DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.61012#0026
xxiv
57/? JOSHUA REYNOLDS.
a more firm and lasting foundation than that on which they
formerly had been placed.”
It is worthy of note, as yet another proof of Sir Joshua’s
justice of judgment and objectivity, that, speaking of portrait-
painting {Discourse HL), he puts it low in rank among the
various departments of painting. He strove with all his power
to elevate English art methods, to lead artists to practice what
he named the “ grand style,” and it was on this account that he
ever and always held up to imitation the gods of his idolatry,
Michael Angelo and Raffaelle. What he writes concerning
pittori improvisatori may well be laid to heart to-day when
Impressionism threatens to swamp genuine study and careful
draughtsmanship. Indeed, looked at from all sides, Sir
Joshua’s Discourses worthily take rank among the English
classics, and it has been truly said that “ with Reynolds’ litera-
ture was the playmate of art, and art became the handmaiden
of literature.”
That detractors have not been lacking is a matter of course,
but Reynolds, like others, can console himself with Goethe’s
lines-
“Die sclilechsten Friichte sind es nicht
Worau die Wespen nagen.”
Some of these objections merit reproduction. Who can read,
for instance, without a smile, the words of Blake, that sweet,
childlike mind, which was at once so penetrative and so
uncritical ? The smile will of course be one of gentle sympathy,
such as one ever accords to that wayward genius. He writes
in his notes-
“ Whether Reynolds knew what he was doing is nothing to
me. The mischief is the same whether a man does it ignorantly
or knowingly. I always considered true art and true artists
particularly insulted and degraded by the reputation of these
discourses ; as much as they were degraded by the reputation
of Reynolds’ paintings, and that such artists as Reynolds are, at
all times, hired by Satan for the depression of art ; a pretence
of art to destroy art.”
Once Blake finds a passage after his own heart : “A firm
57/? JOSHUA REYNOLDS.
a more firm and lasting foundation than that on which they
formerly had been placed.”
It is worthy of note, as yet another proof of Sir Joshua’s
justice of judgment and objectivity, that, speaking of portrait-
painting {Discourse HL), he puts it low in rank among the
various departments of painting. He strove with all his power
to elevate English art methods, to lead artists to practice what
he named the “ grand style,” and it was on this account that he
ever and always held up to imitation the gods of his idolatry,
Michael Angelo and Raffaelle. What he writes concerning
pittori improvisatori may well be laid to heart to-day when
Impressionism threatens to swamp genuine study and careful
draughtsmanship. Indeed, looked at from all sides, Sir
Joshua’s Discourses worthily take rank among the English
classics, and it has been truly said that “ with Reynolds’ litera-
ture was the playmate of art, and art became the handmaiden
of literature.”
That detractors have not been lacking is a matter of course,
but Reynolds, like others, can console himself with Goethe’s
lines-
“Die sclilechsten Friichte sind es nicht
Worau die Wespen nagen.”
Some of these objections merit reproduction. Who can read,
for instance, without a smile, the words of Blake, that sweet,
childlike mind, which was at once so penetrative and so
uncritical ? The smile will of course be one of gentle sympathy,
such as one ever accords to that wayward genius. He writes
in his notes-
“ Whether Reynolds knew what he was doing is nothing to
me. The mischief is the same whether a man does it ignorantly
or knowingly. I always considered true art and true artists
particularly insulted and degraded by the reputation of these
discourses ; as much as they were degraded by the reputation
of Reynolds’ paintings, and that such artists as Reynolds are, at
all times, hired by Satan for the depression of art ; a pretence
of art to destroy art.”
Once Blake finds a passage after his own heart : “A firm