Evening star., 1922-01-19
|ART JUR|ES DIFFER !.
W|THPUBL|C VIEWS
Too Inclined to Place Tech
nique Above Appeal, Says
T. w. GiImer.

The suggestion that the art-loving
public should be represented on the
turies making the prize awards in
such exhibitions as the Corcoran
biennial. now in progress, Is made by
Thomas W. Gilmer of this city, in a
letter to The Star. Such juries al
ways consist of q certain number of
professional artists whose canons OF
judgment are often entirely mex
plicable TO the average gallery visi-
tors. day or two ago The Star
published the result of the 1922 popu-
lar referendum on the pictures. As
invariably, q really good picture won.
hands down, but as always the popu-
professional artistic verdict.
Lovers of art who are not pro-
fessionals prefer a picture that they
can understand" Mr.. Gilmer writes.
with them the good points are the
drawing. harmonious coloring. depth
peals to mind and heart. They like
u picture that tells an interesting
story.
Place Judgment on Technique.
Professional artists call this
mediocrity. With them the i'm
portant points are composition and
technique. Technique has been de-
fined as the form comm only used fos
method of execution in fine art They
admire thing that is without beauty
merely because great skill was re-
quired in its execution. Artists sas
that it is impossible TO define a work
OF art or 10 give reasons for their
award Of prizes
The Sunday Star of December 1s.
1921. contains beautiful reproductions
OF eight Of the pictures in the ex-
hibition this year. including three
prize winners. To the art-losing pub
lie the prize winners do not appear
to be any better than some Of the
others. There are reliable art critics
who are not professional artists, and
the art-loving public considers that
IT might with propriety be represented
Mr.. Gilmer refers specifically to
the biennial exhibit OF 1sl6-1s17,
when the first prize was not re-
garded with favor by the art-loving
public: IL was consider ed by some 10
be without beauty or meaning" MIR.
the prize winner that year drew
i laughter from most exhibition
visitors, Wise even art critics and ar;
lovers generally deprecated the
Opposes Layman Judge.
To have a iayman on a jury of Ave
might please the public. one eminent
local art authority asserts, but could
influence the verdict only slightly if
at oil. while to have two or three
iaymen would not be fair to the
artists. He takes the following
attitude:
IF your boy is sick you don't want
lsyman prescribing for him, but the
best physician You can procure. If
involved in lawsuit you send for a
good lawyer. not a layman. and when
a iayman is asked to judge a painting
the artist suffers
Another angle to- the question is
emphasized: Ii layman were chosen
for jury, the selection would not be
some "unknown"-some casual gall
lery visitor or citizen taken by
cflance-but would be man or wom-
an with a certain knowledge of art.
either a critic. collector or amateur
AS soon as q man begins to learn
something Of art, it is pointed out. he
begins to judge pictures from the
artists standpoint; the more he
knows. the more technical becomes
his basis of judgment. so that tn,
very object sought by the inciusior
Of = lRymaB. namely. the participa
tion OF the point of view OF the gen,
eral public. would automatically b
defeated.