DOI issue:
No. 275 (February 1916)
DOI article:Reddie, Arthur: Paintings by Miss I. L. Gloag, R.O.I.
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.21261#0040
Paintings by Miss I. L. Gloag
indeed, through the very brilliance of its effect
upon the parts it strikes, it leaves in an obscurity
the more profound by comparison. Much among
the work of contemporary painters seems to par-
take of this character of selecting for a fierce
analysis some special aspect, a specialisation such
as has, to some extent, become inevitable in our
complex civilisation, and a consequent and con-
trasting neglect of the rest.
With all its robustness, with all its excellence of
painterlike and draughtsmanlike qualities, there is
something a little restless, a little tinge of dis-
satisfaction which occasionally betrays itself in
Miss Gloag’s work; as though she was admitting
that although she may have said in any particular
picture all that she meant to say, while she may
have expressed all that the momentary exigencies
permitted of being expressed, she knows and feels
that all is not there.
But we do not blame a war-correspondent
because he does not also happen to be a poet, and
we have no possible right or reason to censure a
painter for what he or she does not give us. Let
us try, whilst we enjoy, to appreciate to the full
what has been accomplished, so that our enjoy-
ment and our interest may be the more complete
and the more truly understanding.
In all the examples of Miss Gloag’s work here
illustrated, and indeed in all it has been the
writer’s lot to see from time to time in various of
the exhibitions, three cardinal traits are revealed—
sureness of drawing, directness of touch, and a
marked ability in the handling of paint. These
three characteristics, not by any means universally
encountered together in modern work, reveal the
artist as confident of herself, and it was the recog-
nition of these qualities that prompted the remark
made above as to the non-existence of a skeleton
in her artistic cupboard. This is indeed only what
one would expect to find in an artist whose studies
have comprised work at the Slade, at South Ken-
sington, and in Paris. Then, also, in many of her
pictures there is to be found an evidence of con-
noisseurship, of a delight in beautiful old things,
examples of furniture, rich brocades, fine carving,
marquetry, and rare craftsmanship of all kinds.
Fine workmanship surely appeals strongly here,
and in her own branch of art Miss Gloag evinces
a sound and able craftsmanship. Indeed, if we
have a bone to pick with her—and she would be
the first to be impatient of any writing about her art
that should only eulogise—it is that the fine way
in which she handles her paint transcends upon
occasion the merit of the subject per se. At the
34
same time, let us not ignore the fact, incontestable
in art, that it is most often the manner of treat-
ment—the quality of the draughtsmanship, the
fine play of contrasting light and colour—that
makes the subject; and whether it be some
exquisite vase or an old cracked teapot, a lovely
woman or a misshapen dwarf, matters not a whit,
provided that the genius of the artist has depicted
it with clear insight and a mastery of touch.
Had one to label the work here reproduced one
would be tempted to speak of it as Realism. Not
a Realism such as, for instance, that of Zola, which
has caused the term to become to some extent
debased and to imply an insistence upon unlovely
facts, but rather a healthy desire to enjoy the
material aspect of things, to take things as they
seem, to analyse mayhap, but with something of
a detached and scientific mind, which despite its
utter frankness contains no elements to offend
“the yellow coat’
BY' I. L. GLOAG
indeed, through the very brilliance of its effect
upon the parts it strikes, it leaves in an obscurity
the more profound by comparison. Much among
the work of contemporary painters seems to par-
take of this character of selecting for a fierce
analysis some special aspect, a specialisation such
as has, to some extent, become inevitable in our
complex civilisation, and a consequent and con-
trasting neglect of the rest.
With all its robustness, with all its excellence of
painterlike and draughtsmanlike qualities, there is
something a little restless, a little tinge of dis-
satisfaction which occasionally betrays itself in
Miss Gloag’s work; as though she was admitting
that although she may have said in any particular
picture all that she meant to say, while she may
have expressed all that the momentary exigencies
permitted of being expressed, she knows and feels
that all is not there.
But we do not blame a war-correspondent
because he does not also happen to be a poet, and
we have no possible right or reason to censure a
painter for what he or she does not give us. Let
us try, whilst we enjoy, to appreciate to the full
what has been accomplished, so that our enjoy-
ment and our interest may be the more complete
and the more truly understanding.
In all the examples of Miss Gloag’s work here
illustrated, and indeed in all it has been the
writer’s lot to see from time to time in various of
the exhibitions, three cardinal traits are revealed—
sureness of drawing, directness of touch, and a
marked ability in the handling of paint. These
three characteristics, not by any means universally
encountered together in modern work, reveal the
artist as confident of herself, and it was the recog-
nition of these qualities that prompted the remark
made above as to the non-existence of a skeleton
in her artistic cupboard. This is indeed only what
one would expect to find in an artist whose studies
have comprised work at the Slade, at South Ken-
sington, and in Paris. Then, also, in many of her
pictures there is to be found an evidence of con-
noisseurship, of a delight in beautiful old things,
examples of furniture, rich brocades, fine carving,
marquetry, and rare craftsmanship of all kinds.
Fine workmanship surely appeals strongly here,
and in her own branch of art Miss Gloag evinces
a sound and able craftsmanship. Indeed, if we
have a bone to pick with her—and she would be
the first to be impatient of any writing about her art
that should only eulogise—it is that the fine way
in which she handles her paint transcends upon
occasion the merit of the subject per se. At the
34
same time, let us not ignore the fact, incontestable
in art, that it is most often the manner of treat-
ment—the quality of the draughtsmanship, the
fine play of contrasting light and colour—that
makes the subject; and whether it be some
exquisite vase or an old cracked teapot, a lovely
woman or a misshapen dwarf, matters not a whit,
provided that the genius of the artist has depicted
it with clear insight and a mastery of touch.
Had one to label the work here reproduced one
would be tempted to speak of it as Realism. Not
a Realism such as, for instance, that of Zola, which
has caused the term to become to some extent
debased and to imply an insistence upon unlovely
facts, but rather a healthy desire to enjoy the
material aspect of things, to take things as they
seem, to analyse mayhap, but with something of
a detached and scientific mind, which despite its
utter frankness contains no elements to offend
“the yellow coat’
BY' I. L. GLOAG