ENGLISH ART IN 1888.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXV, Issue 9190, 20 October 1888, Page 1 (Supplement)

ENGLISH ART IN 1888.

The art season is practically over and gone, and, considering the immense number of exhibitions and artists contributing to them, there is really remarkably little worth remembering. There has been no great success standing forth from the rest of artistic work of this year, as there has sometimes been ; and consequently the season of iStiS will sink into obscurity, and the best that can be said of it is that it has produced a fair amount of good work from the men near the top of the tree, and some eccentric innovations from many young artists, who have apparently decided that, if they can't get famous all at once, the next best thing is to become eccentric and notorious.

The Academy has laid itself open to the charge of trying to conciliate artists of every "persuasion" and method, by admitting to its walls works of almost every known style, from Frae-Raphaelitism to rank Impressionism ; and consequently the collection was of a most heterogeneous order. The attacks 011 the Academy during the last year have been sharp and severe, and, under the threat, uttered by men in the highest ranks, of founding a National Academy in opposition to the present private one, the Council have apparently thought well to conciliate everybody as much as possible. The chief successes of the Academy were undoubtedly among the portraits, and above all other artists was the muchlamented Frank Moll, R.A., especially successful. His magnificent portrait of Earl Spencer is probably the finest work that lias been seen for many years in London. A head of M. Pasteur by the great follower of Velasquez—Carolus Duran—comes next in point of excellence to the work of the English painter; and it is curious to remember that the Royal Academy distinguished itself this same season by rejecting another work of this celebrated French artist! The doings of the Academy have been more extraordinary than ever this year ; and many men who have for years had pictures well hung on the R.A. walls were calmly rejected in favour of works which a distinguished painter remarked to me "would only be acccpted by the Acadoiny !" Certainly there were very many pictures hung which would have been returned to their perpetrators by any provincial exhibition, and which the Auckland Society of Arts would have been sorry to see on its walls. Herkomer, A.R. A., and Onless, R.A., were each represented by powerful portraits, while an outsider, who came suddenly into note last year—William Carter—has done much to enhance his reputation. Morris, A.R.A., and Richmond, A.R.A., from whom good portrait work is always expected, were extremely poor; and the portrait of Bismarck by the latter artist was a complete failure. Sir F. Leighton's " Andromache" was too entirely a decorative work to be very popular, but the value of its lovely colours and composition to the art student cannot be overestimated. Alma Tadema's " Heliogabalus" is universally admitted to be a vast amount of lovely work thrown away, as the subject is absolutely unfitted for pictorial representation. Millais had only one work at the Academy this year, a lovely landscape painted on his Highland estate. Vicat Cole, R.A., the finest living painter of English scenery, forsook his green fields for the muddy waters of the Lower Thames, and produced a large and magnificent picture of the " Pool," which the Academy bought with the Chautrey Bequest. Henry Moore, the versatile and charming painter of seas, is decidedly successful this year, and exhibited a series of pictures which will much improve his reputation. McWhirter sent several fine landscape studies of his favourite silver birches, but his work was not up to his usual high point of excellence ; while Leader has done his best to prove that he can paint nothing but the j wedge-shaped sunset pictures that ho has been sending to the R.A. for several years. Of the younger painters, from whom, although as yet outside the magic circle of the R.A., much is expected, W. Logsdail and S. J. Solomon were well to the fore, the former painter's picture of St. Martin's Church, Trafalgar Square, having been bought with the Chautrey Bequest Fund. Sir Coutts Lindsay gathered together a most interesting collection at the Grosvenor Gallery in the face of the fact that the " New Gallery" determined to do everything it could to spoil the chances of its older rival. The secession of Bnrne Jones and his following from the Grosvenor is only of importance to the very few people who profess to understand this peculiar painter's distorted visions of humanity ; to the general mass of spectators, I fancy, it is a distinct relief, and I many time heard expressions to this effect in the Gallery. The whole collection was of a very high average, and there were very few works there that anyone would wish away. The collection contained two very remarkable j portrait pictures, which might, perhaps, bo j almost considered the pictures of the year —"Miss Galloway," by E. J. Gregory, | A.R. A., a young man who is held by many authorities to be the most powerful of living painters; and "Henry Vigue," by J. J. Shannon. Henry Moore was represented by one of his matchless seascapes, and Kielov Halswelle, E. R. Taylor, E. H. Fahcy, and John Smart contributed landscapes of a high order. Very many other well-known names were to be seen in the catalogue, and the exhibition is probably the best that has been held in the Gallery for years. The "New Gallery," established by Burne Jones, C. E. Halle, and Comyns C'arr, and known in the London studios as the " Hallo Carrnassus," was chiefly remarkable for the very short time it took to turn a London market into a gorgeous art gallery. The floors were paved with thin slabs of marble, and the iron columns of the market were cased in slices of the same material, and, with the aid of much borrowed china, marble, and pottery (chiefly from Doulton's large works), the hall presented a very elaborate appearance. But, alas! the pictures, with few exceptions, were not worthy of their temporary home. It had evidently been hard work to find enough works to hang there, and none of the galleries had more than a single line of pictures. Many well-known painters contributed to the Gallery, but, as a rule, their works wore by no means representative. Alma Tadema's contribution was perhaps the most interesting, consisting of five very small works in his own inimitable manner. Herkomer, Millais, Richmond, and Watts were to be seen there, but not at their best. The feature of the galleries were supposed to have been Burne Jones' three pictures, which the ultra-rasthetic critics raved considerably about, bub which ninety-nine out of every hundred visitors "smiled" at pretty loudly. The Pall Mall Gazette published ■ some very clever parodies on these designs, which were much appreciated. Among the statuary was a bronze statuette of "The Mower," by "our only sculptor," Hamo Thornycroft, R. A., an admirable piece of work, which has, however, been seen full size at. the Academy. The Royal Society of British Artists suffered considerably in its summer exhibition from the dissensions among its members. The well-known J. McNeill Whistler, the " knight of the white tuft," as he is called (from having a curious white lock of hair in the midst of his black curls), was electel president of the society a few years ago, but since his election the receipts and sales have steadily gone down ; so the society, at its last annual meeting, overthrew their vivacious and witty president, and elected a very mediocre archeeological painter in his stead. Whistler and about fifteen of his disciples withdrew in a body, and "James"' latest mot on the situation is that the "artists" have come out of th- society, and the "British" remain ! Their exhibition was, in consequence of these squabbles, not at all a success.

The Royal Society of Painters in Watercolours and the Royal Institute had both excellent exhibitions, the great rivalry that exists between them having apparently made each do its utmost to deserve first place. The " old society" has the merit (or demerit) of age, whereas the Institute is comparatively new; but the latter has lately erected for itself a magnificent palace in Piccadilly, and is able to hold exhibitions on a much more extensive and elaborate scale than the society in Pall Mall. Each body has some very celebrated names among its members, and the question of supremacy must be left to each 1 individual beholder, as it is quite certain ' that neither one nor the other would own in any way to being inferior to its rival. All the principal London exhibitions publish elaborate illustrated catalogues, or allow them to be published ; the two chief j

water-colour societies each bring out an excellent illustrated catalogue every year, many of the illustrations of which are themselves works of art. A society recently started is the New English Art Club, which held its exhibition at the Dudley Gallery. This club is a new departure in many ways from the old conventional art society. For example, the " members" have to submit their works to the selection committee as well as outsiders, and may be altogether excluded. Such a golden rule might with much advantage be adopted at other exhibitions, from the Academy downwards. The New English Art Club held a startling little show of works of art this year, and, although the total number of works was exhibited under 130, every style yet exposed was to be seen on the walls, from the old-fashioned smooth, carefully-painted canvas to the wildest example of ultra-Impressionism. Some of the latter were altogether the most extrao"dinary combined results of paint and canvas that have ever been seen in London. One craver after notoriety, of the name of Sickert, exhibited a work which was described by more than one critic as " an insult to visitors but these productions proved quite a " draw.' Several men of the younger schools, who are beginning to make their influence felt in England, exhibited work of great merit in their own individual styles; but there were no works of importance, and nearly all were small canvases.

I must not conclude this list without mentioning a collection of paintings and etchings by Mortimer Meupes (a South Australian artist), which was exhibited at Dowdeswell's Gallery, in Bond-street. As the British public is still very sick with the Japanese fever, Mr. Meupes wisely went to Japan, and, after spending some months there, brought back a collection of oils, water-colours, and etchings, to the number of about 140, all of which were vory small, the largest being only about I2in by lOin. These were shown in Bondstreet in a tastefully got-up Japanese room, with a Japanese young lady to sell catalogues, arrayed in her national garb. This exhibition became quite the rage, and Mr. Meupes achieved the unprecedented feat of selling every sketch on the walls. The artist is an impressionist, and a pupil of tier's, and no one can doubt that ho is possessed of more than ordinary talent; but, until he curbs his wild Whistlerism a little more, there is little chance of his ever being regarded seriously by the " powers that be" of the painting world. Some of his water-colours were delightful sketches (for there was not a finished work in the collection), but his etchings consisted too much in a collection of indecipherable scratches. I devoted nearly ten minutes to the study of one of these, but the only object I could make out at all in that time was an umbrella. I give herewith two exact copies of figures

Japanese Ladies.— Etchings b? Mortimer Meupes. from Mr. Meupes' etchings, which will give some idea of the artist's abhorrence of all outline. There were, of course, many other exhibitions held in London this summer which I have not mentioned, but the list is altogether too long to produce complete. The principal ones I have alluded to, and anyone who has seen all these will have been able to form a very good idea of the art season of ISBS. E. W. Paytox.