Evening star., 1926-05-20
THE NORTH WINDOW
By Leila MechIin.

Federation OF Arts. watch was held
in this city last week, and those IN
attendance were given opportunity TO
hear two of the leading exponents "
moderniStic Walter Iach
author of one OF the .SaneSt books on
the moderniSt movement WhlCh mas
been written, and himself both "A
painter and an etcher, and Ralph NJ.
Pearson, well known as an etcher
and "a leading modernist in the
graphic arts. Mr.. Pach illustrated
his talk on Leaders Of Modernism
by a series of stereOpticOn slides. Mr..
Pearson demonstrated his theory of
Continuity in Modernism" by q
series Of prints which he had as
sembled and also by drawings en-
larged and thrown on a ground glass
screen.
Somewhat to the disappointment Of
those seeking sensation. neither Mr..
Pach nor Mr Pearson gave expires
sion TO any really revolutionary
theories or showed works of a very
RAJ dical sort. Are the mOdernists s
gaining in sanity. or are the tradi-
tlonalists being won over? Perhaps
a little of both
What Mr.. pach and Mr.. PEARSON
insisted upon, most students Of art
return to simplicity Of expression.
an emphasis on structural strength.
and the element Of design Here is
n common meeting ground for the
two supposedly opposing camps, and
IN this direction modernism is lcad-
ing TO good results. TO he sure. Nr.
Pach objected to the phrase. Ira
dition of nobility and beauty in art. ="
but he acknowledged frankly and
fully a worth while heritage as n
governing factor in the art Of today,
Mr.. Pearson indicated by series OF
| lines knowledge OF design IN the
part of Raphael when he painted the
"Sistine Madonna" but whethe. this
knowledge was conscious or .ntutiye
it would be difficult TO prove.
Quoting Benedetto Crocc, Prof.
Narbeke Of Mount Holyoke College
declared that art has its source in
variably in the department uf intui.
is born. not made. lie did not. how
ever. discount the value Of training.
Let it not be supposed. however,
that complete agreement existed or ex-
lists between the eXponents Of modern
ism and those Of the older schools.
Mr. Pearson strongly opposed the
placement Of productions good
eproducti0nS- the works of great
masters in the public schools. and ad-
vocated instead the works OF modern.
even modernist. print makers, though
he did include in his category OF prints
worthy Of such placement works by
some Of the early masters which con
formed in design to the new prints.
In other words, II was not old art, but
art Of a certain sort. TO which he found
exception. John Sargent, he claimed,
was 30 artist at all because his paint
ings do not pattern. do not fit the
prescribed geometric design as do GER
tain works by Raphael and some Of
the early masters.
Also there were those who took part
in this discussion who strongly ad-
vocated the placement Of modern pic
lures in the schools rather than the
works of the old masters. lest the pu-
pills should he encouraged 10 attempt
TO he little Rembrandts and little Ii.
tians Following the same argument,
should not Shakespeare and Milton
likewise be banished lest We produce a
line of little Shakespeares and little
Millions?
This is obviously the day of the
child, and the Unborn genius of child
hood to create and TO produce was re.
peatedly stressed by speakers at the
recent convention. No longer is the
child under the law. but dictator. The
efforts of uninstructed children TO eX-
press emotions through the medium Of
line and color were cited as evidence
of progressive education. There has
not been time enough yet, however,
to point to actual result Certainly
the childish utterances illustrated
were by no means convincing; unla-
beled they were incoherent. unintelli-
gible.
There was complaint that the public
did not sufficiently patronize Cotem-
porary artists. that the sale of pictures
by cotemporary painters was proper
tionately small; but some one did Ven
ture to suggest that d reason for this
was that the painters were painting TO
please themselves. and that their
choice of subjects did not appeal,
Great art has always been called forth
by demand; great paintings have been
executed most often as commissions.
No art has fourished which has not
been coherent. There must. OF course,
be cooperation between the public
and the artists There is tendency
perhaps a weakness among modern
painters, to set forth that which is
ugly rather than that which is beau
tiful; it is easier to do. But. as some
one has said, art represents our
dreams come true" and the general
public demands at least a measure of
beauty in artistic expression.
Attention has been called to the fact
that we have almost no great novel in
modern times of labor. no great novel
IL, ~,
stirringly. the life of the laborer. 1t
may be that we have had no novelist
capable of writing such a book: 1t may
be that the reading public is still more
interested in tigments of the imagina-
ton, in kings and queens and high So
ciety. or the Sensationally vulgar COM
monplace.
There is a certain analogy between
art and novel writing. Many book s
are written; many pictures painted.
When the great book is written and
the great picture painted the public
will acclaim it's merit. OF this there
is no doubt.
X X X x
One thing stood out pronouncedly in
connection with the discussion of art
of Arts convention. 1t was a common
agreement that, after all, the thing of
utmost importance was art itself, and
that, no matter how the form varied.
art is very much alive and moving
forward Mr.. Medary, the newly elect
ed president of the American Institute
of Architects, stressed this fact in the
address which he made when taking
office at the institutes recent banquet.
1t is important, of course, that the
public should be educated, that taste
should be improved, that the masses
should come to recognize the impor-
tance Of art and it's relation to every
day life, but the real thing that counts
is art itself-art and the artist.
I.emordant. the great French paint
or who was blinded in the war, gave
utterance to this conviction when he
llo4ontod in the VOICE of a friend nit V