DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.870#0025
IS
■with their legs, and the same disproportion occurs in the legs of chairmen when compared with their
arms. In models of this class there is an unremitting rigidity and contraction of muscle, arising from
hard labour, which destroys the appearance both of grace and elasticity.
The best models are to be found among the higher ranks of society, whose bodies experience just
sufficient exercise to preserve health and manly vigour, and whose muscles consequently shew none of
those harsh and abrupt intersections before mentioned. This extreme rigidity of muscular fibre is
remarkably perceptible in the arms of blacksmiths, watermen and canal diggers, where the tendon
of the biceps muscle becomes so stretched by violent and constant exertion that the muscle shortens
itself to such a degree as to ascend half-way up the arm, assuming the form of a ball, and giving
the lower part of the humerus, just above the elbow, a poverty of appearance and an unnatural
want of substance.
If it be necessary to adduce any further argument to expose the nonsense and absurdity of
the beau ideal, the following extract from a modern critique on Duppa's life of Raffaelle, will furnish
a pretty ample specimen.
The critic observes, " Notwithstanding the opinion of so great a judge (alluding to Algarotti)
Raffaelle was not exempt from faults, and the greatest of all seems his want of ideal beauty. It is true
he copied nature wherever he could find her, but he copied her as she was. Hence he is inimitable in
painting men, but he is not so exquisite in painting women and angels. We allow, (continues
the critic) that the heads of his Madonne are beautiful, inimitably so, but that is the effect of
beauty in the expression, and not beauty in the abstract. The fact is, Raffaelle altered nature
for the better in regard to expression, but left her as she was in regard to beauty, occasionally we
*S^
■itLujIiii iMMl Ml
■with their legs, and the same disproportion occurs in the legs of chairmen when compared with their
arms. In models of this class there is an unremitting rigidity and contraction of muscle, arising from
hard labour, which destroys the appearance both of grace and elasticity.
The best models are to be found among the higher ranks of society, whose bodies experience just
sufficient exercise to preserve health and manly vigour, and whose muscles consequently shew none of
those harsh and abrupt intersections before mentioned. This extreme rigidity of muscular fibre is
remarkably perceptible in the arms of blacksmiths, watermen and canal diggers, where the tendon
of the biceps muscle becomes so stretched by violent and constant exertion that the muscle shortens
itself to such a degree as to ascend half-way up the arm, assuming the form of a ball, and giving
the lower part of the humerus, just above the elbow, a poverty of appearance and an unnatural
want of substance.
If it be necessary to adduce any further argument to expose the nonsense and absurdity of
the beau ideal, the following extract from a modern critique on Duppa's life of Raffaelle, will furnish
a pretty ample specimen.
The critic observes, " Notwithstanding the opinion of so great a judge (alluding to Algarotti)
Raffaelle was not exempt from faults, and the greatest of all seems his want of ideal beauty. It is true
he copied nature wherever he could find her, but he copied her as she was. Hence he is inimitable in
painting men, but he is not so exquisite in painting women and angels. We allow, (continues
the critic) that the heads of his Madonne are beautiful, inimitably so, but that is the effect of
beauty in the expression, and not beauty in the abstract. The fact is, Raffaelle altered nature
for the better in regard to expression, but left her as she was in regard to beauty, occasionally we
*S^
■itLujIiii iMMl Ml