It is very good practice to copy some pictures when there is something
in them that we wish to learn, yet cannot see how to do from nature. For
instance, you may learn how to glaze and scumble better from a picture
than from nature, because the glazings and scumblings of nature are too
subtle for us to follow always so directly.
You will also learn how painters of repute managed a certain phase or
effect of colour, subject, or composition. Rubens will liberate you from
many a stiffness, and give you in his own buoyant style the liberty and
joyful colouring you may be deficient in. Vandyke will teach you
refinement and dignity; Tintoretto, richness; Michael Angelo, the
boldness and firmness of handling and drawing, the severity and
squareness needful for majestic grandeur.
Amongst our own men, I quote John Pettie for a strength and richness
that have never been surpassed, bring what master of long-ago you like
to the competition; Orchardson for pure and delicate texture; Sir
Frederick Leighton for finish; Millais for realism in its best sense;
Alma-Tadema for imitation and learning; and a host of other men, both
good and true, who must improve the mind, the eye, and the hand.
Millais has said that an artist ought to begin as he did,
pre-Raphaelite, if only to learn the quality of Job. Nature eventually
must make him, as she has made that great realistic master, broad and
strong, if it is to be, though a whole world of critics were to chorus
against it.
Speaking of critics, I think we may divide them into two classes--the
psychological and the destroying, or vermin, species. The first class
look at a painting or a book as we ought to look at everything--with the
bee spirit, to suck out all the honey there is in it. They are of equal
use to the public and to the worker; for, leaving one to see the errors
that all man's work has, they lay the good before the other, benefiting
equally themselves in the instruction they have gained. As for the other
class, do they help the work done, or that has to be done? do they add
to the pleasure of the spectator, or instruct the worker by their
pertness or sneers? Do moths add to the value of clothes? does mildew
improve walls? does rust assist the brightness of polished steel? or do
white ants strengthen the rafters they bed in?
True, these are all works of nature and creatures of God. The decay must
be as useful as the life, or it would not be. But what made critics of
this class? From what? For what?
Discreet copying, as I have said, is very good; but there is only one
other practice as pernicious as indiscriminate and constant copying, and
that I will speak of presently.
What is glazing and scumbling?
Scumbling is going over distance with white or grey, rubbing it hard and
dry, so as to obscure the parts that stand too prominently out; it
softens harshnesses, sends back portions, and does its part in aiding
the general harmony of the distance and middle distance.
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