DOI Heft:
No. 171 (June, 1907)
DOI Artikel:Dibdin, E. Rimbault: Mr. E. A. Hornel's paintings of children and flowers
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.20775#0026
E. A. Hornel
collection, of HornePs Summer. Such splendour of longer in a majority, and Hornel may be regarded
originality should have secured him a lifetime of as safely "arrived," although he has not, like his
neglect and derision ; he has made no concessions, old-time comrade, Mr. George Henry, been stamped
yet here he is, comparatively young, and recognised with the Royal Academy's hallmark. But that
far and wide, bought and admired. Even his pen- distinction is not likely to come to one who recks
chant for children as subjects does not explain it, for little of academies and societies, avoids London,
he despises the conventions of grace and prettiness and regards even familiar Glasgow as a place to
that surely touch the popular heart. There is be visited as seldom as possible,
nothing the true Briton loves better on canvas than Glasgow responds by believing implicitly in
a child—unless it be a horse or a dog—but it must Hornel; and Liverpool, which gave him his first
conform more or le;s to his ideals, which are not formal recognition by the purchase of Summer in
Hornel's. He paints the gamins of Kirkcudbright 1892, is no less appreciative. Again, in 1904, it
as Murillo painted those of Seville, with the un- bought one of his pictures, The Captive Butterfly,
compromising fidelity not of the satirist but of the for the city's permanent collection ; and nobody
true nature-lover, for whom the unkempt, ragged thought of objecting. Other public galleries in
urchin concerned in the manufacture of mud-pies which pictures by Hornel have a place are those
is lovelier than the daintiest suburban miss in pink of Leeds, Bradford, Rochdale, Bury, Brighouse,
muslin and artificial curls. There are still many Toronto, Buffalo, U.S.A., and Ghent,
who turn in disgust from those frank records of To look back at the newspaper records of the
peasant children with faces lovely as rose-petals, Hornel dispute in 1892 helps one to realise the
but oh, so unconventional! However, these are no progress made since then towards catholicity in
artistic judgment. The
papers were full of all
sorts of opinions, chiefly
hostile and contemptuous;
the recommendation to
buy Summer was referred
back by the City Council
to the Art Gallery Com-
mittee, and only Mr. Philip
Rathbone's stubborn be-
lief in his opinion saved
the situation. It was
complicated by the opposi-
tion of Alderman Edward
Samuelson, Mr. Rath-
bone's predecessor as
Chairman of the Art
Gallery Committee, to
whom, emerging from his
retirement in the Conway
Valley, the newer mani-
festations of art were start-
lingly and displeasingly
discordant with his mid-
Victorian ideals. His pro-
tests provoked a violent
attack in " The Speaker "
by Mr. George Moore,
who proved to his own
satisfaction that "The
Alderman in Art" was
almost as deadly as
by e. a. hornel "The Royal Academician
collection, of HornePs Summer. Such splendour of longer in a majority, and Hornel may be regarded
originality should have secured him a lifetime of as safely "arrived," although he has not, like his
neglect and derision ; he has made no concessions, old-time comrade, Mr. George Henry, been stamped
yet here he is, comparatively young, and recognised with the Royal Academy's hallmark. But that
far and wide, bought and admired. Even his pen- distinction is not likely to come to one who recks
chant for children as subjects does not explain it, for little of academies and societies, avoids London,
he despises the conventions of grace and prettiness and regards even familiar Glasgow as a place to
that surely touch the popular heart. There is be visited as seldom as possible,
nothing the true Briton loves better on canvas than Glasgow responds by believing implicitly in
a child—unless it be a horse or a dog—but it must Hornel; and Liverpool, which gave him his first
conform more or le;s to his ideals, which are not formal recognition by the purchase of Summer in
Hornel's. He paints the gamins of Kirkcudbright 1892, is no less appreciative. Again, in 1904, it
as Murillo painted those of Seville, with the un- bought one of his pictures, The Captive Butterfly,
compromising fidelity not of the satirist but of the for the city's permanent collection ; and nobody
true nature-lover, for whom the unkempt, ragged thought of objecting. Other public galleries in
urchin concerned in the manufacture of mud-pies which pictures by Hornel have a place are those
is lovelier than the daintiest suburban miss in pink of Leeds, Bradford, Rochdale, Bury, Brighouse,
muslin and artificial curls. There are still many Toronto, Buffalo, U.S.A., and Ghent,
who turn in disgust from those frank records of To look back at the newspaper records of the
peasant children with faces lovely as rose-petals, Hornel dispute in 1892 helps one to realise the
but oh, so unconventional! However, these are no progress made since then towards catholicity in
artistic judgment. The
papers were full of all
sorts of opinions, chiefly
hostile and contemptuous;
the recommendation to
buy Summer was referred
back by the City Council
to the Art Gallery Com-
mittee, and only Mr. Philip
Rathbone's stubborn be-
lief in his opinion saved
the situation. It was
complicated by the opposi-
tion of Alderman Edward
Samuelson, Mr. Rath-
bone's predecessor as
Chairman of the Art
Gallery Committee, to
whom, emerging from his
retirement in the Conway
Valley, the newer mani-
festations of art were start-
lingly and displeasingly
discordant with his mid-
Victorian ideals. His pro-
tests provoked a violent
attack in " The Speaker "
by Mr. George Moore,
who proved to his own
satisfaction that "The
Alderman in Art" was
almost as deadly as
by e. a. hornel "The Royal Academician