DUNEDIN ART GALLERY.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19952, 20 November 1926, Page 15

DUNEDIN ART GALLERY.

EXHIBITION OF PICTURES

It is a little difficult on a first visit to an art exhibition, especially one containing such a collection of good work as the present exhibition held by tho Dunedin Public Art Gallery Society, to sort out one’s impressions and marshal one’s opinions. But after a few further visits certain pictures begin to take their place as background, while others impress themselves more and more on the mind until one becomes aware that the first impression is due to only a few of the pictures (as was the case in the American room at the Exhibition Art Gallery), or, in rare cases, it can- be concentrated into one position. In a preliminary account of the exhibition, it was suggested that there was a distinct atmosphere of New Zealand present, and although this atmosphere pervades quite a lot of the work, a little careful study will find it fully revealed in a beautiful little picture by Grace Butler This is No. 20, ‘.‘Mount Eolleston Buttress, Arthur’s Pass.” One feels that a more suitable title would have been “The Call of the Wild,” because in it is expressed all the wonderful glamour of Nature waiting to be conquered by man. See how the eye is led by the beautiful converging lines in the foreground towards the barrier which separates us from the delicious blue distance beyond. But the artist has, by her wonderful painting, shown that the barrier is there to be surmounted, for one can see right over it ; in fact, it seems almost possible to run into the picture and peer over the distant edge into the depths of the valley. The picture beckons and invites; it suggests tlm possibility of more beautiful things beyond, and it has all that attraction of virgin Nature which has made the Briton explore every corner of the globe in the face of apparently insuperable difficulties. Considered technically, it is a masterly piece of work, and far ahead of anything else shown by this artist, except, perhaps, No. 18, “Storm Clouds Gathering.” Veryfew landscapes are painted in such a way that they,, are stereoscopic—that is, so that one can measure distances from oneself to objects in the picture or actually see round and feel the bulk of hills or groups of trees. Too often trees in a picture remind one of theatrical trees, which can never be anything but flat and cut out, as in the picture almost above. No. 23 (“Sun Halo”), in which the artist has, we fear, over-reached himself in his efforts to be original. Also, hills and even clouds are frequently represented with hard edges, and no attempt to show them gradually rounding away from the spectator. Distances from front to rear are of vital importance in a picture and do not depend entirely on the relative size of objects. One often sees distant objects projected into the foreground, with sharper colour and detail than could possibly be, seen, or whole ranges of hills, miles in extent, looking like a solid wall, because the laws of fore-shortening have been disregarded. In No. 108 Grace Butler shows us how a distance of a score or two of miles can be quite comfortably accommodated on an inch or so of canvas, and, what is more important, made to look like a score or two of miles. It is easy to show distance if one can make use of a row of telegraph poles diminishing away from the spectator, but not so easy when the poles are not there! Atmospheric colour ia of great assistance, and when an artist can really see atmospheric colour, and not make it up in his studio, he is a long way on the road to deserved success. This picture of Grace Butler’s is evidently inspired by the work of Ormesby Browne, but is none the worse for that. In fact, it is almost a welcome relief from pictures of intersecting mountains. It is to be hoped that similar subjects will continue to appeal to her, for with her vital and vigorous brush she has accomplished a piece of work which—to be colloquial—is “out on its own,” as far as New Zealand art is concerned. Her other big picture, No. 46 (“Bealey Valley, Arthur’s Pass”), mt so successful. Curiously, it is too big for such a big subject. One’s eye wanders into corners of the canvas, or explores the rather disturbed foreground in search of the same concentrated attraction that characterises No. 20. It is the smaller picture which has the bigger “punch,” and it is very pleasing to note that it has already been sold. Grace Butler shows five other works, all fine subjects, vigorously painted. Next in importance to this artist as a landscape painter is Gerald Kelly. Every artist has his or her own methods, ideas, and mannerisms. Two pictures, painted by two artists, at the same moment and on the same spot would show a difference, sometimes only slight, sometimes very great, and the difference in these two artists’ work is only slight, and is mainly in colour. While Grace Butler sees the sombre, olive browns and purples of shadow with clearcut distances, Cecil Kelly sees the opalescence and gold of misty sunlight. At times perhaps his colour is a trifle too light and pretty, but there is no doubt that in No. 13 (“The Road to Rapaki”) and No. 62 (“Morning Light”) he has achieved two very fine works. “Morning Light” is the more attractive because of its simple directness and breezy fresh warmth. But in “The Road to Rapaki” there is something sound and almost scientific, not only in the arrangement of the simple and almost commonplace subject, turning it into a fine composition, but in the separation of the warm lights and cold lights, especially on the distant familiar rounded hill, unpicturesque to the untrained eye, but beautifully picturesque when handled as skilfully as it is in this instance. One feels that a little “human interest” would have been of assistance. A figure or two carefully placed would have kept the foreground from spreading too far. Also the recently cut road is the work of man. Why should not man be shown walking on it! In No. 11l (“Mount Howe, Southern Alps”) the lightness of colours has led to a feeling of smallness not in keeping with the subject. It is very finely handled and the near foliage beautifully drawn, but it lacks a little in strength and bigness. No. 118 (“A Sunny Afternoon”) is a very charming subject, but is also a trifle lacking, perhaps, in strength of colour. The one spot of strong Colour, the window of the loft, is so different to the remainder of the canvas that from a short distance, it appears to be something stuck on the canvas, and does not take its place in the picture. But one feels that any adverse criticism is unwarranted, there is such a fine open-air feeling about this artist’s work. We have been accustomed too long to landscape painters who turn the cold shoulder to Nature and prefer to give us their own versions painted in the murky atmosphere of a studio. It is quite possible for an artist to paint a landscape indoors, provided he has first obtained all his material out-of-doors and is thoroughly saturated with the out-of-doors atmosphere. Tire disadvantage of working out of doors altogether in that one gels really saturated with “atmosphere” and work has to be abandoned!

Elizabeth Kelly shows a landscape, No. 16 (“Otira”), in which she well supports the aims of Cecil Kelly. The modelling of the distant mount, the representation of the facets of rock all catching the light at different angles, shown by the different tones and colours, is very fine indeed. About her figure work we shall have very much to say later. Another artist who seems to have really caught the New 7 Zealand spirit is A. F. Nieoll, though his landscape -work is more in the nature of small sketches, and not large and important works. His rich olive greens, savouring of the Italiau foliage, are very pleasant and very true. He secs things as they really arc, and not by the light of some school of the past or tradition of English or Continental landscape pointing. His best landscape is No. 36 (“Summit Rpad”), a very clever representation of bleak and wind-swept bush, the insistence in the definite outline (which is very finely designed and placid) helping very much’the feeling that one is really on a summit swept by a cutting wind. Quite close is No. 41 (“Winter”), a very clever and obviously “first hand” snow picture.

Considering the opportunities afforded by the recent unusual fall of snow, it is remarkable that so few artists seem to have seized the opportunity for experimenting with a fresh subject. In fact, besides Mr NioolTs picture there is only one other picture in the exhibition inspired by the snow, and that is No. 370 (“Dancing Snowflakes”) by Coreen Browne, an unusually good piece of imaginative work in water colour.

Of the many other landscapes shown it would be impossible to make individual mention, but one would direct attention to No. 82 (“Winter Morning”), by Dinley Richardson, R.8.A., with its remarkable lighting and cleverly painted mist, and No. 132 (“Tomahawk Lagoon”), by R. N. Field, A.R.C.A., with its weird unearthly glow reflected from the heavy clouds and the way in which it is painted from front and rear —that is. the distance pushed back to its proper place, as mentioned above.

No. 24 (“Arthur’s Pass”), by H. Horridge. has many merits, but the egg-like colour of the lights is rather disturbing, and it lacks scale. Mention has been made of No. 23 (“Sun Halo”.), by Marcus King. This artist is better represented by some sketches placed on a screen with the competition work, and not catalogued. But his work is disappointing after the promises of last year. A very line little landscape, apart from New Zealand, is No. 15 (“Richmond Castle, Yorkshire"), by Richard Wallwork; A.R.C.A. It hardly has the freshness of the larger landscapes below it, but it is well conceived, and well painted, and its quiet dignities and rich colour will help perhaps to keep the work of those who believe in “New Zealand first” within proper bounds, and consequently to bring it to perfection.