DOI article:
The editor's room
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.17190#0243
New Publications
structural, always functional, never being so swift only to fall back, under the impulse of Leonardo,
or so tortuous but that it serves to outline a figure, to linealism, having failed to describe the orbit of
or rational draperies, in motion. Botticelli could the artist, the author has been unable to make a
not help feeling the superiority of Leonardo, nor chronological distribution of his works. Now,
seeing how it was attained, and he set himself without chronological distribution, an artist's works
therefore to giving his own figures the utmost can give us only his quality, and not what we are
possible movement. But not having the scientific
and naturalistic training of Leonardo, he could
not articulate his figures, and consequently the
more movement he tries to give them, the more
awkward and, compared with the draperies, the
more motionless do they seem. Who shall say
how much his figures owe their effect of distress
and woebegoneness to this contradiction between
effort and power in the artist ? May this not
account also for Botticelli's almost entirely giving
up painting in his later years, and devoting him-
self to illustrating Dante with outline drawings
which afforded every opportunity for indulgence in
caligraphic line ?
This short analysis of Botticelli's elemental
principle will not have been found out of place,
we trust, if it has established what we must look
for in every work bearing his name that can
claim to be authentic. No matter what its types,
qualities, or faults, if it has Botticelli's line, it is a
genuine work, and consequently the picture which
lacks this line is not genuine, but merely a school-
picture, imitation, or copy—precisely which to
be determined by its relation to the master's line.
Dr. Ulmann never so much as hints at the exist-
ence of this quality of line, and, as it is the only
adequate test, it is no wonder that his conclusions
with regard to the genuineness of pictures ascribed
to Botticelli are without great value. To discuss
them in detail would take a volume, and
scarcely be of interest to any one. Suffice ^^ggs.
it to say, that he leaves out of count any 'x=£===-
works which are probably authentic ; ac-
cepts a number of crude imitations, such sun-dial in temple gardens lethaby's " lead-work '
as the lady with the horse-tail coiffure at
Frankfort; and adds a number of works that, like interested in still more, the evolution of his
the Madonna in the Uffizi, which he christens quality—that is to say, his character. Dr. Ulmann
Madonna of the Clouds, have nothing in common has failed to reconstruct Botticelli's character and
with Botticelli, and would be an insult to the artistic personality, as he has failed to define his
reputation of even a tenth-rate artist. quality; and what other ultimate purpose art
The purpose of sifting the works of a master is studies may have than definition of quality and
to decide upon such as may be considered to be reconstruction of artistic personality, we do not
wholly his own, and therefore as material for know. M. C.
defining his quality. Not having properly sifted Lead-work. By W. R. Lethaby. (London :
his materials, Dr. Ulmann, as we have seen, has Macmillan.)—By way of motto for a volume on
utterly failed to perceive Botticelli's quality; and " Lead-work, Old and Ornamental, and for the
not having noted that this painter was a linealist most part English," which Mr. Lethaby has lately
who for a decade struggled to become a naturalist issued, he has taken a quotation from Viollet
xxxiii
structural, always functional, never being so swift only to fall back, under the impulse of Leonardo,
or so tortuous but that it serves to outline a figure, to linealism, having failed to describe the orbit of
or rational draperies, in motion. Botticelli could the artist, the author has been unable to make a
not help feeling the superiority of Leonardo, nor chronological distribution of his works. Now,
seeing how it was attained, and he set himself without chronological distribution, an artist's works
therefore to giving his own figures the utmost can give us only his quality, and not what we are
possible movement. But not having the scientific
and naturalistic training of Leonardo, he could
not articulate his figures, and consequently the
more movement he tries to give them, the more
awkward and, compared with the draperies, the
more motionless do they seem. Who shall say
how much his figures owe their effect of distress
and woebegoneness to this contradiction between
effort and power in the artist ? May this not
account also for Botticelli's almost entirely giving
up painting in his later years, and devoting him-
self to illustrating Dante with outline drawings
which afforded every opportunity for indulgence in
caligraphic line ?
This short analysis of Botticelli's elemental
principle will not have been found out of place,
we trust, if it has established what we must look
for in every work bearing his name that can
claim to be authentic. No matter what its types,
qualities, or faults, if it has Botticelli's line, it is a
genuine work, and consequently the picture which
lacks this line is not genuine, but merely a school-
picture, imitation, or copy—precisely which to
be determined by its relation to the master's line.
Dr. Ulmann never so much as hints at the exist-
ence of this quality of line, and, as it is the only
adequate test, it is no wonder that his conclusions
with regard to the genuineness of pictures ascribed
to Botticelli are without great value. To discuss
them in detail would take a volume, and
scarcely be of interest to any one. Suffice ^^ggs.
it to say, that he leaves out of count any 'x=£===-
works which are probably authentic ; ac-
cepts a number of crude imitations, such sun-dial in temple gardens lethaby's " lead-work '
as the lady with the horse-tail coiffure at
Frankfort; and adds a number of works that, like interested in still more, the evolution of his
the Madonna in the Uffizi, which he christens quality—that is to say, his character. Dr. Ulmann
Madonna of the Clouds, have nothing in common has failed to reconstruct Botticelli's character and
with Botticelli, and would be an insult to the artistic personality, as he has failed to define his
reputation of even a tenth-rate artist. quality; and what other ultimate purpose art
The purpose of sifting the works of a master is studies may have than definition of quality and
to decide upon such as may be considered to be reconstruction of artistic personality, we do not
wholly his own, and therefore as material for know. M. C.
defining his quality. Not having properly sifted Lead-work. By W. R. Lethaby. (London :
his materials, Dr. Ulmann, as we have seen, has Macmillan.)—By way of motto for a volume on
utterly failed to perceive Botticelli's quality; and " Lead-work, Old and Ornamental, and for the
not having noted that this painter was a linealist most part English," which Mr. Lethaby has lately
who for a decade struggled to become a naturalist issued, he has taken a quotation from Viollet
xxxiii