seven discourses on art-第10部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！

nter's　study。　　To　make　it　merely　natural　is　a　mechanical　operation；　to　which　neither　genius　or　taste　are　required；　whereas；　it　requires　the　nicest　judgment　to　dispose　the　drapery；　so　that　the　folds　have　an　easy　communication；　and　gracefully　follow　each　other；　with　such　natural　negligence　as　to　look　like　the　effect　of　chance；　and　at　the　same　time　show　the　figure　under　it　to　the　utmost　advantage。

Carlo　Maratti　was　of　opinion　that　the　disposition　of　drapery　was　a　more　difficult　art　than　even　that　of　drawing　the　human　figure；　that　a　student　might　be　more　easily　taught　the　latter　than　the　former；　as　the　rules　of　drapery；　he　said；　could　not　be　so　well　ascertained　as　those　for　delineating　a　correct　form；　This；　perhaps；　is　a　proof　how　willingly　we　favour　our　own　peculiar　excellence。　　Carlo　Maratti　is　said　to　have　valued　himself　particularly　upon　his　skill　in　this　part　of　the　art　yet　in　him　the　disposition　appears　so　artificial；　that　he　is　inferior　to　Raffaelle；　even　in　that　which　gave　him　his　best　claim　to　reputation

Such　is　the　great　principle　by　which　we　must　be　directed　in　the　nobler　branches　of　our　art。　　Upon　this　principle　the　Roman；　the　Florentine；　the　Bolognese　schools；　have　formed　their　practice；　and　by　this　they　have　deservedly　obtained　the　highest　praise。　　These　are　the　three　great　schools　of　the　world　in　the　epic　style。　　The　best　of　the　French　school；　Poussin；　Le　Sueur；　and　Le　Brun；　have　formed　themselves　upon　these　models；　and　consequently　may　be　said；　though　Frenchmen；　to　be　a　colony　from　the　Roman　school。　　Next　to　these；　but　in　a　very　different　style　of　excellence；　we　may　rank　the　Venetian；　together　with　the　Flemish　and　the　Dutch　schools；　all　professing　to　depart　from　the　great　purposes　of　painting；　and　catching　at　applause　by　inferior　qualities。

I　am　not　ignorant　that　some　will　censure　me　for　placing　the　Venetians　in　this　inferior　class；　and　many　of　the　warmest　admirers　of　painting　will　think　them　unjustly　degraded；　but　I　wish　not　to　be　misunderstood。　　Though　I　can　by　no　means　allow　them　to　hold　any　rank　with　the　nobler　schools　of　painting；　they　accomplished　perfectly　the　thing　they　attempted。　　But　as　mere　elegance　is　their　principal　object；　as　they　seem　more　willing　to　dazzle　than　to　affect；　it　can　be　no　injury　to　them　to　suppose　that　their　practice　is　useful　only　to　its　proper　end。　　But　what　may　heighten　the　elegant　may　degrade　the　sublime。　　There　is　a　simplicity；　and　I　may　add；　severity；　in　the　great　manner；　which　is；　I　am　afraid；　almost　incompatible　with　this　comparatively　sensual　style。

Tintoret；　Paul　Veronese；　and　others　of　the　Venetian　schools；　seem　to　have　painted　with　no　other　purpose　than　to　be　admired　for　their　skill　and　expertness　in　the　mechanism　of　painting；　and　to　make　a　parade　of　that　art　which；　as　I　before　observed；　the　higher　style　requires　its　followers　to　conceal。

In　a　conference　of　the　French　Academy；　at　which　were　present　Le　Brun；　Sebastian　Bourdon；　and　all　the　eminent　artists　of　that　age；　one　of　the　academicians　desired　to　have　their　opinion　on　the　conduct　of　Paul　Veronese；　who；　though　a　painter　of　great　consideration；　had；　contrary　to　the　strict　rules　of　art；　in　his　picture　of　Perseus　and　Andromeda；　represented　the　principal　figure　in　shade。　　To　this　question　no　satisfactory　answer　was　then　given。　But　I　will　venture　to　say；　that　if　they　had　considered　the　class　of　the　artist；　and　ranked　him　as　an　ornamental　painter；　there　would　have　been　no　difficulty　in　answering：　　〃It　was　unreasonable　to　expect　what　was　never　intended。　　His　intention　was　solely　to　produce　an　effect　of　light　and　Shadow；　everything　was　to　be　sacrificed　to　that　intent；　and　the　capricious　composition　of　that　picture　suited　very　well　with　the　style　he　professed。〃

Young　minds　are　indeed　too　apt　to　be　captivated　by　this　splendour　of　style；　and　that　of　the　Venetians　will　be　particularly　pleasing；　for　by　them　all　those　parts　of　the　art　that　give　pleasure　to　the　eye　or　sense　have　been　cultivated　with　care；　and　carried　to　the　degree　nearest　to　perfection。　　The　powers　exerted　in　the　mechanical　part　of　the　art　have　been　called　the　language　of　painters；　but　we　must　say；　that　it　is　but　poor　eloquence　which　only　shows　that　the　orator　can　talk。　　Words　should　be　employed　as　the　means；　not　as　the　end：　　language　is　the　instrument；　conviction　is　the　work。

The　language　of　painting　must　indeed　be　allowed　these　masters；　but　even　in　that　they　have　shown　more　copiousness　than　choice；　and　more　luxuriancy　than　judgment。　　If　we　consider　the　uninteresting　subjects　of　their　invention；　or　at　least　the　uninteresting　manner　in　which　they　are　treated；　if　we　attend　to　their　capricious　composition；　their　violent　and　affected　contrasts；　whether　of　figures；　or　of　light　and　shadow；　the　richness　of　their　drapery；　and；　at　the　same　time；　the　mean　effect　which　the　discrimination　of　stuffs　gives　to　their　pictures；　if　to　these　we　add　their　total　inattention　to　expression；　and　then　reflect　on　the　conceptions　and　the　learning　of　Michael　Angelo；　or　the　simplicity　of　Raffaelle；　we　can　no　longer　dwell　on　the　comparison。　　Even　in　colouring；　if　we　compare　the　quietness　and　chastity　of　the　Bolognese　pencil　to　the　bustle　and　tumult　that　fills　every　part　of；　a　Venetian　picture；　without　the　least　attempt　to　interest　the　passions；　their　boasted　art　will　appear　a　mere　struggle　without　effect；　an　empty　tale　told　by　an　idiot；　full　of　sound　and　fury；　signifying　nothing。

Such　as　suppose　that　the　great　style　might　happily　be　blended　with　the　ornamental；　that　the　simple；　grave；　and　majestic　dignity　of　Raffaelle　could　unite　with　the　glow　and　bustle　of　a　Paulo　or　Tintoret；　are　totally　mistaken。　　The　principles　by　which　each　are　attained　are　so　contrary　to　each　other；　that　they　seem；　in　my　opinion；　incompatible；　and　as　impossible　to　exist　together；　as　to　unite　in　the　mind　at　the　same　time　the　most　sublime　ideas　and　the　lowest　sensuality。

The　subjects　of　the　Venetian　painters　are　mostly　such　as　give　them　an　opportunity　of　introducing　a　great　number　of　figures；　such　as　feasts；　marriages；　and　processions；　public　martyrdoms；　or　miracles。　I　can　easily　conceive　that　Paul　Veronese；　if　he　were　asked；　would　say　that　no　subject　was　proper　for　an　historical　picture　but　such　as　admitted　at　least　forty　figures；　for　in　a　less　number；　he　would　assert；　there　could　be　no　opportunity　of　the　painter's　showing　his　art　in　composition；　his　dexterity　of　managing　and　disposing　the　masses　of　light；　and　groups　of　figures；　and　of　introducing　a　variety　of　Eastern　dresses　and　characters　in　their　rich　stuffs。

But　the　thing　is　very　different　with　a　pupil　of　the　greater　schools。　　Annibale　Caracci　thought　twelve　figures　sufficient　for　any　story：　　he　conceived　that　more　would　contribute　to　no　end　but　to　fill　space；　that　they　would；　be　but　cold　spectators　of　the　general　action；　or；　to　use　his　own　expression；　that　they　would　be　figures　to　be　let。　　Besides；　it　is　impossible　for　a　picture　composed　of　so　many　parts　to　have　that　effect；　so　indispensably　necessary　to　grandeur；　of　one　complete　whole。　　However　contradictory　it　may　be　in　geometry；　it　is　true　in　taste；　that　many　little　things　will　not　make　a　great　one。　　The　sublime　impresses　the　mind　at　once　with　one　great　idea；　it　is　a　single　blow：　　the　elegant　indeed　may　be　produced　by　a　repetition；　by　an　accumulation　of　many　minute　circumstances。

However　great　the　difference　is　between　the　composition　of　the　Venetian　and　the　rest　of　the　Italian　schools；　there　is　full　as　great　a　disparity　in　the　effect　of　their　pictures　as　produced　by　colours。　　And　though　in　this　respect　the　Venetians　must　be　allowed　extraordinary　skill；　yet　even　that　skill；　as　they　have　employed　it；　will　but　ill　correspond　with　the　great　style。　　Their　colouring　is　not　only　too　brilliant；　but；　I　will　venture　to　say；　too　harmonious　to　produce　that　solidity；　steadiness；　and　simplicity　of　effect　which　heroic　subjects　require；　and　which　simple　or　grave　colours　only　can　give　to　a　work。　　That　they　are　to　be　cautiously　studied　by　those　who　are　ambitious　of　treading　the　great　walk　of　history　is　confirmed；　if　it　wants　confirmation；　by　the　greatest　of　all　authorities；　Michael　Angelo。　　This　wonderful　man；　after　having　seen　a　picture　by　Titian；　told　Vasari；　who　accompanied　him；　〃that　he　liked　much　his　colouring　and　manner；　but　then　he　added；　that　it　was　a　pity　the　Venetian　painters　did　not　learn　to　draw　correctly　in　their　early　youth；　and　adopt　a　better　manner　of　study。〃

By　this　it　appears　that　the　principal　attention　of　the　Venetian　painters；　in　the　opinion　of　Michael　Angelo；　seemed　to　be　engrossed　by　the　study　of　colours；　to　the　neglect　of　the　ideal　beauty　of　form；　or　propriety　of　expression。　　But　if　general　censure　was　given　to　that　school　from　the　sight　of　a　picture　of　Titian；　how　much　more　heavily；　and　more　justly；　would　the　censure　fall　on　Paulo　Veronese；　or　more　especially　on　Tintoret？　　And　here　I　cannot　avoid　citing　Vasari's　opinion　of　the　style　and　manner　of　Tintoret。　　〃Of　all　the　extraordinary　geniuses；〃　says　he；　〃that　have　ever　practised　the　art　of　painting；　for　wild；　capricious；　extravagant；　and　fantastical　inventions；　for　furious　impetuosity　and　boldness　in　the　execution　of　his　work；　there　is　none　like　Tintoret；　his　strange　whims　are　even　beyond　extravagance；　and　his　works　seem　to　be　produced　ra