Studio: international art (1.1893)

The Royal Academy (Second Letter). By A. Besnard

painter) for landscape, and for the sea or the
Thames such powerful artists as Mr. Hook, the
painter of cliffs, Mr. MacCullum, Mr. Moore, Mr.
John Brett, and Mr. Wyllie. No one more than
Mr. Wyllie will give the impression of this river,
where float, sending out before them a ruddy
foam, the great boats which look like strange
floundering monsters.

I think I have established what the English ideal
of art really is, represented in its charm and ele-
gance by Sir Frederic Leighton, in its searchings
lor colour by Sir John Millais, the much regretted
John Pettie, and Mr. Orchardson; and also, I
imagine, that I have sufficiently indicated what
part Mr. Burne-Jones and Mr. Watts have
played in the domain of the pure idea, guided
always by the same ideal in the research for a for-
mula which will ever remain the ambition of
delicate minds more attentive to the tinklings of
their own individual ideas than to the great
voice of Nature. It now remains for me to show
with what new forms this ideal will clothe itself.

The glass has turned and reflects other images,
I might almost say other worlds. A new kind of
production, a new school, is gradually changing the
turn of our neighbour's ideas. They who were
mystic are about to become realists. Conscien-
tious, almost absurdly particular as they were,
they are becoming freer—and disrespectful. They
also, like ourselves, wish to show large nude figures
containing nothing—nymphs weary of their forests
and goddesses without employment. Why should
this be ? Why this new direction, and this call
for new formulas ? All borrowing is a sign of
fatigue in a generation, and not a need. If one
could only tell them : Rest yourselves awhile, pro-
duce no more for a space. Breathe and look
around you. You have so far.thought of nothing
but this, think now of that; you have looked at
nothing but the human face, look at Nature; you
have seen nothing but generalities, incline
yourselves towards detail. A rejuvenation would
ensue, which, leaving intact the genius of a people,
would prevent the confusion of disguises. It is
never with impunity that one country lends its
genius to another. The one which borrows
becomes like the people who solicit the help of
their neighbour's armies. The strong establish a
garrison among the weak, whom they invade and
absorb. The Italians of the sixteenth century
were quartered with us for some two hundred
years. The English school of 1830, of which I
have spoken before, did not absorb us, but sug-
gested faculties which were already with us in
a latent state ; the proof is that these have given us
masters. Dutch art and Italian masters absorbed
Reynolds so little that his finest portraits are
those in which he is the most himself—that is to
say, a painter and an Englishman. As, for ex-
ample, in the admirable full-length portrait in the
gallery of Mr. Tennant. Another example, more
recent: Mr. Whistler, with whom the influence of
Velasquez is very visible, is not absorbed by it;
it has but come to reinforce the capabilities of his
112

genial organisation. Pure sources revive. Ingres
will always be a sure guide for the genius of a
people, whatever it may be, because he only
appeals to what is most pure in art, admiration of
Nature. An English painter may, for the same
reason, always, without weakening himself, apply
M. Degas' art to his conceptions. But to be in-
fluenced by it and to copy it are two entirely differ-
ent things. To be inspired by a master is to pay
him just homage ; to copy is to misunderstand
him. Unfortunately, this is the commencement of
nearly all the schools.

What, then, is to become of this new evolution ?
As for myself, I frankly admit I do not think it
necessary unless it leads English painting back to
its keen and persistent qualities of days gone by.
Without going back so far as Reynolds and Gains-
borough, I would like to find once more that
instinct and research of emotion which made
Wilkie's work so successful. I personally would
wish to see them use once more the carjiation of
their women, the allure of their men, and, above
all, to have them banish for ever from the domain
of art those things which, on the pretext of con-
scientious studies, they show us under the name of
portraits of badly dressed women and old porters,
dull productions and worn out, of a poor genera-
tion without style, which have for the last thirty
years so delighted us in France. The movement
is, however, not only to be seen in the Academy;
the New Gallery, which shares with the Grafton
and the New English Art Club the honours of
dissidence, gives us many examples. It is as a
matter of fact in the Grafton that this evolution
seems to be the most evident. But the Academy,
being the oldest institution, should be used in the
first place, so I shall speak of it before the others.

Firstly, one is struck by a distinctly strong ten-
dency towards the nude, of which I must give the
precedence to a great demon of a Truth whose
" nombril " follows your eye right across three vast
rooms. This fact is characteristic enough, for but
ten years ago Sir Frederic Leighton exhibited—as
a daring experiment—a woman's torso seen from
behind, seated on the sea-shore; nudity clothed
with precautions which only the President could
allow himself. A year later, I think, he showed a
great Venus, whose amber body reminded one of
Titian's figures. It is, then, to this man of taste
and culture that we owe the introduction of the
nude into the English school of to-day. It is
thoroughly established there, and will doubtless
fructify.

Besides, this Truth of which I have spoken,
and which shows a certain skill, has already a com-
panion : an Eve, powerfully formed and well
enough painted, and who was certainly born in
Diisseldorf, as the Truth was in Paris. I would
say the same of Mr. Hacker's Circe. Looking at
this mythological canvas which seeks for grave
seriousness, I cannot help thinking of what the
fantastic John Etty would have done with it. He
would have been more logical in his madness than
Mr. Hacker in his wisdom. These three women
sufficiently represent the nude at the Royal