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
There were returns to the illustrative during his later years in such
pictures as “The Wreck,” “Kissing the Moon,” and in Adirondack scenes,
but by 1900 he had reached his apogee and thereafter changed little. He
was not to break out any new sails. Nor was there need of it. His great
ability and originality had been abundantly displayed and universally
recognized by both painter and public. Honors, enough and to spare,
were his. In 1893, at Chicago, he had been awarded the gold medal, and
everything that art societies could do or artists and critics could
say had been done and said. Up at Prout’s Neck, where he had shut the
door after him and kept it closed for so many years, these echoes of
the world’s recognition were received with indifference. Miss Mechlin
quotes from a letter of his in 1907:
“Perhaps you think I am still painting and interested in art. That is
a mistake. I care nothing for art. I no longer paint. I do not wish to
see my name in print again.”
He wrote that perhaps on one of his bad days, for he did take up the
brush again, but with no great spirit or effectiveness. In 1908 he was
seriously ill and quite helpless, but he insisted upon living on in his
lonely house with entrance forbidden to all but his brother’s family.
And there quite by himself he died in September, 1910. He had lived a
strange life, produced a strong art, and then died, like a wolf, in
silence.
One often wonders regarding such a character as Winslow Homer what
would have been the result if the strange in both his life and his
art had been eliminated. Would it have helped matters or would his
strength have been dissipated thereby? And wherein lay the strangeness
of Homer if not that he never inherited a single social or artistic
tradition nor would adopt one in later life? He made his own manners
and his own methods, in life as in art, with the result that in both he
was always a rough diamond. He never received anything of importance
by teaching or training. Culture of mind and hand, emotional feeling
or romance, were practically unknown to him. He was as far removed
from romanticism as classicism, and cared nothing about any of the
isms of art. We keep flinging back to an early conclusion that he
was a wonderful reporter rather than an interpreter, a reporter who
saw unusual things in the first place and reported them with unusual
characterization in the second place. The result was about the
largest nature truths of our day. Truth was his avowed aim--the plain
unvarnished truth. He never intentionally departed from it.
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