International studio (18.1902/1903)

Z.t3-z^?y

Dutchmen. But it was not merely in this im-
portant matter that the painters of the mid-Victorian
era were lacking. In their method, or lack of
method, of putting on the paint they were often
grievously at fault; while rarely, if ever, had they
any sense of style.
One thing particularly Lavery may be said to
have learnt from, or in any case to possess in
common with, the great American artist to whom
he acknowledges indebtedness. AH his mature
work shows plainly that he has laid well to heart
the ancient maxim, art is to conceal art. As to
that work, it seems to the present writer it
speaks for itself; and that it would savour of
superhuity to dwell at any great length upon
qualities which must at once appeal to anyone
possessing pretensions to sound judgment. Per-
haps, however, it is scarcely accurate to speak
of the appeal Lavery's art makes as being imme-
diate. In common with all art which has intellect
and trained sensibility behind it, one needs to
become atuned to it before the full measure of its
power and beauty is appreciated. In ordinary
picture exhibitions, where the hanging is commonly
an offence to the very name of art, no hne work
has any chance of being judged fairly on its
merits unless it be of that assertive character—the
word is not intended necessarily as a term of
reproach, and certainly in instancing Mr. Sargent's
contributions to the latest Academy exhibition no
such reproach is implied — that it throws into
obscurity its environment. The fact that so many
of Mr. Lavery's later and best pictures have not
been seen at ah in this country places many of his
admirers at a disadvantage ; but after passing some
hours in the delightful studio Lavery now occu-
pies, and for some time past has occupied, in
Cromwell Place—a studio, by the way, built for his
own use by the late Sir Coutts Lindsay, and
occupied thereafter by Sir James Linton—one be-
comes increasingly conscious of the truth of the
general proposition just propounded. Undoubtedly,
to use a hackneyed expression, Mr. Lavery's art
grows on one. More and more, as one looks at it,
its subtile charm, both in the sense of rehned and
elegant craftsmanship, and in the sense of spiritual
and inteliectual qualities, pervades the onlooker.
Power is there in full measure, but it is power
chastened by rare and peculiar tenderness. Lavery's
art conveys the sentiment of that highest kind of
strength which is always allied to cbarity. The
colour is satisfying; sensuous it is, but not to the
point which impinges upon virility. Everything
which leaves Lavery's easel has the stamp of

hnality and spontaneity upon it which marks the
master hand. Much might be added to what has
been set forth above; but surely, if the above be
accepted as the bare truth, it is unnecessary to
extend it. It is scarcely needful to register the
fact—it would be presupposed by the knowing—that
Lavery studied in Paris. A pupil of Bouguereau,
in 1883 VA/%w7*.f was hung on the line
at the Old Salon and purchased, I believe, by a
French sculptor of eminence. From that time
onwards Lavery, until the formation of the New
Salon, commonly known as the Champ de Mars
Salon, was a constant exhibitor at the Champs
Elysees exhibitions. Personally, if my memory
does not play me false, it was the Z?7-Z<%g<? /Tf GTfj, a
picture now in the Pittsburg CoIIection, that, in
1883 or thereabouts, hrst attracted my attention to
Lavery's art; though where I saw it I cannot say.
I remember, however, writing about it enthusiastic-
ally at the time. I know that it made a forceful
appeal to a large number of amateurs and critics,
and to the more emancipated of the younger artists
of twenty years since. I confess that, so far as rny
memory is to be trusted, I should place it on a far
higher pedestal than the Z?7-/</g<? <//* LTZq repre-
senting Spring, painted in the following year, at a
time when the young artist, in common with the
men working at Julian's generally, was much in-
huenced by Bastien as a modern painter and by
Holbein as an old master. I will allow, however,
that a more intimate acquaintance with the 18S4
F?7*/<2^g <y U7-<?.f tends to increase one's respect for
it as a sincere, if scarcely inspiriting, study frorn
Nature. Still it does not possess the sesthetic
quality which belongs to the earlier and better
known work, painted at a time when the artist
was drawing more directJy on his own innate
artistic impulses.
So far as the general public is concerned, one
may say, perhaps, that ^4 TUnw A*a7-/y, painted,
I believe, in 1886 and exhibited at the Royal
Academy in 1887, was the work which hrst brought
John Lavery into prominent notice. This picture
was subsequently seen at the Champs Elysees
Salon, and was awarded a gold medal. Several
years later it was exhibited at Munich, and was
ultimately purchased by the National Pinakothek
of that city. As touching this picture I cannot do
better than quote the opinion of Mr. David Martin,
himself a painter, set forth in a work on the
Glasgow School of Painting. Mr. Martin writes :
" The subject of the ZF7777A A<27-/y was a very charac-
teristic one for Lavery, as it offered a TwA/'such
as he delights to paint, and one wherein the
113