New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-06-30

Cnce OF one or Two tnlnBs u - b
functorv character. His carrier per
formanees, coming back after con-
siderable lapse of time, IKE tne u.
Crocheting." wear well. IN ms roon'
VIC are conscious OF an authenuc per
sonality, expressing ltse!t IN interest,"
ing terms aad steadily beating ou' an
idea. ,tyle. The fact that he Is not
Nv any means uniformly successful
cannot lessen appreciation OF me
other. more important, fact that ne
has genuine inspiration. Hassam
invites, almost word for word Ihe
same comment, with an added anu
sion 20 the brilliance and charm OF MS
color. Though he. too, is uneven one
pauses in his room with posltiVe
gusto for the brimming lie, the enet-
giving light, that he puts into his pet
ures. Mr.. Carl Melchers IL not seen
altogether TO advantage through me
retrospective exhit N ne has made
There are too m his pa ntings
which are Of the AIRY Saloh. type.
Tbev cas-. an unfo to light athwart
his later. more Dc lar work. r. ".
Redfeld Is handicapped by the mo-
notony Of his art. Ills harshly reals.
tic winter scenes have the merit OF
truth and his technical readiness Is
bevond question. But landscapes so
yn;macira.ive as his lose something OF
heir effect when lot OF them are
crowded together. His room EFFORTS
respect. It yields no race OF mere de-
light.
For that boon we nave henceforth
20 range rather freely over all the
galleries. Further groupings are to De
observed. but rot on the same scale
Weir and Tryon, for example, snare
one OF the smaller rooms and tney
have a companion in McLure Hamilton;
| wish that Welr's ten paintings couIu
have had ten more added TO them' OF
twenty, his art is so fine and so pereh-
n,ally new, so clearly one OF the cIea-
live achievements Of our time. Inc
landscapes he sends are typical, put
they do not tell the full tale OF his
gifts; single portrait leaves the
charm of his work with the figure
practically unrecorded. Apropos OF
this omission. | may note, by the way,
a certain symbolical fitness in the cir
cnmstances. II is in landscape that
the American artist has always ex-
celled and is always winning new
laurels. a foreigner visiting the rair
and studying our school for the trst
time might be relied upon, ] think, 70
fix upon the landscape painters as me
men most decisively expressive, OF the
national genius. He would remark the
unqualified salience of lnness and his
eroup, and then, following the chrome
/ logical sequence, he would be struck
by the numerical force Of the artists
who have upheld their tradition with
/ ability and individuality. And how
securely they have grasped the prin-
/ ciple OF growth is shown by the ease
with which they have adjusted them
selves TO later developments in their
art. As the impressionist hypothesis
| has been advanced they have met 1t
! hall way-and have stayed Americans.
The landscapes everywhere in this
/ show mean just so many moments OF
stimulus and pride. ! do not describe
( them, for the list is too lang and, be-
sides, In the East, the artists who
make them are very familiar. But
/ there is one painter whose work, | am
| sure, Is not as we'll known in New
York as It ought to be. He is Francis
/ McComas, who paints the pines at
/ Monterey, the strange cities OF the
! desert and bleak. sandy scenes in
J Arizona. His color rests within a
narrow scale, dominated by tawny rus
set browns and yellows. He draws
/ his landscape forms in the simplest
/ fashion and with the right synthetic
! touch. His work has quality and
strength. It has made, for me. one OF
| the bright spots in the exhibition.
The figure painters. looked at in a
general way, leave a mixed impression,
which both gains and loses as it is
clarified. They confirm the remark
ventured above, that we have had
plenty OF men with a good habit of
| painting. Here again, in fact, there is
a pretty long list to be surveyed, II one
could undertake it, list in which such
names as those of La Fargo, Hunt.
Homer, Fuller. Currier, Bunker and
| Brush conspicuously shine, and most
of them are in tolerably representative
/ form at the fair. IL is significant.
| however, that as one remembers the
leading men so many of them carry US
! back of the present day. We have seen
that some of our best painters are
amongst those now at work and that
! they are in their prime. | have re-
ferred also TO some important abb
sentees, and all through the exhibition
we encounter men like George Bellows.
#. C. Frieseke, Robert Henri, c. W.
! Hawthorne and J. C. Johansen, or
women like Mary Cassatt. Cecilia
Beaux and Ellen Emmett, who know
perfectly well how 70 use q brush.
return to that point | have already
made about our freedom from a soul
| less sophistication. and repeat that in
painters Of fresh and sincere tech
meal habit we do most emphatically
abound. Yet some Of them have an
] exasperating way of hating on the
path to the true goal. Partly il is due
to their indifference to subject and to
design. The pretty girl is, Of course. a
blissful institution, but one can have
enough OF her prettiness and her
blooming frou frou. So confess that,
merely for change, it is with sigh
of relief that | turn 10 Mr.. Bellows's
pell NELL OF water rats in his River
| Front" Is it only by accident that he
paints them so well? | think not. He
paints the better because he paints
human life in the raw, not all smoth-
cred in the ribbons and roses of the
boudor or the properties of the studio.
Incidentally, he brings US back to that
hackneyed- blessed thing, tenn
permanent.
The trouble as diagnose it amongst
the horde of latter day figure painters
at the fair is that they do not think
or feel; they put no emotion into the
grain Of their work In color, in draw
ing, they are astonishingly adroit and
clever. And in both they are shallow.
Ones ultimate impression is a little
more than mixed-it is a trife puz-
cling. How is it that so many artists
who can paint so cleverly are never
theless provocative of so ephemeral an
INTEREST," Il is dispiriting question
suggesting as it does that the not alto
gether successful character Of the ex-
hibition Of paintings at the fair is 10
be explained by conditions quite apart