New-York tribune., 1919-05-18
The American Painter.
On the Way TO His Coal

their Hudson River contemporaries and
the difference is seen to be one of per-
sonal ability rather than of scholastic
tradition.
Homer Martin, for example, was al
ways a little in sympathy with the
Hudson River School He looked at
mountain and lake in Adirondack
scenery at the beginning in much the
same way. His key, so to say, was for
time in harmony with that of the
others. But Martin had genius. 1t
comes out in his color, but even more
IN his conception Of landscape art in
the large. He paints with stronger,
more powerful gesture Convention is
brushed aside. The artist is simply
himself. Accordingly his three land
scapes in this exhibition have a solid
lty and freshness which Clifford or
McEntee never knew. And his work.
early and late, is all of piece. His
surface manner developed. At the
centre he always was an original mas
ter. The Wyants here invite the same
comment, though, as it happens, less
interestingly. The examples of him
are not particularly suggestive. IN
ness on the other hand, invigorates
the theme. His three pictures are like
a biography in little "The PASSING
Shower" dating from 1860, when he
was only thirty-five, has all the traits
of the beginner, the exact notation Of
detail, certain carefulness which is
explicit in everything. 1t is, as a
whole, comparatively inert. But the
personality is there, genius is feeling
IT'S way. 1t foreshadowed in absolute
clearness the breadth or the "March
Breezes' of 1885, and the gorgeous
vlrtuosity of the "Sunrise," master
piece done only. two years before he
died Another man of his generation,
Wlnslow Homer, spans the same gamut
IN the same way from mis- familiar
Civil War picture, "The Bright Side"
to his brilliant "Driftwoodo of 1909
BY the time you have absorbed the
effect produced by these two painters
YOU realize that convention is indeed
harmless factor in the DEVELOPMENT
of art. 1t hurts only those who are
unqualified to rise above it. To the
true artist it is a negligible thing.
Personality and It's Alliance With
Technique
Our problem, then, is clarified so far
as its relation to things of convention
is concerned. Personality, we have
seen, is the root of the matter. But it
is not talismanic resource, something
which by itself will win the day. The
usefulness Of the bulk Of the pictures
IN the Macbeth exhibition lies in what
they have to tell us of the part played
by technique in the exploitation of per
sonality. What happens when to the
man we add his method? There are
two types involved in the answer. One
is the man who is mastered by his
method. The other is the man who
masters it. Mr.. Arthur B. Davies is q
good representative Of the first of these
types. In his earlier work he uses q
method like unto that which has served
an endless succession of painters, and
alike in the "Landscape" of 1890 and
the "Alchemy' of 19OS-one of the
most charming Of his echoes of the
Italian renaissance--he is able success
fully to express the poetic ideas which
are of the very grain of his talent
Then, IN 1918, he makes his "Dancers"
the sketch for decoration, and makes
it entirely according to the Cubistic
hypothesis. The beauty of his early
period vanishes into thin air. Method
invades him and strangles his art. To
see what it means to keep method
where it belongs, means to an end. let
us turn TO the most conspicuous figure
painter in the show.
AS regards technical manner there is
a whole world of difference between
Mr.. Dewings Hermit Thrush" a land
scape with figures painted in 1889, and
"The Spinet" which he produced in 1904.
Another note is struck again in the
Lady in White" which belongs to his
latest period But the differences are
not fluctuations. They do not mean
that in one case Mr.. Dewing has mas
tered his technique and in another has
lost control of it in a sad confusion.
He has known all the time precisely
what he was about; his method has
been like his brushes, something to be
taken up and modified, adjusted, as the
subject has required a change His
essential ability has remained stable.
1t brings up an important point-the
artists attitude toward his work. Let
painter once receive a thorough train
ing in his craft, and if beauty pure and
simple persists as his ideal he can, in
sense, leave technique to take care
of itself. That is, he will paint well
because his standard carries with it
kind of unfaiing spiritual support Let
him wander off after false gods, theorize,
develop fantastic conceptions of what
art is intended to be, and his technique
will suffer. 1t is curious to observe
how in contemplation of picture like
"The Spinet" one ceases presently to
dwell upon either technique or sub
iect. One is held, rather, by the inde-