American painting and its tradition : $b as represented by Inness, Wyant, Martin, Homer, La Farge, Whistler, Chase, Alexander, Sargent — John Shaqi
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
But not entirely. Some of these last-named were influenced by European
art, outgrew the teaching of their forerunners, and in middle life
rather forsook their early love and faith. Yet it would be idle to
contend that they had not received an inclination, even an inspiration,
from contact with the older men. Short-lived though it was, and
shallow as were its teachings, the Hudson River school, nevertheless,
had weight with its followers. Even error is often helpful in
establishing truth, and a feeble precedent is perhaps better than none
at all. Some of the pupils--F. E. Church and Sandford Gifford, for
examples--never outgrew their basic teaching. To the end they carried
on the Cole-Durand tradition, improving and bettering it. They bettered
it because they could add to their own view-point the observation and
teaching of their masters. Three generations at least are supposed to
be necessary to the making of the thorough gentleman. Is it possible to
make the thorough artist in one?
But the Hudson River school was too frail inherently to carry great
weight. Men like Inness, Wyant, and Martin soon began to see its
weaknesses. Even before they went to Europe they had doubted and
after their return to America they were openly heretical. They held
allegiance only in the matter of the Catskill-Adirondack subject, and
even that became modified to a virtual disappearance toward the end of
their careers. Both aim and method changed with them. They saw deeper
and painted freer, until finally they were wholly out of sympathy not
only with the thin technique of the school but with its panoramic
conception of nature.
So it was that in 1876 when the United States held its first national
art exhibition--the Centennial, at Philadelphia--the painting of
the country was in something of an anomalous condition. The Hudson
River school was practically at the end of its rope. The older
portrait-painters had been succeeded by Harding, Alexander, Neagle,
Elliott, Inman, Page, Healy--each of them more or less going his own
way. The German Leutze had been here and had blazed a brimstone trail
of Düsseldorf method, along which some painters followed. Hicks and
Hunt at Boston had introduced the French art of Couture and Millet,
and they also had a following. Quite apart from all of them stood some
independent personalities like La Farge and Winslow Homer, who seemed
to say, “a plague on all your houses.” And they, too, went their own
ways. There was no school unity.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account