Art criticism; Dramatic criticism; Literature -- History and criticism
‘If ever this nation should produce genius sufficient to acquire
for us the honourable distinction of an English School, the name of
Gainsborough will be transmitted to posterity, in the history of the
art, among the very first of that rising name.’ So wrote, in his
Fourteenth Discourse, Sir Joshua Reynolds--a lover of pomp and ceremony
even in the art of Literature--doing therein ‘untimely justice’ to the
merits of his contemporary, whom he survived. Since then the English
School, whose separate existence this accomplished admirer of the
Roman and the Bolognese did but doubtfully and modestly look forward
to, has become an accomplished fact, and all but a hundred years after
his death, ‘the talents of the late Mr. Gainsborough’ are honoured at
the Grosvenor Gallery. In the two large rooms and in the vestibule
there are to-day exhibited about a couple of hundred pieces from his
brush; the great Sir Joshua Exhibition of last winter is felt to be
successfully rivalled; and an opportunity is given to the student to
perceive the range, the flexibility, the spontaneity of Gainsborough’s
art.
Gainsborough, like any other distinct individuality in Art or Letters,
is best understood when he is taken simply on his merits, without
reference to other personalities who happened to be of his time. To
institute a perpetual comparison between him and Sir Joshua is to
make the sterile blunder that is made when Dickens is pitted against
Thackeray, the epic of _Copperfield_ against the satire of _Vanity
Fair_. In each case it was only accident that brought the men into
juxtaposition; and as regards Gainsborough, it is rather with Velasquez
or Vandyke, or with some French Eighteenth Century Master of familiar
grace, that we should compare him. These were his kindred, with
these he had something in common, as the Romans, the Bolognese, and
sometimes the Venetians, were the kindred of Sir Joshua. And yet, to
a certain extent, comparison between Gainsborough and Sir Joshua is
even now unavoidable. Living at the same period and in the same great
town, painting the same people, and--save for the briefer apparition
of Romney--dividing between them, though dividing unequally, the
applause of polite Society, that choice which the men of their time
had to make of one of them, has still to a certain extent to be made
by us. Often, of course, we are liberated from the necessity of any
such narrow alternative; but when we look at the portraits, by the two
artists, of Johnson, Garrick, Mrs. Siddons, the characteristics of
each--what each lacked and what each brought to the accomplishment of
his task--cannot but suggest themselves. And it will then be apparent
that Reynolds painted with a more obvious learning, Gainsborough with a
more spontaneous grace; Reynolds often with a more determined adherence
to the particular character, Gainsborough with a keener enjoyment of
the suggestions that character afforded for translating a sometimes
uncouth nature into an exquisite art.
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