliment
as his lette. showed. but he refused II. No
doubt n. seemed t, himself, and to others. a
greater man as plain Thomas Carlyle. writer
of books than az Sir Thomas Carlyle, G. c. l..
And there was always a doub. whether Tenny-
son did well to merge the Poet in the Peer He
might have taken "Fluctuat nee mergitur for
his motto for the Poet did keep his head above
water. or above what the New Radical now de-
lights to call the Beerage.
Think I doubted the other day whence came
the impulse which lifted Mr.. Burne-Jones INTO
Sir Edward am now tod 1t was MI GIa4-
stone lie and Sir Edward are. 1t appears
friends AMI each has an admiration Tor 'hs
other. There is marvel in mat NV. "iau-
stones interest in art may not be profound. bu,
A. exists IT has always been doubtful whetheT
there Is any subject IN which he is not interested
II any unconventional art appealed to MN, Ii
might well be that Of Sir Edward Burne-Jones'
with It's purity its religious ascetlcism its sprtu-
aIity AT any rate he likes the artist, ana inc
artist likes him. Sir Edward unlike some or MS
brethren of the brush cares for other things IMAM
his art He is widely read. and always thought
he might have made a name in literature hao
he not preferred to make one by palntihg'
Preference It was not. imagine Art does not
live ny nrefere,ces but by the irresistible inn
pulse of a nature which finds there. ana ho'
elsewhere. its true expression. 1t is not an act
of will The man who chOo9es. who says 10 NM
self after deliberations Il will not be a lawyer
nor a doctor but a painter'-that man is bad
painter to the end or painter at all. bra
does not say to itself afte- delberatloh L VIII
not walk but fly 1t cannot do otherwise nor
can the artist To him. 10 the bird. nature
has granted wings and them he must.
But baronet with wings--is there. or Is there
not an incongruity? Yet never heard that sir
John Ma!s or Sir Frederick Leighton painted
worse pictures after they had been. as French
paper would have il, "ennobled" Nor Will Sir
Edward Burne-Jones. If he changed his NINA
family influences seem 20 have had something
70 do with It, He has who is on terms
Of some acquaintance with Lord Salisbury. Mr..
Arthur Balfour whom the father consulted, adj
vised him to accept. So ii may be assumed mat
In the bestowa and acceptance OF TINS coihpH-
ment party politics had no place nor influence. IL
is an odd blending of influences and personalities
which have had each some share In TINS latest
addition to the already toecably long list OF Eng
lish Baronets.-Mr. Gladstone, LORD SaIspury'
Mr.. Balfour Young Mr.. Phil Burne-Jones' NM
self painter: Dante Rossetti, IN MS grave
but vet living in the person of his most distin-
CT,ished disciple and finally Sir Edward burhe-
Jones himself. There are no less than 100 haro-
rets Of England and Of the United Kingdom
n,petv.two Raronets Of Scotland and siXty-four
Baronets Of Ireland.
The well-deseryed distinction conferred on MI
Burne-Jones has given rise, as might oe en-
pscted, to cavis. If Mr. Burne Jones Is TO be-
come Sir Edward Burne-Jones. Bart, why Is no
similar honor offered to some Of his ex-colieagces
OF the Royal Academy? ask some of the admir-
ers Of some Of these eminent artists. why ho'
Mr. Alma Tadema. or Mr. Hook or Mr.. Orchard
son? No doubt some OF them are worthy OF all
honor. vet questions OF this kind are always in
,,screat They give rise to other questions.
They give rise for example to this other ques-
t,on. How many Royal Academcians might be
made baronets or made anything, with the gen.
eral assent, either Of the public or or the art
world? 1t reminds one of the familiar challenge
In France TO name the members OF the French
Academy, IT to explain why the majority OF
them are Academicians. II is challenge se.-
dom accepted. never well met
The Royal Academy holds a relation 10 British
Art analogous to that which the French Acad-
envy holds the Literature OF France Mem
bership OF IL implies theoretically. excellence In
some form OF ant Perhaps 1t IL hardly fsiT
10 ask an American audience what standard OF
excellence IS implied or upheld by certain names
which. even in England, ara thought to confer
little honor upon this honorable body. Some o,
them are hardly known outside England, or QUIZ
side London. even outside Burlington House
The reputation of the Academy depends. how
ever no, upon is least good, but upon It's best
members or these, Sir Frederick Leighton. the
Cf- Joh Hat r.
onets Mr. Watts. we know. was offered
the same title the same time as Mr.. Burne-
Jones and declined II; for the second third
time have named three others entitled
by gen al consent to some such honor. Among |
the thrce Mr.. Alma Tadema Is. as a painter |
pre-enn n.
But II the inquiry had to be pushed. who is |
70 be named next? How many more are there |
who could be named at all without provoking |
a derisive protest? Thus far. we have got |
six names out OF forty. 1t is not a large pro-
portion. To select the least fit would be neither |
agreea BILE nor profitable. What one would like
10 know Is whether. ont OF the remainder OF
thirtY-four other candidates could be produced.
ard IL So vino? | mean. Of course candidates
who would not make Inc proposer look foolish.
There are certain names which have long been
though, to add no lus,re 10 the Academy; men
OF perfectly respectable character good fathers
OF families. punctual IN the payment Of rates
AMI taxes. full OF the most excellent intentions
even with respect to the ART of painting. but
unhappiy unable II paint or DO other work in
the domain OF art. and therefore ont OF place
In the Royal Academy. The most enthusiastic
believer in this Institution would not recommend
these gentlemen foi any such tribute as that
which Mr.. Burne-Jones has received. who is
not an Academic!an at all. Does the Government
then mean to east reelection on the Academy?
] apprehend not. But what they have done for
Mr.. Burne-JOnes is sort OF reminder to this
distinguished body that, as at present consti-
tuted, 1t does not exhaust the possibilities Of art
I'm the United Fingdom.
Beyond doubt. 1t would be a misfortune Y the
Academy did exhaust them: If British art and 1