“Cool-headed conservatism should clarify the halo which encircles Whistler’s portraits. The periodic ‘symphonies,’ ‘harmonies,’ and ‘arrangements,’ in gray and green, green and rose, purple and gold, or brown and black, have, or had, novelty to recommend them,--more novelty, however, than psychology. Apart from one or two, they are little beyond essays in subdued _Japonisme_ with subtle dashes of Velasquez. The portrait of his mother alone shows adequate depth, for the overlauded Carlyle is merely a male replica of the single canvas wherein the artist seemed to lose--and to find--himself. It is not in portraiture, but in etching and lithography, that Whistler has disclosed the validity of his talent.”[31] To which may be added the following comments since his death from leading American papers: “Whistler in earlier life was a real etcher, easily the first of the nineteenth century. The number of his plates of the best quality is comparatively small. He soon lost his power or the incentive to execute it. His hand degenerated, his work became trivial and insincere. As a painter none of his pictures will ever explain to posterity the reputation, or the apparent reputation, that he enjoyed during his lifetime.” “It is, however, as an etcher rather than as a painter that Whistler will be remembered.” “Thus, setting aside the portraits of his mother, of Thomas Carlyle, Lady Campbell, and Miss Alexander, and the startling ‘Nocturne in Blue and Silver,’ and the ‘Arrangement in Black,’ it might be possible to count upon the fingers of one hand the finest examples of his brush.” Many others of similar import might be gathered, but the foregoing suffice. In reading them it should not be forgotten that the etchings, which are now praised without reserve, passed through the same stages of depreciation through which the paintings are passing; so that, guided by the parallel, it is reasonable to expect the complete acceptance of the latter as masterpieces in the near future. Broadly speaking, the order of acceptance has been: First. Etchings and lithographs. Second. Portraits. Third. Color harmonies,--such as many of his figure-pieces, marines, nocturnes, and pure color compositions generally, none of which is fully accepted, some of which are scarcely known, and [Illustration] all of which are misunderstood, in spite of his many explicit words of explanation. Such has been the order of general acceptance of his work; but the order of real merit is almost precisely reversed. Whistler stands supreme,-- First as a colorist. Secondly as a painter of portraits. Thirdly as an etcher and lithographer. As an etcher comparisons are drawn between him and Rembrandt. As a painter of portraits comparisons are drawn between him and Velasquez. As a colorist he is beyond comparison save with the masters of the far East.