The History of Modern Painting, Volume 1 (of 4): Revised edition continued by the author to the end of the XIX centuryMuther, Richard
History
The History of Modern Painting, Volume 1 (of 4): Revised edition continued by the author to the end of the XIX century
Muther, Richard
Painting -- History
as a portrait-painter, he became the depicter of society, and society
ruined him. In order to please his distinguished customers, he devoted
himself far more than is good for portrait-painting to smooth rosy
flesh, large glassy eyes, and dainty fine hands, and over-idealised his
sitters till they lost every appearance of life.
[Illustration: LEFÉBURE. TRUTH.
(_By permission of Messrs. Goupil, the owners of the copyright._)]
_William Bouguereau_, who industriously learnt all that can be
assimilated by a man destitute of artistic feeling but possessing a
cultured taste, reveals even more clearly, in his feeble mawkishness,
the fatal decline of the old schools of convention. He has been compared
to Octave Feuillet, who also never extricated himself from the scented
atmosphere of distinguished society; but the comparison is unjust to
Feuillet. Bouguereau is in his Madonna-painting a perfumed Ary Scheffer,
in his Venus-pictures a greater Hamon; and in his perfectly finished and
faultless stencilling style of beauty he became from year to year more
and more insupportable. His art is a kind of painting on porcelain on a
large scale, and he gives to his Madonnas and his nymphs the same smooth
rosy tints, the same unreal universalised forms, until at last they
become a _juste-milieu_ between Raphael's "Galatea" and the wax models
one sees in hairdressers' shops. Only in one sense can his religious
painting be called modern; it is an elegant lie, like the whole of the
Second Empire.
[Illustration: _L'Art._
HENNER. SUSANNA AND THE ELDERS.]
Close by Bouguereau's "Venus" in the Luxembourg hangs the well-known
colossal figure of a beautiful nude woman with unnaturally
over-developed thighs, which by the shining mirror in its uplifted right
hand proclaims itself to be "Truth." _Jules Lefébure_, the painter of
this picture, is also completely a slave to tradition; he came from
Cogniet's studio, and won the Prix de Rome in 1861. But he at least
possesses more taste, elegance, and character; his painting of the nude
is more distinguished, truer, and more powerful. He is in the broader
sense of the word a worshipper of nature, and was so in his youth
especially. His "Sleeping Girl" of 1865 and his "Femme couchée" of 1868
are smooth and honest studies from the nude, of delicate, sure
draughtsmanship, and have therefore not become antiquated even to-day.
Unfortunately he did not find this masculine accent again, when at a
later time he grouped ideal figures together to make pictures of them.
His "Diana surprised" of 1879 was a very clever composition of
well-ordered lines, possessing even fine details, especially one or two
charming heads, but as a whole it is lifeless and uninteresting. Like
Bouguereau, he lacks power, and, notwithstanding his distinction and his
capacity for arrangement, he is not painter enough to be truthfully
entitled a "painter of the nude."
[Illustration: _Gaz. des Beaux-Arts._
HENNER. THE SLEEPER.]
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