British Art-Painting and Sculpture.

103

ART. V.-1. Notes on Some of the Principal Pictures Exhibited at the Royal Academy. By JOHN RUSKIN. London: 1858.

2. Catalogue of Royal Academy. London.

3. Annual Reports of Royal Scottish Academy, and Catalogue. Edinburgh.

4. Statement of Liverpool Exhibition.

It is manifest that British art now holds a higher position than it ever did at any former period. The deep public interest taken in it, is evinced by crowded exhibitions, frequent notice by the press, the great demand for illustrated publications, and the very large sums annually laid out on works of art. Our Continental neighbours not only now acknowledge, what they have so long denied, that we have a school, but they characterise it as marked by "freshness and originality." In the "Exposition Universelle," in 1855, the works by British artists excited great interest, and were very favourably noticed by the Parisian press. One of the most popular writers on art in France, Théophile Gautier, in his work, "les Beaux-arts en Europe," divides the art of the world. into four strongly defined zones, namely, Great Britain, Belgium, Germany, and France,-Britain being distinguished by "Individuality," a potent element in art, Belgium by "Skill," Germany by "Ideality," and France by "Eclecticism," or a selection and combination of the qualities of all other schools.

Though a sort of private academy, of which Sir Godfrey Kneller was president, was instituted in London in 1711, it soon went down, as did similar attempts by Sir James Thornhill and others; and it was not till 1734-35 that the English School of Art was founded, when, at the suggestion of Hogarth, between thirty and forty artists hired a room in Peter's Court, St Martin's Lane, and instituted an academy for studying the figure. It was managed on the principle proposed by Hogarth, "that every member should contribute an equal sum towards the support of the establishment, and have an equal right to vote on every question relative to its affairs." The purposes of this institution were successfully carried out for more than thirty years; further development was called for; and after several attempts -for various obstructions occurred from differences of opinion consequent on a remodelling, and on arrangements affecting private interests, the efforts of the artists were rewarded by the establishment of the Royal Academy in 1768-69, and the British school acquired that important position which it now occupies with such marked distinction.

It has often been maintained, and many still hold, that the Academy should have no connection with Government, but rely entirely on its own exertions. Numbering in its ranks so many artists of eminence, it should be able, it is said, by the annual exhibition of interesting and important works, to realise such a revenue as to make it quite independent of Government aid. But we would be sorry to see the disruption of a connection that has subsisted so long with mutual advantage. Is it not an honour to Britain to number among its institutions a great school of art-national not merely by the character of its works, and by its being within the country, but by being connected with it by a bond of national acknowledgment? And really, as a mere question of debtor and creditor, taking into account what the Academy does for art education, the balance is in its favour.

But, in truth, when the Academy was founded, the countenance and support of the King, so strongly and openly given,if we take into view the state of taste at that time in what may be styled the fashionable world,-was of the greatest consequence to English art. There was then a great desire on the part of the wealthy to acquire works of art; but the English school was in its infancy, and the limited number of artists had scarcely any opportunity of making their works known to the public and so acquiring a reputation,-an essential requisite, and purchasers, according to the prevailing taste, esteemed no works worthy of their notice but those of the old masters. In a work, "L'Etat des Arts en Angleterre, par M. Rouquet de l'Academie Royal de Peinture," etc., published in Paris in 1755,—that is, thirteen years before the Royal Academy was founded,-it is stated, "That in London, within these twenty or thirty years, many saloons or galleries have been erected for the purpose of picture sales. When a sale is advertised, the gallery where it is to take place is opened several days before the sale, and all but the rabble are admitted. One of the police, distinguished by his badge of office, is stationed at the door; and the public throng to these places in the same way as they in Paris go to the galleries when the works of the artists of the Academy are exhibited. . These kind of sales have made a taste for pictures very general in London; they help to form it; and there, to some extent, a knowledge of the different schools and masters is picked up. On the other hand, it is a species of gambling, where able players often put in practice all imaginable means of making dupes; and in this they generally succeed."

M. Rouquet notes these picture auction-marts as institutions peculiar to London. No doubt, in France, pictures, like other property, would occasionally be disposed of in this way; but in

Hogarth-Modern Exhibitions.

105

London these galleries were kept constantly in operation for this purpose alone, by a continuous importation from Italy, Holland, etc., of old pictures, or imitations of ancient works. Waagen, in his "Works of Art and Artists in England," says, "Collections which were formed by the end of the eighteenth century, are, however, of a very different character from those of the time of Charles the First. They betray a far less pure and elevated taste, and in many parts show a less profound knowledge of art. We, indeed, often find the names of Raphael, Correggio, Andrea del Sarto, but very seldom their works."

English art, then, at its commencement, had to struggle against the influence of a system that had become in a great degree national, or rather fashionable; and opposed by this, the individual efforts of those who ventured on the arduous career of art, were attended with little or no result. Combination was necessary. To Hogarth, therefore, English art owes more than to any other man. It was his genius that first drew the public to take an interest in it; while, by the academy set on foot by him in St Martin's Lane, the English artists were brought together, and besides studying, were enabled to discuss and arrange plans by which their united efforts could be made available for rearing the structure of a national school of art. Of course, the schemes proposed were numerous. One of the first was the foundation of a chartered Royal Academy, to consist of a president, thirty directors, fellows, and scholars. It seems Hogarth was opposed to this, and his objections to it have been quoted as against the present Royal Academy; but it was this attempt which was made in 1755 that he opposed, and not the Royal Academy, for it was not founded till 1768-69, and Hogarth died in 1764. But there can be no doubt he strongly supported the scheme of Modern Exhibitions, and opposed the dilettante rage for old pictures with great names attached to them. He contributed several of his works to the Modern Exhibition at Spring Gardens in 1761, and designed a frontispiece for the catalogue, in which Britannia is represented nourishing, with water drawn from a fountain surmounted by a bust of George III., three young trees, the trunks of which are entwined, and inscribed, "Painting, Sculpture, and Architecture," and the motto, "Et spes et ratio studiorum in Cæsare tantum;" and a vignette as a tail-piece, in which a monkey, dressed in the fashion of the day, figures with an eye-glass in one hand and a watering-pot in the other, assiduously labouring to refresh three decayed stumps of trees in pots, on each of which respectively is inscribed, obit 1502, 1600, and 1604, and on a label, "Exoticks." This piece of satire, thrown out in Hogarth's strong and pointed style, seems to have been relished by the public, for thirteen thousand of these catalogues were sold.

It is clear, however, that the main hindrance to the foundation of the Academy must have been the difficulty experienced by the artists in arranging among themselves the limits of membership, -who were to occupy the ranks, and who were to be the leaders. We have seen that the attempt to found a Royal Academy in 1755 turned out a failure. The artists next tried to draw attention to British art by gratuitously adorning with their works the Foundling Hospital, in the extension of which, at that period, the public had taken a great interest. At length, in 1760, having obtained the use of the great room of the Society of Arts Manufactures and Commerce, the first exhibition of the works of British artists was placed before the public; but, from the control exercised by the Society preventing the free development of the exhibition, more independent action was proposed, by an exhibition the following year in a gallery in Spring Gardens, hired from an auctioneer. Entire accordance, however, in a body so loosely bound together, was scarcely to be expected. We accordingly find that in 1761 there were two modern exhibitions-one in the great room of the Society of Arts, in which the exhibition of 1760 had been held, and the other at Spring Gardens, by the majority, under the name of the Society of British Artists of Great Britain, and it was to that body that Hogarth gave his support, in the way above alluded to. The former of these societies, which numbered in its ranks 50 members, ceased to exist in 1775; and the latter, in which 211 members were at one time enrolled, may be said to have expired in 1780. Thus we find the British school in its infancy represented by two societies, numbering between them 261 members. But how very few of this large body have left works that posterity has judged worth preserving! Every one who wrote himself artist seems to have been allowed to enter the lists; but, after a few years' trial, it was found that many of these only encumbered the field, and it would be matter of delicacy or difficulty to get them to withdraw. Those, therefore, who by their efforts had distinguished themselves, and had been noticed by the public, retired, and, under a new and more strictly defined organisation, as members of a body with the King at its head, and titled the Royal Academy of Arts, renewed those efforts which have tended so much to extend and consolidate the fabric of British art.

The members of the Royal Academy, were declared at the commencement to consist of forty academicians, twenty associates, and six associate engravers. Lately, an additional academician has been added, and two engravers are now admitted to that rank; and perhaps a farther extension would be a just measure, seeing the great increase of artists of talent at the present time; though, on the other hand, too wide an extension of membership

Dilettanti Oppose Royal Academy and Modern Exhibitions. 107

and lowering of its status would soon break up the Academy, as artists of very high standing would not care for entering such a body. The admission of engravers to the highest honours was a giving in on the part of the Academy to a temporary clamour raised a few years ago; for, admitting the high talent required for excelling in that art, it is brought out in a manner altogether different from that required for painting or sculpture, and, in place of the sort of limited affiliation accorded to engravers by academies of painting and sculpture, the members of that profession would find their status raised and their art benefited by being incorporated as an independent body. Although architects apparently enjoy unrestricted membership, the above remarks may to a great extent be applied to them. Indeed, several years ago, by a very general movement among the members of that profession, societies for the furtherance of their art have been instituted with such successful results, that architects will probably soon forego the advantages, little more than nominal, that they enjoy by being associated in academies where their works, like those of engravers, are thrown so much into the shade by those of painters and sculptors.

It has been seen that exhibitions of works by British artists were instituted by them for the purpose of proving to the public that British art had vitality and vigour, and that, if a portion of the encouragement so lavishly given to those auction-room exhibitions of pictures imported into England with the names of ancient masters attached to them, were bestowed on modern exhibitions, art would become an important national feature ; and the result has been even greater than was expected.

The arduous struggle which British art had to engage in with the class of dilettanti satirised by Hogarth in the tail-piece to the Exhibition catalogue, has terminated; auctions of works of art are, no doubt, common enough yet, but they are generally conducted on principles different from those described as having been so much the fashion in the infancy of our school. But the feeling still exists; and, though now senile and unfit to enter on an open contest, as in times past, with British art, it seizes every opportunity to evince its enmity to it. This is manifested in various ways, in attempts to revive the old creed, of the vast superiority of all the works of ancient masters to anything ever done by painters of the British school-that portrait painting is too much encouraged in this country-that academies are hurtful to art-that Modern Exhibitions injure art, and should be put down, as they induce artists to hurry up pictures to attract customers that neither the Royal Academy nor any academy should receive encouragement from Government, in the shape of galleries or otherwise, as they are close corporations, and give special privileges to their own members.