International studio (18.1902/1903)

But the Glasgow men, unlike certain " schoois " of
recent years, rareiy incurred the reproach of paint-
ing by syndicate. The bond wbich held them
togetherwas, in truth, somewhat more debnitethan
that which united the so-called Barbizon painters ;
but their habitat, so far as a body of globe-trotters
can be said to have had one, was not, as in the
case of the Newlyn schoo!, let us say, a small, out-
of-the-way viilage. On the contrary, it was one ot
the most progressive and inteliectual cities ot the
British Empire. Undoubtedly the fact, weil known
to every one who has concerned himself about the
art development of our country during the last two

" FRAULBIN 1-IERTHA VON G.

or three decades, that among the citizens of
Glasgow men were to be found who, from one
cause or the other, became the possessors of, or
in any case offered, in the way of ioan exhibitions,
temporary hospitality to, the works of those French
and Dutch painters, who since the comparative
decline of art in Great Britain—a decline which
may be said to date from the time when the race
of giants terminating with Constabie came to an
end, a decline which was not arrested untii Cecii
Lawson made his appearance—had kept alive on the
Continent the hnest traditions of art, did exercise
a distinct infiuence, and obviously a stimulating and
elevating one, over that remarkable
coterie of painters loosely banded to-
gether in that busy city of commerce
on the banks of the Clyde.
It is to be noted, however, that in
the case of John Lavery, at all events,
the naturalistic ideals of Bastien Lepage,
the painter answerable for the Newlyn
School, were the ideals earliest followed
rather than the more idealistic realism
of the Romanticist School. Lavery's
earlier work may be said to have shown
distinctly the influence of the French
painter. At the present time there
hangs in the dining-room of his house
in Cromwell Gardens, sentinelled on
either hand by works of different
periods, a picture representing a
bridge, in which the dat treatment
and somewhat depressing colour-
ing 01 the British school is
conspicuously exemplihed. This work
represents spring, but,frankly,it is spring
without its joyousness and sparkle. It
is astonishing to the present writer how
different was the impression created by
works of this period when seen by him
at the timethey werepainted. In 1885
the impression they left on the mind
was not only agreeable, they moved one
to enthusiasm. Still, the reason is not
far to seek. They marked a distinct
breaking away from those worn out
conventions which, during the previous
quarter of a century, had satisfred the
current taste of the great bulk of artistic
amateurs in this country; when mere
prettiness, the superhcial treatment of
a few stereotyped effects, was the begin-
ning and end of the landscape painter's
aim. On either side of this picture,

BY JOHN LAVERY