The record-union., 1896-09-18
IN THE ART GALLERY.

1Iduu prize, merltOrtOuS DISPLAY, SOIO
medal to Eva Withrow. San Fran
cisco.
Silver medal for portraiture to Henry
Raschen, San Francisco.
Flower and genre painting. silver
medal to Edith White, Pasadena
Marine painting in oil, silver medal to
Frank L. Heath, San Francisco.
Landscape in oil. silver medal to r.
D. Yelland, San Francisco.
Pen and ink work, Silver medal to
Jules Pages, San Francisco.
| Amateurs and Students Gallery, to
Mary Hinkson Of Sacramento for por-
trait and figure work, silver medal.
Water-color work, silver medal TO NJ.
Urunnela, San Francisco.
CrayOn, charcoal and pastel, silver
medal to Oscar Kunath, San Francisco.
Statuary and modelling. silver medal
to Flora Vivian.
| Drawing by School Of Design, silver
medal to the Mark Hopkins Institute.
San Francisco, affiliated with State Uni
versity.
No award of medal for best free-hand
or mechanical penmanship by any COM
mercial college for want Of competition
| Design OF machinery, silver medal to
1 0dSA L ICC 4NiSA III 0SAOOi.
| Design Of city residence, silver medal
to A. w. Campbell.
No awards Of medals in Glass VII. for
best mechanical drawing Of any
kind" and for "best mechanical and
free-hand drawing for want of compe-
tition.
Cash awards in part compensation for
displays by art workers have been made
as follows:
Sacramento Night School, with medal,
$40; best drawing by minor, Arthur
Atkinson, So; statuary, Rupert Schmid,
S25; Flora Vivian, SIS: Minnie Smeg-
ner, $40.
Etching and India ink, etc.-Pages SS,
Piexotto So, Hyde So, Strong $4, Bruen
S4, Goodloe $5, Tebs 81, Hutchinson "a,
Huber So, Patterson So, Treat 81 90,
Dickinson So so. Fifty dollars in this
| CLASSY
| Pastel, oil, crayon, ETC., Students
Gallery-Hinkson SO, McCalla 81. Lo-
gan 50, Vockel 81, Greenlaw Sd, Bruen
SO, Slocum So. F. McC. Richardson 50.
Huber 81, Reno So Waggoner 81. Cor
die Gilman 50, Grant 81, Crouch $4,
Thompson So. Mrs. E. L. Gray's work
not entered to compete. Billings ",
Porter 50.
| General gallery Of artists work-C D.
Rhodes So, A. w. Best So. Annie Har-
mon S5, H. R. Bloomer $50, M. Straus
| SO, E. c. Peixotto SIS, Grace Hudson
| S5, G. Gadenasso $40, Rosie Lewis 80,
Nellie S. Goodloe So, Mrs. Richardson
SS, Chris Jorgensen $40, Mary Herrick
Ross So, Mrs. L. Hickox S4, Eva With
row 500, William Hubacek $15, Kate
Maher 50, E. De Saisset SS, j. F. Pages,
ST., S5, Sarah E. Bender $6. Marian Hol-
den So, c. D. Robinson S15. Joseph
Cleary So, Alice B. Chittenden S12,
Thomas Hill $25, Martha Patterson 50,
H. w. Seawell $40, r. D. Yelland $50,
Sister Bethenia 81, Henry Raschen $40,
Mrs. NJ F. Mention $40, Nellie Treat $40,
Helen Hyde $40. c. Dalton Bond So, B.
Robayashi So, H. c. Best S5, ]. A. STAN
ton $50, Sidney Armer $40, CaIthea G.
Vivian SS. H. j. Breur So, j. D. Strong
S15, J. N. Partington So, Oscar Kunath
$15. F. L. Heath $50, Jules Pages, Jr..
81, Amadee Joullin $40, c. Bodwell S5,
Edith White $12. c. Won Perbandt $12,
NJ De Urnnuella $40. M. Hutchinson
$40. Miss H. E. Coan S5, Regina Q. Kane
S5, c. G. Judson $40. Mrs. NJ. F. Pettis
S.. Miss Lou Wall IS. ]. Martinez So,
L. P. Latimer $15 Elsie Vockel -,
Anna F. Briggs $S, Miss De Neale Nor
gan &C. Hugo Fisher So. ]. r. Dickinson
So, Mrs. T. ellison S4 A. P. Niles 50. E.
| Warren So, Lillian Candlin S4, Miss
Blanch $40.
Saisset's "Etud de Dos" we have
spoken Of as a good example Of figure
painting. That Is. may be true. and
probably is. But 1t is a poor subject.
| q f;ct clo Tho
figure Is far from attractive. There is
little delicacy Or grace in 1t. Some
consider it absolutely vulgar and
study of the piece leads us to modify our
views and hold it to be suggestive of the
gross. The position is not one that is
pleasant It brings out the bony struc-
ture too strongly, the line Of the verte-
bra is too distinctly marked and the
bust is not graceful. to put it mildly.
While 1t may be true to model, and thus
| be worthy the commendation that it Is
strong and we'll colored, it will remain
that the figure is poor. the pose inele-
| CANT, and the presentation Of the figure
| gross.
One can we'll understand the difficult
les that were encountered by Superin-
tendent Stanton In hanging this GAL
| lery There is too much vacant space
| aloft: it is barn-1ike and raw. The
| lighting at night Is not what 1t should
be, and no hanging can be effected un-
der it and not give rise to dissatisfac-
tion Next year the lines of artificial
light should be in sections that may be
set at different nights and distances
and shifted to suit conditions. This
would not be difficult to arrange with
| flexible feed tubes If gas is used, while
with electricity 1t will be no trick at all.
| The loft-like space above the gallery
| should be at least partly closed in. III
there was a fifteen-foot hood from the
upper lines projecting into the building
it would be a great improvement II
properly tinted.
For the Agricultural Directors must
| the environment of a picture for its
success as upon it's intrinsic merits.
Then, too, the catalogue, or rather the
premium list, needs reformation. For
| instance, the word best" should be
stricken out wherever it occurs, and
there should be complete separation of
| classes now intermingled. Why should
| the word human" appear in the sched-
ule before the word figure? Why not
leave the reward for figure painting" ?
| Why class still life, flowers and genre
painting together? Why mingle profes-
| sionals and amateurs? How on earth is
S1,nerintendent Stanton to tell who to