The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1907-11-13

The average modern European State
empowers its Government to spend some
money every year on works of art. By
what principles should the Government
be guided in these purchases? Should it
try TO get the absolutely finest works
in the market? Then its whole credit
might be exhausted by a single acquisi-
ton. Should it aim rather at playing
Lady BOuntiful to more or less hardup
artists in the community? A semi
official answer just published in France
a that the Government should do
neither OF these things, nor anything else
whatever except to act as a keen art
dealer who buys low" where there is a
prospect Of a rise. This answer has the
merit Of cleanness and IL ~postulates a
perhaps unexpected coincidence of COM
mercial and artistic interests. for when
looked into it will not be found neglectful
Of the latter.
The place where this answer appears
is one in which a good deal Of sensible
discussion of art topics has presented
itself before now, the introduction to
the French parliamentary report oil the
budget scheme OF the Ministry Of Fine
Arts for the ensuing year. The report
for 1908 has been distributed 10 the
Chamber within the last few days, and
NJ. BUYAT. who has drawn up the in
PRODUCTION on this occasion, proves him.
self an author Of no small interest and
originality. He skins ver a wide
range Of topics, some Of an almost meta
physical hue, some tense with immediate
practical advice. For instance, he con-
trasts the attitude of a monarchy-he
means the regime Of LOUIS XIV.-to art,
with the attitude Of the present repub-
lican Government. He supposes that
the obstinate prejudices" of a monarch
in favor OF a given school are not TO be
expected from a democracy. A demo-
cratic Government, liable TO constant
changes, cannot, he thinks, attain TO
such consistency or independence Of
Judgment. He lays il down that tho
modern democratic State must adopt the
criteria Of tho experts who prevail at the
moment. It must be more sensitive to
currents Of taste" Whether this is q
disadvantage or not he does not decide,
but he points out that the democratic
Government is at all events more disin-
terested. Il does not ask the artist to
glorify this or that cabinet, but the cOun-
try. Because Of It's very momentariness
It viii not impose It's personal tastes
despotically.
Perhaps NO other country makes so
large an assignment for annual art
purchases a. France. When n. BUYAr
comes to this practical topic IL Is not
quite clear how his metaphysical prem
lssos ht In with his ethics Of action,
though we may surrnise the connec-
ton. Anyway, he has q distinctly con-
crete abuse 20 tilt against, IN abuse not
unknown elsewhere. French Deputies
arc continually getting at the Minis
try 10 buy for provincial museums the
productions OF artists In their local con-
s~tituencies. and beyond doubt a vast
deal OF the national fund Is thus diverted
70 improper ends. Horrors In stone and
paint, donated by tho State, cucumber
the provincial museums; veritable ma
terializations OF that sad thing political
graft. Against this malpractice M.
! BUYAr lifts up his voice In accents not
undeserving our own democratio atten-
ton. And tho businesslike principle
which be sdysncss as the solution Of the