International studio (55.1915)

Truth and Personality in Art

to-day would not attempt to express his idea in a
way so hopelessly out of tune with the modern
spirit. Ibsen would not write the lengthy descrip-
tive matter to be found in Scott’s novels. Only
mediocre writers would do this to-day.
As there are those who are more drawn to the
art of the past than to the present, so there are
many who prefer the works of the earlier writers to
the writings of contemporary men. Many favour
the productions of the past through familiarity
and because of an inability to grasp the meaning
and value of a new idea. Generally speaking, it is
easier for most people to live in the spirit of a past
epoch by contemplating some human expression
of that time than it is for them to attune their
imagination to the spirit of the present or future.
Although I shall not speak much of the techni-
cal side of art, I may say that personality greatly
enters into technique. An artist of mean percep-
tion may paint broadly because it is the fashion—
that is, place upon the canvas broad masses of pig-
ment suggesting some natural form, yet the result
conveys no breadth of feeling or significance; in
fact, it remains just paint. Another artist im-
bues a similar mass of pigment with meaning and
bigness without apparent difference in treatment.
In studying the art of Athens or of the Renais-
sance it is evident that the quality which has made
it enduring was evolved from a strict adherence to
living truth. Of course, much work not inspired
by life has been produced throughout the ages,
and because the artist has taken advantage of the
public’s disposition to value only art that is
reminiscent, it has, in its time, received wide
popularity. A reversion, therefore, to an art
which never was inspired by living conditions is
likely to produce, if possible, a more deciduous art
than that based on the vital art of a former age, as
in the case of that keen and vigorous classicist,
Louis David.
I have endeavoured to point out how important
in the moulding of art are those elements and
phases of life which make up the spirit of an age.
The greatest of creators have expressed in their
work the spirit of their age. They have been
sensitive, unconsciously so, to the conditions
around them—political, religious, industrial and
social—and while these conditions cannot alter
the artist’s idea or the emotional side of his work,
they do affect the channel and methods of his ex-
pression. Emotions are the same at all times and
in all parts of the world.

We know how completely the art of Athens ex-
pressed the spirit and ideals of the early Greeks,
and what a perfect record it is of the uninvolved
intellect of the Athenian. The works of Titian
are equally a perfect record of a well-rounded
people. In them is reflected the loftiness of ideals,
the spiritual contentment and enlightenment of
the Renaissance. The art of that period suggests
the demand for true knowledge by a people physi-
cally and intellectually able to live lives of satis-
faction to themselves and to their country and
posterity. The great men of this epoch were rich
in discrimination and comprehension, and, by
being true to their own ideals, were constructive;
for such was their potency that they not only illu-
mined their own time but influenced art and
literature in the whole of Europe for one hundred
years and more.
Another element that enters into a great work
of art is the natural tendencies of the artist. They
may be realistic, idealistic, symbolistic, poetical,
musical, or mystical. These tendencies, or ways
of looking at life, incline the conception in certain
directions. The part they play varies according
to their power of insistence and the degree of
virility in the artist’s personality. This influence
of temperament is the most important of all dis-
tinguishing traits of great art, because it gives that
personal color which makes it easy to decide the
author of a fine work of art, whatever the subject.
The works of Goya, Gainsborough, and Raeburn
are good illustrations of this personal quality. No
painter is more individual than Goya; in the work
of no other artist does the temperament of the man
so predominate. There is a distinct individuality in
each of his portraits and, more than that, you feel
each person painted would be well worth knowing.
This may have been due to his good fortune in secur-
ing only interesting people to paint, but I am more
inclined to think that it is due to a certain reflec-
tion of his own interesting personality; for to know
the life, character, and disposition of Goya is to
recognize these qualities in his portraits. Despite
the distinct individuality in each painting, the fact
that it is a work by Goya and not just a portrait of
some one is what insistently appeals to you.
Goya’s portraits are not only good illustrations
of the expression of an artist’s temperament, but
his work was an innovation of a means of expres-
sion subsequently demanded by the mind of the
nineteenth century. He was the most modern
and original painter of his period. There is a cer-

XXVIII