Studio: international art (47.1909)

The Lay Figure

THE LAY FIGURE: ON THE

VALUE OF GARDENS.

“Would you count gardening among
the Arts?” enquired the Practical Man, “I notice
that some people talk about gardens as if they
had a real artistic value; is such a point of view
reasonable ? ”

“ Of course it is,” replied the Critic, “gardening
is undoubtedly an art, and an important one too.
It offers very valuable opportunities for the exer-
cise of ingenuity in design and for the display
of trained taste, and it is certainly capable of
producing quite beautiful results. What more could
you want ?”

“ But surely it is an unpractical art,” objected
the Practical Man; “what is the use of it and in
what measure does it contribute to the national
welfare ? ”

“ Do you look upon a garden only as a place in
which you can grow cabbages ? ” interrupted the
Man with the Red Tie. “ Can you not think of it
as productive of something else besides edibles—
as a source of pleasure to men of refined minds,
and as a means by which true aesthetic instincts
can be rationally satisfied?”

“ On the contrary, I think for myself I
should be more inclined to count the mere
pleasure garden as a waste of good land,” returned
the Practical Man. “ The person who appropriates
for his own enjoyment ground which could be
better employed is a selfish being, surely, and to
argue that he is encouraging the art of gardening
by his appropriation, seems to me but a lame
excuse.”

“ Then, I gather that in your opinion the
national welfare demands the suppression of
artistic invention,” said the Critic. “ If you
regard the gardener’s art as merely a waste of
good material, then you would also regard all other
forms of art as wasteful, purposeless, and of no
use to the community—that seems to follow as a
matter of course.”

“ Well, when you come to think of it, all art
work is unproductive,” retorted the Practical
Man. “ It is in a sense waste; but it

cannot be urged against the painter or the
sculptor, like the gardener, that he is wasting
something that is in general demand, and that
can be used for the benefit of a large number of
people.”

“Your argument would apply equally to the
land which is covered by our cathedrals and other
historical buildings,” broke in the Man with the
330

Red Tie. “ Do you consider that that land is
wasted ? ”

“ No, the two cases are not quite the same,”
replied the Practical Man; “ we are always told
that such buildings are useful as architectural
examples, or that they have associations which
justify their preservation. There is something to
be said for that contention and I am quite willing
to accept it.”

“ But the contention is equally applicable to
gardens,” cried the Critic, “ or at all events to
those gardens which deserve to rank as illustrations
of the art of gardening, and there are scores of
them in this country. As an illustration of a
special and valuable form of design, a fine piece
of garden making is every bit as worthy of preser-
vation as the cathedral or historical building, which
you admit has a right to exist. The land which
that garden occupies is most distinctly not wasted
if it is used for the display of a real artist’s work.”

“ Yet it is of no public benefit,” argued the
Practical Man, “ because it is the property of a
private owner. It gives pleasure to him and his
friends only, and the community derives no enjoy-
ment from it whatever.”

“ Is that not true also of the pictures and pieces
of sculpture in a private collection ? ” asked the
Critic. “ Would you say that these works of art
should not be preserved because they are not
public property ? ”

“ I believe that some people look upon works of
art as a sort of national asset,” replied the Practical
Man. “ I do not take this view myself, but I am
prepared, as a reasonable man, to allow freedom
of opinion to others in such a matter.”

“Then you cannot deny it to the lovers of the
art of gardening,” said the Critic, “for the gardens
which are artistically important, are as fittingly to
be reckoned among the greater possessions of a
nation as the pictures and statues which are
treasured in public and private collections. Such
gardens owe their perfection to the unceasing care
of many generations of art lovers and to the con-
stant attention of art workers who have made
a special study of their subject. They are of
inestimable value as object lessons for the designer,
and they serve as schools in which the garden
makers and designers from other countries can learn
how to apply the principles of their craft. Any
economic change which might cause the old gardens
to be neglected or destroyed, would be nothing
short of a national disaster. That would be a
waste indeed—a waste of the artistic activity of
centuries.” The Lay Figure.