International studio (18.1902/1903)

To be strictly correct, one should speak of Lavery
as an Irish painter, for he is a Scot only by self-
adoption. He was born in the North of Ireiand,
and, being of Irish ancestry, no doubt the theorists
who beiieve that ali good things in British art and
letters come from the Celtic element in the British
nation,wiU claim him for their own. Again, it can-
not be said of Lavery that he continued, in any
binding sense, to be influenced by the ideals and
shibboleths of the artistic fraternity with which, in
his early days, he was associated. It is ever thus
with painters of marked individuality and power.
Strong painters cannot continue to march in Hocks,
save, indeed, in the sense that a strong painter
may lead a Hock. The tendency to herd with one's
fellow-workers is, of course, a wholesome one in
youth. It is, unquestionably, one way, and a
healthier way than the art school commonly supplies,
of learning one's business. But the individual
artist, sooner or later, and better sooner than
later, has to "gang his own gait," and play for
"the great lone hand." To say of Lavery, that
soon after he broke away from the somewhat
depressing influence of the naturalistic school—
the school of grey shadows and feeble contrasts—
he fell under the spell of James McNeill Whistler,
is to say nothing. Every young painter of to day
worth his salt has felt the influence of this remark-
able artist's individuality; as every painter who
immediately followed Rembrandt or Velasquez,
Reynolds or Constable, Diaz or Corot, felt the
inhuence of those commanding personalities.
But it is easy to see, and the painter himself
admitted as m^ch when the issue was directly pre-
sented to him, that he is wedded to no particular
school of painting; no particular style or method.
The discussion as to the respective merits of
impressionism, realism, naturalism, romanticism,
classicism, and all the rest of it, which even yet
causes wide divergences of opinion in many a studio
soon came to have no personal interest for him.
With Lavery, as with all great artists, the result is
conclusive. Any method which eventuates in a
strong and pleasing effect is legitimate. As an
illustration of this, though of course the particular
instance is comparatively trivial, involving no great
principle fought for by the pedants, his practice of
adding effects or suggesting emendations to his
unfinished works, by painting them on the glass
covering them, may be mentioned. But the more
particular consideration of the painter's methods,
and the registration in detail of his achievements,
must be reserved for a subsequent article.
f 71? & <f(772/27223,fff. ^

y^ESIGNS FOR COTTAGES:
) HSOMEREMARKSUPONTHE
^_y RESULTS OF "THE STUDIO"
COMPETITION A XXVIII.
Tnn response to this competition has been a
large one, and, after leaving on one side those
impossible and inept designs which are inevitable—
but arecuriouslyfewin the presentinstance,—there
remains a body of work of a very interesting nature.
The competitors will, we are sure, recognise that
sheer considerations of space prevent notice of
each one of the works submitted, and we hope
they will understand that, if their own does not
come under mention, it by no means implies that
it belongs to the category of those of which silence
is an adequate criticism.
There is amongst the various sets and sheets of
drawings an extraordinary divergence of feeling as
to the best and most effective method of setting
forth the various designs, and there is a sliding-
scale from the feeble and amateurish to such
strong, and individual work as " Ovon," and such
effective and workmanlike drawing as is shown
by " Bunny Hutch," " Twentieth Century," and
"Brush."
Fortunately, the misleading "architectural per-
spective," with its elements of what the draughtsman
knows as " fudge," is not very largely present, and
the competitors prefer to rely upon the more
veracious, if properly understood, plan, elevation,
and section.
The architectural thought exhibited is interesting,
and the subject set them was a well-chosen test, in-
asmuch as, of all buildings, such small houses as
these give an opportunity of manifesting the in-
dividual tastes and preferences of a proprietor or
client, as expressed in architectural terms. The
amount to be expended clearly indicated that the
cottage to be designed was not intended for occupa-
tion, at a remunerative rent by an artisan, a work-
man, or a farm-Iabourer. It rather meant that
the building was to be of the nature of what have,
of recent years, near London and other large cities,
been known as "week end cottages." These re-
treats, where the tired city doctor, barrister, or
merchant finds occasional holiday and rest in the
simpler life for which such buildings are adapted,
and under the blue sky, and in the purer air in
which they are built, are a distinct feature in
our life of to-day. Round London, especially in
Surrey and Sussex, are many of these pretty little

13