DOI Heft:
No. 286 (January 1917)
DOI Artikel:Wood, T. Martin: The Buccleuch miniatures at the Victoria and Albert Museum
DOI Seite / Zitierlink:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.24575#0176
The Buccleuch Miniatures
face, Miniature art left behind it the character- It was said of Cooper's miniatures that if a glass
istics that related it to jewellery, which Hilliard, could expand them to the size of Vandyck's
being a jeweller, enjoyed. paintings they would appear to have been painted
With the miniature regarded simply as an
object that is exquisite throughout, there is no
period to compare with the Elizabethan. The art
of the miniature of that time is self-contained.
Hilliard has not a rival; and the Olivers gradually
let slip the charm of the art that he bequeathed
them. When we begin to look at the character of a
face, have we taken the first step away from the
purely artistic judgment of the picture ? When the
interest of the face depicted excludes from present
consciousness the grace of pattern and colour, to
that extent have we ceased to respond to art ;
queen mary i. (1516-1558)
painted in oil by antonio more
for that proportion. Now this is in one sense
true of all art on a small scale that reveals a
perfect craftsman. The writer has seen the smallest
anne clifford, countess of dorset (1590-1676)
by isaac oliver
or does art also rest with rendering that interest
of the face, is such interpretation of character
the highest art of all ? It must be conceded
that it is generally considered to be so, and
that in this Holbein and Samuel Cooper as
miniaturists represent the highest that Miniature
can attain to. In this aspect the head of Oliver marie de cleves
Cromwell by Samuel Cooper (p. 168) is, I suppose, princesse de conde (i 553-1574)
, . . . , ^ , , by a contemporary french artist
the greatest thing that the Buccleuch collection
contains. This miniature was copied by Bernard
Lens, the copy being in the Welbeck collection, heads by Teniers and Watteau enlarged to life-size
It is easy to see, even from a reproduction of that on a screen. They assumed the bold character
copy, that by the one stage removed from life that is associated with the work of Hals. The
there is a great loss of vitality. Lens must have drawing is not disintegrated by the process of
had Puritan leanings, for he leaves out the wart. enlargement. And the reason for this is that the
164
face, Miniature art left behind it the character- It was said of Cooper's miniatures that if a glass
istics that related it to jewellery, which Hilliard, could expand them to the size of Vandyck's
being a jeweller, enjoyed. paintings they would appear to have been painted
With the miniature regarded simply as an
object that is exquisite throughout, there is no
period to compare with the Elizabethan. The art
of the miniature of that time is self-contained.
Hilliard has not a rival; and the Olivers gradually
let slip the charm of the art that he bequeathed
them. When we begin to look at the character of a
face, have we taken the first step away from the
purely artistic judgment of the picture ? When the
interest of the face depicted excludes from present
consciousness the grace of pattern and colour, to
that extent have we ceased to respond to art ;
queen mary i. (1516-1558)
painted in oil by antonio more
for that proportion. Now this is in one sense
true of all art on a small scale that reveals a
perfect craftsman. The writer has seen the smallest
anne clifford, countess of dorset (1590-1676)
by isaac oliver
or does art also rest with rendering that interest
of the face, is such interpretation of character
the highest art of all ? It must be conceded
that it is generally considered to be so, and
that in this Holbein and Samuel Cooper as
miniaturists represent the highest that Miniature
can attain to. In this aspect the head of Oliver marie de cleves
Cromwell by Samuel Cooper (p. 168) is, I suppose, princesse de conde (i 553-1574)
, . . . , ^ , , by a contemporary french artist
the greatest thing that the Buccleuch collection
contains. This miniature was copied by Bernard
Lens, the copy being in the Welbeck collection, heads by Teniers and Watteau enlarged to life-size
It is easy to see, even from a reproduction of that on a screen. They assumed the bold character
copy, that by the one stage removed from life that is associated with the work of Hals. The
there is a great loss of vitality. Lens must have drawing is not disintegrated by the process of
had Puritan leanings, for he leaves out the wart. enlargement. And the reason for this is that the
164