The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1914-01-04
SOME NEW BOOKS.



The artist lives in his works. and
cannot very fruitfully be sought In the
external facts Of his life. What his
contemporaries or posterity need to
know about him. beyond an authentic
attribution OF his works, Is a collec-
ton Of such facts as are collected in
Nasaris Lives" the earliest work OF
It's scope in modern literature. In an
cient literature there is nothing Of
the kind. The contempt Of artists.
3maed with the enjoyment and admiral
ton Of art, IL. according to modern
notions, obtrusively obvious In Plu-
tarch. One might have expected the
combination in Roman of the En-
pire, and indeed ,one finds 1t there. il
IL shrewd remark of Violet lie Due
about the Roman of the Empire: He
treated the whole question of art with
q sort Of good nature. II ] may use
the word. wn1cn is moi without It's
charm, ana cer,ai,i'y has tras CT
grandeur in IT," But Plutarch was a
Greek and wrote In Greek, and, far
removed as he was in date from the
masters Of the Periclean time. you
would expect OF him more generous
appreciation Of the glories of Greece
ana the benefactors of mankind when
the Periclean artists were. Decidedly
you do not get II. Though you have TO
rely on him for such data as you have
about the buildings Of the Acropolis.
you cannot help remarking In MIN
also the sort of good nature" which
the French critic attributes TO the
imperial Roman. This new and hand
some volume, Charles Follcn Mckim,
by ALFRED HoYr GRANGEK ,Houghton.
Mifflin Company, reminds us how far
we have got away from the Roman
or Plutarchian point Of view, even II
w have no Periclean works to write
about.
Rather unhappily. the present biog-
rapher has taken a view OF MS subject
which disables him from doing nun
critical justice to II, and would disable
him, even II ne had the necessary en-
dowment and equipment. What one
expects in a critical biography OF this
kind is a critical detachment OF the
subject, all the more that he was
member Of a firm" Artistic individ-
uslity Is to this generation OF readers
the most interesting thing about WORK
of art. To detach md define II IL the
grateful task Of the critic. But II Is
the first condition Of individuality In
n work OF art that 1t should be done
Mead & White all went as the work
of a firm while all three partners were
living and working. There were two
strongly marked individualities in 1t,
those OF Charles f. Mckim and stan
ford White. not to speak OF the third
partner, who has kept himself out OF
the scope OF individual critical consider
alton not less by modesty than by sur
vival.
Combining ones self to the two part
aers who have lost their immunity, the
Individuality OF McKim was one and the
Individuality Of White was another. The
individuality Of the author of the Bos-
ton Public Library and of the Agricul-
tural Building at the Chicago fair was
one thing: the individuality OF the au-
thor Of the Madison Square Garden
and of the Century Club. let us
say, was another. Anybody who
remembers the buildings can con-
fidently say that. 1t would be de-
lightful to have first class French
man, for example, define and differen-
tiate the two and show how Mckim's
classcism was innate and radical and
Stanford Whites superficial and ex-
trinsic. The partners themselves quite
recognized their differences. 1t was at
q public dinner at which "Dick" Hunt
was praising McEim for the Madison
Square Garden that McKim interjected
whites" and it was the only loud word
that he said at that dinner. But Mr.
Granger saves himself cerebral wear
and tear by treating the output of the
firm as one thing, and even adducins
the front Of the Century Club as char
acteristic work OF "the firm" though ii
is inconceivable that McKim should
have designed 1t. AS our suppostitious
French critic might say: THE indi-
vidualty Of firm. That does not see
itself"
Still, we owe something to Mr.. Gran
ger in the way of information about the
work of the architect whom Mr.. Arnold
Bennett calls "the Incompatible Nc
Kim" OF information, or rather of re-
minder. there are some freely pic
turesque and more or less Gothic cot
tages down on the Jersey coast. the cot
tage I'm which Garfield died being one
OF them, which attest his early interest
in Gothic. The information is thai
given in a tribute here printed from
Mr.. Il. :. Peabody of Boston, from
which it appears that on his arrival II
Paris, still in the time of the Secont
Empire, Mckim found himself quite
out of touch with the academic incul
cations Of the BeauX Arts, and still
from his New York apprenticeship, dis
posed to look upon the Gothic rsviva
as a revival, as indeed ii might con
ceivably have become, and not as |
galvanism. Mr.. Peabody explains b!
saying that Mckim was alread.
more in sympathy with Rome thai
with Paris, but even this Is by II,
means explanatory Of the Helleni
classicism Of his later work. Even whel
the motive of his work was borrowe,
from the Romans McKim was apt L
Hellenize 1t. His building at the Chi
cago fair, distinctly the most classica
of the contributions to the Court o
Honor. and having no rival in this re
spect but the Art Building. which At
wood reproduced from a French design
was evolved from the motive of tn
baths OF Caracalla, and induced an ap
quotation from Swinburne on Lander
And through the trumpet OF a child Of Rom
Rang ths pure music OF the flutes of Greece
In his ripest and best work II ma,
>oi rIx ha ooi1 hat OF i'm .,lo ictv