The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1896-01-29
THE coo-Goo ART CONTEST.

Providence to compete in the great por-
trait painting c%ontes', with His Honor
the Mayor as the subject, are the follow
ing named: Mr.. BREUL, Mr.. NORTON,
Mr.. ARNOLD, Miss SWAN and Mr.. JACK
SON.
We trust il shall not be deemed any re-
Election on these painters that we print
their names thus conspicuousiy. So
far as we know they may be all quite able
to paint a portrait of the Mayor that shall
bs satisfactory, even beyond the measure
OF satisfying the needs OF a municipality.
"City work" in other lines is, according
TO the proverbial philosophy OF Goo-GJo-
ism, i1ev itabIy less worthily performed
than that for private corporations or in
dividuals, and too much ought not to be
expected OF an art work any more than
OF any other contract, but We should be
disposed to the belief that any OF these
artists would paint quite as faithfully
poration as they would for a private indi-
vidusL. Mr.. BREUL is a PAINTER OF
acknowledged repute and there are some
examples Of his excellent portrait work
In town. Mr.. NORTON is one of the
younger artists, but he has already done
exceptionally good work. Mr.. ARNOLD is
a SIX illed veteran OF the brush, and Miss
SWAN has produced very many beauti-
full pieces, though We do not associate her
with portrait work. Mr.. JACKSON has a
number of Mayors portraits to his credit
already, we believe, and they speak for
themselves. The five artists are all right.
What we do not understand, however, is
why the selection should be limited to
five, or indeed why 1t should not be un-
limited. We nave in mind several artists
Of at least equal proves with the five thus
favored by fortune who ought to have
koon osIral 40 aA-Ganfa,, laaa not utanI
for a narrow partizanship in art. And
think of what a grand thing II would be
to have a portrait painting contest open
to the world In this connection we may
assert that THE News art department,
which produces the handsome portrait of
a handsome young woman on the outside
page OF this issue, is entitled to some
claim of recognition as a possible COM
petitor by reason of having already prac-
ticed on the Mayors portrait and pre-
duced a Der OF striking pictures of
His Honor in the dear delig htful past of
political discussion.
We may here take occasion to express
our sympathy for the Mayor h will be
compelled to sit for each and every one of
the competitors. Or will it be provided
that he give sittings at which all the ar
fists will attend? Or will this last sugges-
tion be impossible, since each artist may
want to put His Honor in a pose different
from all the rest or throw the light on
him from a different window, or drape
him in a different way?
What can the Mayor do about 1t? It
would appear that he is helpless In the
matter, the unfortunate subject OF the
art committees win and WITHIN, and the
victim OF a doubtless iBsatiate rivalry Of
five holly competing artists. For IL must
be remembered that while this Is to be a
portrait OF the Mayor, It Is by no means
to be the Mayors portrait. 1t is the city's
portrait that 1t is to be. The distinction
and the difference are plain. What kin
of n portrait ii is TO be is none OF the
Mayors business. The art committee
is the only authority on that matter.
And for the benefit, not TO say the
amusement, Of a great public, we have
pleasure in printing again the names OF
the art committee that each n every
one OF them may receive his due share of
the glory that attaches TO the inception
OF the large and unique scheme OF the