New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-12-04

TIE NEW AND THE OLD IN ART

George Bell Sons. New-fork; Macmillan q
SIR FREDERIC LEIGHTON. BART, p A..
An illustrated CHRONICLE by Er1es, FSo pa
Iii. "a London: George Bell & Sons. New-iork:
Macmillan co.
In spite Of its title. THE Art OF Neasquez
Mr. r. A. NJ. Stevenson's large volume on the
great master Of Spain is opened with expec'a-
..ons Of much beside art criticism. OF much MS
tory and biography. So big n book seems 10
promise volumnous record OF the Spaniaro
career. no matter how copious the author might
be In details OF pure Interpretation. But the puih
o~ the book proves 10 be due to It's thick paper
and many illustrations: the pages OF the text are
oomnaratjvely few and they prove none too
many to devote to Mr. Stevenson's impression OF
TIE ar; of velasquez Broadly speaking. 1t is
,ust ana insnirjng impression. We would deduct
from It one troublesome element-that underlying
defiance and even reprobation Of all academic
tradition without which no modern writer on
Velasouez seems to think himself complete. Mr..
Stevenson ought 10 know that he could not weak
Ell MS claim for Nelasquez by accepting the fact
that there have been other excellent painters IN
the world other kinds Of art. Anxiety to elevate
his master above all suspicion Of ever having
been contaminated by the awful rites OF classi-
csn, disturbs the serenity OF a book whose sub
ject requires no partisan defence.
But after all it Is hard to blame Mr Steven
so,. To know Velasquez we'll as he knows him.
is 10 refuse to believe in the mans mortality IL
r. the immortality Of Velasquez that takes hold
Of one his extraordinary power and vitality.
What Mr.. Stevenson says OF him in the seventh
chapter Of this book is brilliantly exact "Whcther
YOU look at a point Of his (Velasquez's) compost
ton cclortng. modelling or handling he says
IL appears always TO have been decided by the
aspect Of each picture. and not by preconceived
principles. His composition Is never a pattern
forced upon nature. his drawing is not an effort
20 realize abstract contours. his color is not
The harmony Of positive tnts understood by
,nillner his brush changes with his Impressions
ms the tones of a mans voice with his emotions"
Tha; is an acute and conclusive expression Of the
light IN which Veasquez must appeal to trained
and syInpathetic eye. and save that we could
fpsre the fling az classical art In the reference
to the .niner the passage is one which alone
vould give value TO Mr. Stevensons book There
Ere many like it--passages which. in bringing to
the surface the essential qualities Of the art of
Velasquez enforce with authority the d:ctum
that his example Is peculiarly one to show the
younger artists Of America and England the true
ra his 20 success
The danger les IN the obliteraton by Velas-
cuez Of the painter who approaches him. He Is
dangerous model Just because ii is so tempt
Ing 10 take aim as one. as q master 10 pe lEll-
tated instead Of as a teacher OF universal pre-
cepts The painter who follows him is wofully
apt to fall beneath the spell Of his style before
IL has even begun to grasp the great veracitles
which are the groundwork Of that style. At
tantive perusal Of Mr.. Stevenson's book will
60 Far to obvi1te this catastrophe. for he is con-
cerned with the groundwork: his analysis OF this
painting or that is painter-like in the extreme,
following with the utmost subtlety and pre-
csion the technical characteristics OF the
PAINTER. and making the latter's art as trans
parent as it needs to be made or can be made,
by any critic The truth is that 1t is really
q transparent art. the art Of genius. and. there
fore. not to he reduced TO a rule Of thumb, but
eimple withal, and so direct, so lucid. so spon-
taneous that II is easily evaporation TO a
painter trying 10 study II and profit by 1t in
practical way. II looks easy. Its trumphs
are so inaccessible to a modern brush. Its tri-
unphs yes, but not all its virtues. Those are
capturable. for they are the elemental virtues
10 which alluson has just been made-truth
simplicity. clarity and force.
There is no painter in history with whom
artifce counts little with Velasquez Mr.
Stevenson speaks with profound insight when
he saws that his composition is never pat
tern forced upon nature" The masterpieces Of
the Prado every of them illustrative
of the beauty that is truth. They most
sympathetically interpreted we have shown
in Mr.. Stevenson's text. They have received
naturally less adequate treatment in the il
!, Illustrative side of the voume-tha- was in
/ evitable-but the score OF photographers which
adorn The book have been admirably printed
and in the soft brown tint of the ink used they
recall with considerable accuracy and subtle
depth the qualities Of the originals which are
reproducible by the camera. In the back of the
1s,,.arN
process blocks. which are of slighter value, but
they serve good purpose, nevertheless, as
memoranda for the student. Taken as a whole,
the book has a value for the student which we
wish could be given wider scope by the publ
cation Of a cheaper edition And vet. when
q is remembered that this would probably eX-
clude number Of the photographers. there
is nothing to do but to express gratitude for
the volume as IL stands. The publishers have
given it a handsome form. type and paper being
all that could be desired Mr. Stevenson can
be congratulated upon having had every as
sistance In his task. the task Of presenting An
old master so persuasvely to the public that
his vitality modern qualities visible at
once.
In turning to the new book on Sir Frederic
leighton one is tempted 10 observe that II makes
visible at once the vitally antique qualities OF
modern master. In the presence Of picture by
Vslasquez you feel though II might have been
painted yesterday. A design by the president OF
the Royal Academy seems as though II might
have been drawn by some Hellenic sculptor ages
and ages ago Probably no two men chosen from
the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries respec-
lively could be antithetical than Leighton
and Velasquez to another. Yet the 1uxta-
position OF the two proves nothing more conclus
1vely than that the seventeenth and nineteenth
centuries are at when their artistic represent
a;ives preserve their artistic recttude. The spon-
taneity of Nelasquez is modern. the immobility
Of Leighton is antique. but their distinction is OF
no particular time. the distinction Of rising to the