DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.68073#0411
ENGLISH, EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 385
an earlier Blue Boy by him exists in the portrait of his nephew, Edward
Gardiner, painted in 1768.
“Here in Master Buttall is Gainsborough’s first great invention
both in matter and manner, almost a challenge to Van Dyck’s reputa-
tion, but painted in a scheme of color Van Dyck never thought of,
and would probably never have tried if he had. In handling it is
Gainsborough’s first link with Watteau in its broken tints and fear-
less lightness of handling of the drapery, in its fascinating play of
light and shade, its delightful silhouette and cast shadows. It is
difficult to imagine how the composition could be bettered; the pic-
ture, by itself, had no others come from the same brush, would have
immortalized the painter.”
Finally, Sir Walter Armstrong agrees, too, with the Stephens theory:
“Those who cling to the old traditions quote the style of The Blue
Boy in support of the notion that it could not have been painted be-
fore 1779. I confess that, to me, it now seems, after much and close
observation, to point the other way. The loaded impasto, the ruddy
carnations, the tendency to brown and beyond it in the shadows, the
preoccupation with force, seem all to belong to about the same period
as the group at Knole and to be inconsistent with the feathery light-
ness, freedom, and gaiety which mark Gainsborough’s work towards
the end of his life. The most significant comparison may be made
with the National Gallery Mrs. Siddons. Here again blue, and a
franker blue than that of the Master Buttall, is the dominant note.
But the painting is more assured, the handling lighter and more
prompt, the shadows more transparent, and the figure, as a whole,
truer to its illumination. It would not be fair to dwell too much on
the contrast between the flesh painting of The Blue Boy and that of
the Mrs. Siddons, for I fancy the peculiar white bloom of the latter’s
skin is due to the fact that she sat in her paint. But it must not be
overlooked that even in the portraits of pretty women, that of Eliza
Linley for instance, painted about 1770, there is a fullness of color we
do not find ten years later. Taking everything into account, it seems
to me that the old tradition of The Blue Boy must be given up, and
that the Duke of Westminster’s picture, so far from being an answer
an earlier Blue Boy by him exists in the portrait of his nephew, Edward
Gardiner, painted in 1768.
“Here in Master Buttall is Gainsborough’s first great invention
both in matter and manner, almost a challenge to Van Dyck’s reputa-
tion, but painted in a scheme of color Van Dyck never thought of,
and would probably never have tried if he had. In handling it is
Gainsborough’s first link with Watteau in its broken tints and fear-
less lightness of handling of the drapery, in its fascinating play of
light and shade, its delightful silhouette and cast shadows. It is
difficult to imagine how the composition could be bettered; the pic-
ture, by itself, had no others come from the same brush, would have
immortalized the painter.”
Finally, Sir Walter Armstrong agrees, too, with the Stephens theory:
“Those who cling to the old traditions quote the style of The Blue
Boy in support of the notion that it could not have been painted be-
fore 1779. I confess that, to me, it now seems, after much and close
observation, to point the other way. The loaded impasto, the ruddy
carnations, the tendency to brown and beyond it in the shadows, the
preoccupation with force, seem all to belong to about the same period
as the group at Knole and to be inconsistent with the feathery light-
ness, freedom, and gaiety which mark Gainsborough’s work towards
the end of his life. The most significant comparison may be made
with the National Gallery Mrs. Siddons. Here again blue, and a
franker blue than that of the Master Buttall, is the dominant note.
But the painting is more assured, the handling lighter and more
prompt, the shadows more transparent, and the figure, as a whole,
truer to its illumination. It would not be fair to dwell too much on
the contrast between the flesh painting of The Blue Boy and that of
the Mrs. Siddons, for I fancy the peculiar white bloom of the latter’s
skin is due to the fact that she sat in her paint. But it must not be
overlooked that even in the portraits of pretty women, that of Eliza
Linley for instance, painted about 1770, there is a fullness of color we
do not find ten years later. Taking everything into account, it seems
to me that the old tradition of The Blue Boy must be given up, and
that the Duke of Westminster’s picture, so far from being an answer