seven discourses on art-第25章

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！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


orantly　imagined　to　proceed　from　inattention　to　all　rules；　and　in　defiance　of　reason　and　judgment；　whereas　it　is　in　truth　acting　according　to　the　best　rules；　and　the　justest　reason。

He　who　thinks　nature；　in　the　narrow　sense　of　the　word；　is　alone　to　be　followed；　will　produce　but　a　scanty　entertainment　for　the　imagination：　　everything　is　to　be　done　with　which　it　is　natural　for　the　mind　to　be　pleased；　whether　it　proceeds　from　simplicity　or　variety；　uniformity　or　irregularity：　　whether　the　scenes　are　familiar　or　exotic；　rude　and　wild；　or　enriched　and　cultivated；　for　it　is　natural　for　the　mind　to　be　pleased　with　all　these　in　their　turn。　　In　short；　whatever　pleases　has　in　it　what　is　analogous　to　the　mind；　and　is　therefore；　in　the　highest　and　best　sense　of　the　word；　natural。

It　is　this　sense　of　nature　or　truth　which　ought　more　particularly　to　be　cultivated　by　the　professors　of　art；　and　it　may　be　observed　that　many　wise　and　learned　men；　who　have　accustomed　their　minds　to　admit　nothing　for　truth　but　what　can　be　proved　by　mathematical　demonstration；　have　seldom　any　relish　for　those　arts　which　address　themselves　to　the　fancy；　the　rectitude　and　truth　of　which　is　known　by　another　kind　of　proof：　　and　we　may　add　that　the　acquisition　of　this　knowledge　requires　as　much　circumspection　and　sagacity；　as　to　attain　those　truths　which　are　more　open　to　demonstration。　　Reason　must　ultimately　determine　our　choice　on　every　occasion；　but　this　reason　may　still　be　exerted　ineffectually　by　applying　to　taste　principles　which；　though　right　as　far　as　they　go；　yet　do　not　reach　the　object。　　No　man；　for　instance；　can　deny　that　it　seems　at　first　view　very　reasonable；　that　a　statue　which　is　to　carry　down　to　posterity　the　resemblance　of　an　individual　should　be　dressed　in　the　fashion　of　the　times；　in　the　dress　which　he　himself　wore：　　this　would　certainly　be　true　if　the　dress　were　part　of　the　man。　　But　after　a　time　the　dress　is　only　an　amusement　for　an　antiquarian；　and　if　it　obstructs　the　general　design　of　the　piece；　it　is　to　be　disregarded　by　the　artist。　　Common　sense　must　here　give　way　to　a　higher　sense。

In　the　naked　form；　and　in　the　disposition　of　the　drapery；　the　difference　between　one　artist　and　another　is　principally　seen。　　But　if　he　is　compelled　to　the　modern　dress；　the　naked　form　is　entirely　hid；　and　the　drapery　is　already　disposed　by　the　skill　of　the　tailor。　　Were　a　Phidias　to　obey　such　absurd　commands；　he　would　please　no　more　than　an　ordinary　sculptor；　since；　in　the　inferior　parts　of　every　art；　the　learned　and　the　ignorant　are　nearly　upon　a　level。

These　were　probably　among　the　reasons　that　induced　the　sculptor　of　that　wonderful　figure　of　Laocoon　to　exhibit　him　naked；　notwithstanding　he　was　surprised　in　the　act　of　sacrificing　to　Apollo；　and　consequently　ought　to　be　shown　in　his　sacerdotal　habits；　if　those　greater　reasons　had　not　preponderated。　　Art　is　not　yet　in　so　high　estimation　with　us　as　to　obtain　so　great　a　sacrifice　as　the　ancients　made；　especially　the　Grecians；　who　suffered　themselves　to　be　represented　naked；　whether　they　were　generals；　lawgivers；　or　kings。

Under　this　head　of　balancing　and　choosing　the　greater　reason；　or　of　two　evils　taking　the　least；　we　may　consider　the　conduct　of　Rubens　in　the　Luxembourg　gallery；　of　mixing　allegorical　figures　with　representations　of　real　personages；　which；　though　acknowledged　to　be　a　fault；　yet；　if　the　artist　considered　himself　as　engaged　to　furnish　this　gallery　with　a　rich　and　splendid　ornament；　this　could　not　be　done；　at　least　in　an　equal　degree；　without　peopling　the　air　and　water　with　these　allegorical　figures：　　he　therefore　accomplished　that　he　purposes。　　In　this　case　all　lesser　considerations；　which　tend　to　obstruct　the　great　end　of　the　work；　must　yield　and　give　way。

If　it　is　objected　that　Rubens　judged　ill　at　first　in　thinking　it　necessary　to　make　his　work　so　very　ornamental；　this　brings　the　question　upon　new　ground。　　It　was　his　peculiar　style；　he　could　paint　in　no　other；　and　he　was　selected　for　that　work；　probably；　because　it　was　his　style。　　Nobody　will　dispute　but　some　of　the　best　of　the　Roman　or　Bolognian　schools　would　have　produced　a　more　learned　and　more　noble　work。

This　leads　us　to　another　important　province　of　taste；　of　weighing　the　value　of　the　different　classes　of　the　art；　and　of　estimating　them　accordingly。

All　arts　have　means　within　them　of　applying　themselves　with　success　both　to　the　intellectual　and　sensitive　part　of　our　natures。　　It　can　be　no　dispute；　supposing　both　these　means　put　in　practice　with　equal　abilities；　to　which　we　ought　to　give　the　preference：　　to　him　who　represents　the　heroic　arts　and　more　dignified　passions　of　man；　or　to　him　who；　by　the　help　of　meretricious　ornaments；　however　elegant　and　graceful；　captivates　the　sensuality；　as　it　may　be　called；　of　our　taste。　　Thus　the　Roman　and　Bolognian　schools　are　reasonably　preferred　to　the　Venetian；　Flemish；　or　Dutch　schools；　as　they　address　themselves　to　our　best　and　noblest　faculties。

Well…turned　periods　in　eloquence；　or　harmony　of　numbers　in　poetry；　which　are　in　those　arts　what　colouring　is　in　painting；　however　highly　we　may　esteem　them；　can　never　be　considered　as　of　equal　importance　with　the　art　of　unfolding　truths　that　are　useful　to　mankind；　and　which　make　us　better　or　wiser。　　Nor　can　those　works　which　remind　us　of　the　poverty　and　meanness　of　our　nature；　be　considered　as　of　equal　rank　with　what　excites　ideas　of　grandeur；　or　raises　and　dignifies　humanity；　or；　in　the　words　of　a　late　poet；　which　makes　the　beholder　learn　to　venerate　himself　as　man。

It　is　reason　and　good　sense　therefore　which　ranks　and　estimates　every　art；　and　every　part　of　that　art；　according　to　its　importance；　from　the　painter　of　animated　down　to　inanimated　nature。　　We　will　not　allow　a　man；　who　shall　prefer　the　inferior　style；　to　say　it　is　his　taste；　taste　here　has　nothing；　or　at　least　ought　to　have　nothing　to　do　with　the　question。　　He　wants　not　taste；　but　sense；　and　soundness　of　judgment。

Indeed；　perfection　in　an　inferior　style　may　be　reasonably　preferred　to　mediocrity　in　the　highest　walks　of　art。　　A　landscape　of　Claude　Lorraine　may　be　preferred　to　a　history　of　Luca　Jordano；　but　hence　appears　the　necessity　of　the　connoisseur's　knowing　in　what　consists　the　excellence　of　each　class；　in　order　to　judge　how　near　it　approaches　to　perfection。

Even　in　works　of　the　same　kind；　as　in　history　painting；　which　is　composed　of　various　parts；　excellence　of　an　inferior　species；　carried　to　a　very　high　degree；　will　make　a　work　very　valuable；　and　in　some　measure　compensate　for　the　absence　of　the　higher　kind　of　merits。　　It　is　the　duty　of　the　connoisseur　to　know　and　esteem；　as　much　as　it　may　deserve；　every　part　of　painting；　he　will　not　then　think　even　Bassano　unworthy　of　his　notice；　who；　though　totally　devoid　of　expression；　sense；　grace；　or　elegance；　may　be　esteemed　on　account　of　his　admirable　taste　of　colours；　which；　in　his　best　works；　are　little　inferior　to　those　of　Titian。

Since　I　have　mentioned　Bassano；　we　must　do　him　likewise　the　justice　to　acknowledge　that；　though　he　did　not　aspire　to　the　dignity　of　expressing　the　characters　and　passions　of　men；　yet；　with　respect　to　the　facility　and　truth　in　his　manner　of　touching　animals　of　all　kinds；　and　giving　them　what　painters　call　their　character；　few　have　ever　excelled　him。

To　Bassano　we　may　add　Paul　Veronese　and　Tintoret；　for　their　entire　inattention　to　what　is　justly　esteemed　the　most　essential　part　of　our　art；　the　expression　of　the　passions。　　Notwithstanding　these　glaring　deficiencies；　we　justly　esteem　their　works；　but　it　must　be　remembered　that　they　do　not　please　from　those　defects；　but　from　their　great　excellences　of　another　kind；　and　in　spite　of　such　transgressions。　　These　excellences；　too；　as　far　as　they　go；　are　founded　in　the　truth　of　general　nature。　　They　tell　the　truth；　though　not　the　whole　truth。

By　these　considerations；　which　can　never　be　too　frequently　impressed；　may　be　obviated　two　errors　which　I　observed　to　have　been；　formerly　at　least；　the　most　prevalent；　and　to　be　most　injurious　to　artists：　　that　of　thinking　taste　and　genius　to　have　nothing　to　do　with　reason；　and　that　of　taking　particular　living　objects　for　nature。

I　shall　now　say　something　on　that　part　of　taste　which；　as　I　have　hinted　to　you　bef