Lectures on Landscape: Delivered at Oxford in Lent Term, 1871 — John Shaqi
Lectures on Landscape: Delivered at Oxford in Lent Term, 1871Ruskin, John
Philosophy
Lectures on Landscape: Delivered at Oxford in Lent Term, 1871
Ruskin, John
Landscape painting
5. Again here are two sea-pieces by Turner of the same
period--photographs from them at least. One is a calm on the shore at
Scarborough; the other the wreck of an Indiaman.
These also are each painted with exquisitely artistic purpose: the
first in opposition of local black to diffused sunshine; the second in
the decorative grouping of white spots on a dark ground. That
decorative purpose of dappling, or [Greek: poikilia], is as studiously
and deliciously carried out by Turner with the Daedalus side of him, in
the inlaying of these white spots on the Indiaman's deck, as if he
were working a precious toy in ebony and ivory. But Turner did not
paint either of the sea-pieces for the sake of these decorous
arrangements; neither did he paint the Scarborough as a professor of
physical science, to show you the level of low tide on the Yorkshire
coast; nor the Indiaman to show you the force of impact in a liquid
mass of sea-water of given momentum. He painted this to show you the
daily course of quiet human work and happiness, and that, to enable
you to conceive something of uttermost human misery--both ordered by
the power of the great deep.
6. You may easily--you must, perhaps, for a little time--suspect me of
exaggeration in this statement. It is so natural to suppose that the
main interest of landscape is essentially in rocks and water and sky;
and that figures are to be put, like the salt and mustard to a dish,
only to give it a flavor.
Put all that out of your heads at once. The interest of a landscape
consists wholly in its relation either to figures present--or to
figures past--or to human powers conceived. The most splendid drawing
of the chain of the Alps, irrespective of their relation to humanity,
is no more a true landscape than a painting of this bit of stone. For,
as natural philosophers, there is no bigness or littleness to you.
This stone is just as interesting to you, or ought to be--as if it was
a million times as big. There is no more sublimity--_per se_--in
ground sloped at an angle of forty-five, than in ground level; nor in
a perpendicular fracture of a rock, than in a horizontal one. The only
thing that makes the one more interesting to you in a landscape than
the other, is that you could tumble over the perpendicular
fracture--and couldn't tumble over the other. A cloud, looked at as a
cloud only, is no more a subject for painting than so much feculence
in dirty water. It is merely dirty air, or at best a chemical solution
ill made. That it is worthy of being painted at all depends upon its
being the means of nourishment and chastisement to men, or the
dwelling place of imaginary gods. There's a bit of blue sky and cloud
by Turner--one of the loveliest ever painted by human hand. But, as a
mere pattern of blue and white, he had better have painted a jay's
wing: this was only painted by him--and is, in reality, only pleasant
to you--because it signifies the coming of a gleam of sweet sunshine
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