Print collector's quarterly (12.1925)

ships is evident in all such plates, and his drawing often
superb. Yet when attempting the human figure he
seems to have abandoned the testimony of his own eye-
sight and to have relied upon the records of others.
Hence his failure.
The figures which are alive are the exceptions ; the
majority suggest an entire lack of interest in human
form on the part of their maker. When a landscape
appeared to demand the presence of some living creature,
one was introduced—nearly always in the right place—•
but as often as not appropriated from another artist’s
work. His drawing of horses occasionally shows obser-
vation, yet in one of the latest plates—Haddington—the
animal which does duty for a steed is so bad that it
utterly destroys an otherwise good plate.
Even though this plate were etched from a very early
drawing (as inscribed), or from Sandby (as suggested in
the Bannatyne Club notes), it is curious that the mature
etcher should have been content to reproduce such a
hopeless piece of drawing.
My intention, however, was not to pick out the weakest
points of these interesting plates—after all, the figure
was not Clerk’s affaire—but rather to try to do belated
justice to a notable figure in the early infancy of the art
in this country.
Clerk’s outlook was wide, and I am convinced that,
both technically and artistically, some few of his finest
plates entitle him to a definite and permanent place
amongst the etchers who count.

28