American painting and its tradition : $b as represented by Inness, Wyant, Martin, Homer, La Farge, Whistler, Chase, Alexander, SargentVan Dyke, John C.
History
American painting and its tradition : $b as represented by Inness, Wyant, Martin, Homer, La Farge, Whistler, Chase, Alexander, Sargent
Van Dyke, John C.
Painters -- United States; Painting -- United States
The last-named picture, a full-length in profile, now in the
Metropolitan Museum, set all Paris by the ears. The wonderful if
somewhat sharp drawing of the face and head, the equally fine
portraiture of the hands, arms, figure, and dress, commanded instant
attention. The subject was a great beauty, and the painter, painting
precisely what he saw, had dealt with her remorselessly. Even then
they began to discuss Sargent as a character reader, an anatomist,
a psychologist, a physiognomist--great nonsense to be sure, but
nevertheless suggestive of his remarkable truth of observation. It
was perhaps this very quality that soon brought him more commissions
for portraits than he could fill and possibly led to the virtual
abandonment for the time being of other themes.
In taking up portraiture as the field of his endeavor Sargent was
perhaps wise as well as fortunate, for it requires the keen, cool
observer, the man who can record the fact without romance, to make
a good portrait-painter; and Sargent has proved himself an observer
above all. He is not a poet in paint, nor does he indulge in sentiment,
feeling, or emotion. He records the fact. If I apprehend him rightly,
such theory of art as he possesses is founded in observation. One night
in Gibraltar some fifteen years ago I was dining with him at the old
Cecil Hotel. We had been on ship for a dozen days and were glad to
get ashore. That night, as a very unusual thing, Sargent talked about
painting--talked of his own volition. He suggested his theory of art in
a single sentence: “You see things that way” (pointing slightly to the
left) “and I see them this way” (pointing slightly to the right). He
seemed to think that would account for the variation or peculiarity of
eye and mind, and, with a manner of doing--a personal method--there was
little more to art. Such a theory would place him in measured agreement
with Henry James, whose definition of art has been quoted many times:
“Art is a point of view and genius a way of looking at things.” But
whether Sargent has followed James, or James followed Sargent, in that
definition, I am not able to record.
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