Studio: international art (31.1904)

THE STUDIO

THE WORK OF GEORGE HENRY, that has greeted a popular work condemns the

R.S.A. : A REVIEW AND AN unfortunate artist to a succession of attempts, more

APPRECIATION BY PERCY or less successml> to repeat his triumph. Or yet
another cause of this narrowness of achievement
may be found in the fact that a painter has hit upon

There are many painters—perhaps one may a novel convention, a personal method of treatment,

even say that they are in the majority—who, that is easy to him, and soon becomes habitual. An

having discovered that work of a certain style artist may develop a method that suits one particu-

attains a great success with the public, and there- lar class of subject, while being quite inapplicable

fore possesses a distinct commercial value, continue to another ; or he may attain the doubtful success

consistently to produce that one thing, and that of a style so individual that it absolutely hall-marks

one thing only. There is, of course, more than his picture! This latter is often a questionable

one cause for a painter's production of one special gain, for such a method is apt to degenerate from

class of picture. It may be that the artist has no manner into mannerism, is apt to induce a habit

capacity for painting of another kind; the aqua- of artistic indolence, preventing a painter from

rellist often fails when he turns to oils, and the advancing, while it cannot preserve him from

portrait painter achieves but scant success when he retrogression. No one can rightly claim that the

attempts a landscape. It may be that the applause expression in a painter's work of his individuality,

"kelvingrove park" by george henry, r.s.a.

XXXI. No. 131.—February, 190+. 3