A Popular Handbook to the National Gallery, Volume I, Foreign Schools: Including by Special Permission Notes Collected from the Works of John Ruskin
History
A Popular Handbook to the National Gallery, Volume I, Foreign Schools: Including by Special Permission Notes Collected from the Works of John Ruskin
National Gallery (Great Britain); Painting -- England -- London -- Catalogs
The characteristics of Van Dyck's art may in large measure be
gathered from the circumstances of his life. He is essentially
the painter of princes. His sacred and other subject pictures
are often remarkable for force and vigour of handling.
"Van Dyck," says Ruskin, "often gives a graceful dramatic
rendering of received Scriptural legends." But it is not in
these subjects that Van Dyck is seen in his most interesting
and most characteristic manner. "Rubens is only to be seen in
the Battle of the Amazons, and Van Dyck only at court." No
more in him than in the other later Flemish artists is there
anything spiritual. The difference between him and Teniers, for
instance, is accidental rather than essential. "They lived,"
says Ruskin, "the gentle at court, the simple in the pot-house;
and could indeed paint, according to their habitation, a
nobleman or a boor, but were not only incapable of conceiving,
but wholly unwishful to conceive, anything, natural or
supernatural, beyond the precincts of the Presence and the
tavern." What distinguishes Van Dyck is the indelible mark of
courtly grace and refinement which he gives to all his sitters.
Nowhere clearer than in his portraits does one see the better
side of the "Cavalier" ideal. In this connection we may note
Van Dyck's feeling for the nobility of the horse (_see_ note
on No. 156). One thing "that gives nobleness to the Van Dyck,"
says Ruskin in describing one of his "cavalier" portraits, "is
its feminineness; the rich, light silken scarf, the flowing
hair, the delicate, sharp, though sunburnt features, and the
lace collar, do not in the least diminish the manliness,
but add feminineness. One sees that the knight is indeed a
soldier, but not a soldier only; that he is accomplished in all
ways, and tender in all thoughts." The reader who remembers
any large collection of Van Dycks will feel that the spirit
of Ruskin's description is true to a very large number of
them. One may forget the individual sitter; the impression
left by the Van Dyck type is indelible. Charles I. and his
Queen, though painted by several other painters, are known to
posterity exclusively through Van Dyck--not (says M. Hymans)
from a greater closeness of resemblance to the original, but
from a particular power of expression and bearing, which, once
seen, it is impossible to forget. The same may be said of Van
Dyck's portraits generally. He endowed all his sitters alike
with the same distinction of feature and elegance in bearing.
He excelled in giving delicacy to the hands, and is said to
have kept special models for this part of his work. He is not
what is called an "intimate" portrait painter. He does not
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account