The diplomatists, who opened up Japan in 1858, the pioneers of trade,
who have penetrated into the secret places of Western China, carrying
their lives in their hands, have all added to our wealth of plants, both
in form and colour, but chiefly in colour. When we see the glorious
velvety shafts of Lawson’s Cypress, or _Libocedrous decurrens_, shooting
up heavenward like church spires, when we look upon the great American
conifers, so rich and so various, or among the lowlier plants, are
startled by the huge leaves of the Chilian Gunneras, we cannot but admit
that for form we have to thank the West.
In a later chapter, in the course of a fascinating disquisition on
Byzantine architecture, Mr. Phillips goes on to say: “We must recognize
that between these ideas of colour and softness there is something more
than an accidental connection ... softness and colour go together as
naturally as hardness and form.”
These are words which might be applied with special fitness to the
garden. But although form is of its very essence hard, so far as outlines
are concerned, we are not without one corrective which softens and
subdues it. That corrective is atmosphere.
I hold, and I think that most fellow-craftsmen, if I may dare to reckon
myself among gardeners, will agree with me, that background is absolutely
essential to success; yet if you place a statue, or plant a specimen
tree, immediately against the finest background that imagination could
desire, it will remain hard and shorn of much of its charm, because it
will lack the softening influence of atmosphere.
I know no better illustration of this than the way in which the Venus
of Milo is shown at the Louvre. It is so skilfully placed that the air
plays all round it, and the outlines of the marble melt, as it were, into
the surrounding atmosphere. Were it pressed, as statues so often are,
close against a curtain or a dead wall, the supreme beauty of the goddess
would be cruelly sacrificed. The form, the inspiration of the sculptor,
would be there, but the hardness of the material would be unredeemed; it
would represent death instead of life. That is why so many photographic
portraits fail to render beauty. The model is placed immediately in
front of a screen—all sense of aerial perspective is lost—and the
result is, from an artistic point of view, a deadly failure, even should
the photograph be technically perfect, so far as optics and chemistry
are concerned. No composition is good, or even tolerable, where aerial
perspective is neglected, and that is as true in gardening as it is in
the plastic arts.
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