New-York tribune., 1900-12-02

motive II ms theorN OF composition applied 10
portrabure Sir Walter would, Of course. retort
on the FIRST count that there is scarcely any
LUX at al between Sir Joshua's graceful trees
or stately vistas and the naturaIisrn which we
are all agreed 10 identify with modern land |
scape, which is 70 say with landscape art in its
truest estate. We may grant that a BACKGROUND
of landscape was painted by him in the same 4
spirit which governed his employment Of classi-
cal architecture and draperies for the furnishing
OF canvas. His landscape was artificial in
essence. But taking IL as SO much decoration
how potential il is! A great deal OF the magic
ot Sir Joshua resides in tust his enhancement
Il the Incompatible grace OF eighteenth century
English womanhood by the combination Of it
with the suavest and most decorative glimpses
Of beautiful scenery that portrait painter not
q landscapst ever achieved. Gainsborough's
landscape backgrounds not only set off the fig
uTes, but are in themselves mastery. Sir Joshua
reduces nature 70 the function OF a piece Of
drapery mere mass OF color an adumbra-
don Of form, hut the expedient is so consum-
mately managed IL is SO in harmony with the
whole scheme OF the portrait. that We cannot
complain. His constructive gift comes out
strongly in this field. He puts his trees where
they VIII do the most good 10 the design he
manages his skies and distant fields, as in the
"Niscountess Crosbie," with just the touch that
sufices 10 make the portrait a composition. The
child and the dog in the Honorable Frances
Harris" would enchant the beholder though
they were set against bare background but
there is no doubt that as it stands the portrait
gains enormously from the scenery which il in /
cludes.
There is another point on which We may take /
issue with Sir Walter; and here il is not a mat 4
ter Of omission, but a Of his saying the I
wrong thing. His preference for Gainsborough /
Zoe justified ir VA gEhf frb is nm
necessary now 10 discuss hut even though 4
Reynolds painted women and children with less \
insight than his rival disclosed, il is really in
JuecioUs 20 pit them one against the other in .
this province. Gainsborough had deeper SYM /
pathy for women and children, no doubt; he /
could feel with them, and, as we are told in /
this volume. Sir Joshua observed them keenly. 1
hut too judicialiy. storing up in his wonderful \
memory the carriage Of their heads. the play Of
their limbs even the rreachery Of their sudden |
looks. He translated their obvious qualities into
terms 81 line and color" Precisely and that is |
All that we need ask him to do. II was in doing |
this that DE was in harmony with his surround
.rss. painting people as they liked TO be seen
AS they liked 10 he seen on canvas. so they took
pains 70 be seen in all the relations Of life al
least in those aristocratic circles which provided
The great portrait painters with most OF their
models II might be fanciful to argue that
Ihysiogn0my had changed hut il certainly does
seem Il the great ladies and DISTINGUISHED
men q Sir JoshUa's age were far less striking
ID feature Jhan they have been in some other
eQochs. This, al all events, is the testimony Of
The whole company of portrait painters. The .
women were beautiful the men were handsome
but II there was opportunity for painting them
when on their guard in dramatic moments Sir
Joshua, despite Sir Walter Armstrong; argl-
meuts 10 the contrary So far as men are con-
cerned, failed 10 let US know II. His least con-
ytnuonal poses sun smack Of the studio First
ail last, there is curious repose about his por-
tfaits; even when in the "Niscountess Cros-
lie." there is vivacious movement the vivacftv
ls measured. The animation Of the portrait is
AaIt within bounds and you feel chiefly the
-rry elegance which SIR Joshua preferred be-
.--se il was what he saw around him all the
tme. He was a Fashionable painter when
fashion mad immense authority. and II Is always
t-a ch4sten-d emotion of q worldly world that
te gives you. This we maintain is one Of his
t-st claims 10 distinction. He was a great
PAINTER In the technical meaning Of the words |
na handled his brushes with amazing skill. he
Has capable dTaUgh. AN and a brilliant col
CRISIS but most of all he had the mental equip
r-ut and the style which enabled him to in
..ru-et for Us the external bravery Of an his
t.ric social pageant, wherein We may add he is
arer akin than in anything else 10 Van Dyck
He had the balance he had the taste he had