DOI issue:
No. 339 (June 1921)
DOI article:Mourey, Gabriel: A few words on the Royal Academy exhibition
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.21392#0230
ROYAL ACADEMY EXHIBITION
canvases of a certain type, with subjects
mythological, legendary, religious or his-
torical—subjects which in the already re-
mote days of which I am speaking had far
too much space on the walls—are so few
this year that they can be easily counted.
That, at any rate, is so much to the good.
It surprised me further to see not more
than five or six pictures devoted to the War:
modern military painting has always left
me rather cold. 0000
Eventually I noticed that the walls of the
Royal Academy which formerly were
covered with canvases from floor to ceiling,
were now not nearly so much smothered.
Nor did that displease me. The Selection
Committee, they tell me, has been excep-
tionally severe and hard to please this year,
and therein truly, it has done well. A jury
of artists has no reason for existence unless
it be severe. The alternative is : no selec-
tion at all, and a show open to all the world,
as with our " Expositions des Indepen-
dants." 000000
But to discover whether the Committee
of the Royal Academy was right in showing
so much severity it were necessary to see
the works it rejected; seeing those accepted
does not suffice to enable one to form a
sound and an adequate judgment on the
matter. But I find it hard to believe that
among the multitude of works rejected
there should not be a certain number equal
in merit to some of those displayed, and
no more than they deserving to have the
doors of Burlington House shut in their
face. 000000
On all hands I hear, however, that this
exhibition is full of daring work, of novel
tendencies. Shall I confess, as a French-
man, accustomed to exhibitions like those
in Paris, where works infinitely more
audacious, and inspired by tendencies
infinitely more novel, are admitted and
cause no sort of scandal among the public
(which goes to prove in any case, and
among other things, that the French
public is more blase, more sceptical, than
the English)—dare I confess that I have
found it difficult to recognise, as I should
have liked to do, an atmosphere of fresh-
ness in this exhibition i Indeed, I do not
for a moment suppose that the most
" advanced " works displayed there would
have run the slightest risk of rejection
214
in Paris, even by the jury of the Old
Salon, which is considered to be the most
retrograde, or, at least, the most con-
servative of all. 0000
Take, for instance, an artist like Sir
William Orpen. The canvas on which he
has represented the Chef de VHotel
Chatham, Paris—a tribute to the excellence
of French cooking for which no French-
man can fail to be grateful—is, to my
eyes, far from being the best of the six
portraits he is exhibiting at Burlington
House; yet this is the picture which has
attracted most public attention and won
for the artist the most striking success.
The question of art, it seems to me, plays
but a secondary part in the matter. In
my opinion it is perfectly evident that if
art played the principal role here public
appreciation must have been most en-
thusiastic over the portrait of Sir William
MacCormack, so diverse and so sure in
its execution, or over that of Mrs. Melvill,
in which the quality of the blues is so
brilliant, so refined, so precious; or,
again, over the portrait of Jenny Simson, in
which the artist has found a harmony of
yellow and orange tones of incomparable
magnificence. Sir William Orpen is a
virtuoso of the brush endowed with the
true master's touch. His verve is unique,
and his knowledge of effect complete.
One feels that this man paints with gusto,
joyfully and in full freedom ; he is so
fresh and charming in his audacities. But
qualities such as these are somewhat re-
moved from the spiritual and psychological
depth one has the right to expect from
every portrait painter; moreover, it happens
sometimes, as in the two women's por-
traits just mentioned, that one's interest
ends by concentrating itself almost more
on the clothes than on the faces of these
ladies. I would even venture, using a
current expression, to declare that at times,
in Sir William Orpen's pictures, " the
sauce is superior to the fish." 0 0
But to return to the Chef de VHotel
Chatham, It is possible that some day
this may be—or, rather, may become—a
masterpiece ; everything depends on how
the picture ages. I doubt it, however,
because the manner in which it is painted
gives the impression of being hollow and
superficial. The whites in it, particularly,
canvases of a certain type, with subjects
mythological, legendary, religious or his-
torical—subjects which in the already re-
mote days of which I am speaking had far
too much space on the walls—are so few
this year that they can be easily counted.
That, at any rate, is so much to the good.
It surprised me further to see not more
than five or six pictures devoted to the War:
modern military painting has always left
me rather cold. 0000
Eventually I noticed that the walls of the
Royal Academy which formerly were
covered with canvases from floor to ceiling,
were now not nearly so much smothered.
Nor did that displease me. The Selection
Committee, they tell me, has been excep-
tionally severe and hard to please this year,
and therein truly, it has done well. A jury
of artists has no reason for existence unless
it be severe. The alternative is : no selec-
tion at all, and a show open to all the world,
as with our " Expositions des Indepen-
dants." 000000
But to discover whether the Committee
of the Royal Academy was right in showing
so much severity it were necessary to see
the works it rejected; seeing those accepted
does not suffice to enable one to form a
sound and an adequate judgment on the
matter. But I find it hard to believe that
among the multitude of works rejected
there should not be a certain number equal
in merit to some of those displayed, and
no more than they deserving to have the
doors of Burlington House shut in their
face. 000000
On all hands I hear, however, that this
exhibition is full of daring work, of novel
tendencies. Shall I confess, as a French-
man, accustomed to exhibitions like those
in Paris, where works infinitely more
audacious, and inspired by tendencies
infinitely more novel, are admitted and
cause no sort of scandal among the public
(which goes to prove in any case, and
among other things, that the French
public is more blase, more sceptical, than
the English)—dare I confess that I have
found it difficult to recognise, as I should
have liked to do, an atmosphere of fresh-
ness in this exhibition i Indeed, I do not
for a moment suppose that the most
" advanced " works displayed there would
have run the slightest risk of rejection
214
in Paris, even by the jury of the Old
Salon, which is considered to be the most
retrograde, or, at least, the most con-
servative of all. 0000
Take, for instance, an artist like Sir
William Orpen. The canvas on which he
has represented the Chef de VHotel
Chatham, Paris—a tribute to the excellence
of French cooking for which no French-
man can fail to be grateful—is, to my
eyes, far from being the best of the six
portraits he is exhibiting at Burlington
House; yet this is the picture which has
attracted most public attention and won
for the artist the most striking success.
The question of art, it seems to me, plays
but a secondary part in the matter. In
my opinion it is perfectly evident that if
art played the principal role here public
appreciation must have been most en-
thusiastic over the portrait of Sir William
MacCormack, so diverse and so sure in
its execution, or over that of Mrs. Melvill,
in which the quality of the blues is so
brilliant, so refined, so precious; or,
again, over the portrait of Jenny Simson, in
which the artist has found a harmony of
yellow and orange tones of incomparable
magnificence. Sir William Orpen is a
virtuoso of the brush endowed with the
true master's touch. His verve is unique,
and his knowledge of effect complete.
One feels that this man paints with gusto,
joyfully and in full freedom ; he is so
fresh and charming in his audacities. But
qualities such as these are somewhat re-
moved from the spiritual and psychological
depth one has the right to expect from
every portrait painter; moreover, it happens
sometimes, as in the two women's por-
traits just mentioned, that one's interest
ends by concentrating itself almost more
on the clothes than on the faces of these
ladies. I would even venture, using a
current expression, to declare that at times,
in Sir William Orpen's pictures, " the
sauce is superior to the fish." 0 0
But to return to the Chef de VHotel
Chatham, It is possible that some day
this may be—or, rather, may become—a
masterpiece ; everything depends on how
the picture ages. I doubt it, however,
because the manner in which it is painted
gives the impression of being hollow and
superficial. The whites in it, particularly,