summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
-rw-r--r--.gitattributes4
-rw-r--r--LICENSE.txt11
-rw-r--r--README.md2
-rw-r--r--old/64074-0.txt2446
-rw-r--r--old/64074-0.zipbin56760 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h.zipbin6701512 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/64074-h.htm2809
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/colophon.jpgbin12686 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/cover.jpgbin283479 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_008fp.jpgbin193381 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_010fp.jpgbin220913 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_014fp.jpgbin230716 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_016fp.jpgbin257068 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_018fp.jpgbin256296 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_020fp.jpgbin239883 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_022fp.jpgbin101607 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_026fp.jpgbin111373 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_028fp.jpgbin210760 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_032fp.jpgbin201502 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_034fp.jpgbin192227 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_036fp_1.jpgbin246550 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_036fp_2.jpgbin247214 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_038fp_1.jpgbin236533 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_038fp_2.jpgbin244753 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_040fp.jpgbin203706 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_042fp.jpgbin207324 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_044fp.jpgbin191570 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_046fp.jpgbin227540 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_048fp.jpgbin173196 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_052fp.jpgbin167800 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_054fp.jpgbin188287 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_056fp.jpgbin125123 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_058fp.jpgbin239883 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_060fp.jpgbin100033 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_062fp.jpgbin132119 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_064fp.jpgbin142435 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_066fp.jpgbin236171 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_068fp.jpgbin237122 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_070fp.jpgbin233889 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_074fp.jpgbin218818 -> 0 bytes
-rw-r--r--old/64074-h/images/i_frontispiece.jpgbin136156 -> 0 bytes
41 files changed, 17 insertions, 5255 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d7b82bc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+*.txt text eol=lf
+*.htm text eol=lf
+*.html text eol=lf
+*.md text eol=lf
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2a40f17
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #64074 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/64074)
diff --git a/old/64074-0.txt b/old/64074-0.txt
deleted file mode 100644
index 480c337..0000000
--- a/old/64074-0.txt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,2446 +0,0 @@
-The Project Gutenberg eBook of G. F. Watts, by G. K. Chesterton
-
-This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
-most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
-whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
-of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
-www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you
-will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before
-using this eBook.
-
-Title: G. F. Watts
-
-Author: G. K. Chesterton
-
-Release Date: December 22, 2020 [eBook #64074]
-
-Language: English
-
-Character set encoding: UTF-8
-
-Produced by: Tim Lindell, Chuck Greif and the Online Distributed
- Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was
- produced from images generously made available by The Internet
- Archive/Canadian Libraries)
-
-*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK G. F. WATTS ***
-
-
-
-
- G. F. WATTS
-
- [Illustration: THE HABIT DOES NOT MAKE THE MONK.]
-
-
-
-
- G. F. WATTS
-
- BY G. K. CHESTERTON
-
- [Illustration]
-
- LONDON
-
- DUCKWORTH & CO.
-
- HENRIETTA ST. COVENT GARDEN
-
-
-
-
- _Published 1904_
- _Reprinted 1906, 1909, 1913, 1914_
-
-
- PRINTED AT
- THE BALLANTYNE PRESS
- LONDON
-
-
-
-
-LIST OF PHOTOGRAVURES
-
-
- _Facing p._
-
-THE HABIT DOES NOT MAKE THE MONK _Frontispiece_
-
-G. F. WATTS, R.A. 8
-
-THE RIDER ON THE WHITE HORSE 10
-
-LESLIE STEPHEN 14
-
-WALTER CRANE 16
-
-THE SLUMBER OF THE AGES 18
-
-CARDINAL MANNING 20
-
-CHAOS 22
-
-“FOR HE HAD GREAT POSSESSIONS” 26
-
-AN IDLE CHILD OF FANCY 28
-
-THE MINOTAUR 32
-
-THE COURT OF DEATH 34
-
-MATTHEW ARNOLD 36
-
-JOHN STUART MILL 36
-
-ROBERT BROWNING 38
-
-LORD TENNYSON 38
-
-THE DWELLER IN THE INNERMOST 40
-
-GEORGE MEREDITH 42
-
-ORPHEUS AND EURYDICE 44
-
-HOPE 46
-
-JONAH 48
-
-MAMMON 52
-
-DEATH CROWNING INNOCENCE 54
-
-A STORY FROM BOCCACCIO 56
-
-LORD LYTTON 58
-
-DAWN 60
-
-EVE REPENTANT 62
-
-LOVE AND DEATH 64
-
-WILLIAM MORRIS 66
-
-DANTE GABRIEL ROSSETTI 68
-
-THOMAS CARLYLE 70
-
-GOOD LUCK TO YOUR FISHING 74
-
-
- _The Photogravures are from photographs by Fredk. Hollyer.
- Permanent photographs of works of Watts, Rossetti, Burne-Jones,
- Holbein, and of pictures in the Dublin and Hague Galleries can be
- obtained of Fredk. Hollyer, 9 Pembroke Square, Kensington._
-
-[Illustration: G. F. WATTS, R.A.
-
-Photograph from Life by Frederick Hollyer.]
-
-
-George Frederick Watts was born on 23rd February 1817. His whole rise
-and career synchronizes roughly with the rise and career of the
-nineteenth century. As a rule, no doubt, such chronological parallels
-are peculiarly fanciful and unmeaning. Nothing can be imagined more
-idle, in a general way, than talking about a century as if it were some
-kind of animal with a head and tail, instead of an arbitrary length cut
-from an unending scroll. Nor is it less erroneous to assume that even if
-a period be definitely vital or disturbing, art must be a mirror of it;
-the greatest political storm flutters only a fringe of humanity; poets,
-like bricklayers, work on through a century of wars, and Bewick’s birds,
-to take an instance, have the air of persons unaffected by the French
-Revolution. But in the case of Watts there are two circumstances which
-render the dates relevant. The first is that the nineteenth century was
-self-conscious, believed itself to be an idea and an atmosphere, and
-changed its name from a chronological almost to a philosophical term. I
-do not know whether all centuries do this or whether an advanced and
-progressive organ called “The Eleventh Century” was ever in
-contemplation in the dawn of the Middle Ages. But with us it is clear
-that a certain spirit was rightly or wrongly associated with the late
-century and that it called up images and thoughts like any historic or
-ritual date, like the Fourth of July or the First of April. What these
-images and thoughts were we shall be obliged in a few minutes and in the
-interests of the subject to inquire. But this is the first circumstance
-which renders the period important; and the second is that it has always
-been so regarded by Watts himself. He, more than any other modern man,
-more than politicians who thundered on platforms or financiers who
-captured continents, has sought in the midst of his quiet and hidden
-life to mirror his age. He was born in the white and austere dawn of
-that great reforming century, and he has lingered after its grey and
-doubtful close. He is above all things a typical figure, a survival of
-the nineteenth century.
-
-It will appear to many a somewhat grotesque matter to talk about a
-period in which most of us were born and which has only been dead a year
-or two, as if it were a primal Babylonian empire of which only a few
-columns are left crumbling in the desert. And yet such is, in spirit,
-the fact. There is no more remarkable psychological element in history
-than the way in which a period can suddenly become unintelligible. To
-the early Victorian period we have in a moment lost the key: the Crystal
-Palace is the temple of a forgotten creed. The thing always happens
-sharply: a whisper runs through the salons, Mr. Max Beerbohm waves a
-wand and a whole generation of great men and great achievement suddenly
-looks mildewed and unmeaning. We see precisely the same thing in that
-other great reaction towards art and the vanities, the Restoration of
-Charles II. In that hour both the great schools of faith and valour
-which had seemed either angels or devils to all men: the dreams of
-Strafford and the great High Churchmen on the one hand; the Moslem
-frenzy of the English Commons, the worship of the English law upon the
-
-[Illustration: THE RIDER ON THE WHITE HORSE]
-
-other; both seemed distant and ridiculous. The new Cavalier despised the
-old Cavalier even more than he despised the Roundhead. The last stand of
-English chivalry dwindled sharply to the solitary figure of the absurd
-old country gentleman drinking wine out of an absurd old flagon. The
-great roar of Roundhead psalms which cried out that the God of Battles
-was loose in English meadows shrank to a single snuffle. The new and
-polite age saw the old and serious one exactly as we see the early
-Victorian era: they saw it, that is to say, not as splendid, not as
-disastrous, not as fruitful, not as infamous, not as good or bad, but
-simply as ugly. Just as we can see nothing about Lord Shaftesbury but
-his hat, they could see nothing about Cromwell but his nose. There is no
-doubt of the shock and sharpness of the silent transition. The only
-difference is that accordingly as we think of man and his nature,
-according to our deepest intuitions about things, we shall see in the
-Restoration and the _fin de siècle_ philosophy a man waking from a
-turbid and pompous dream, or a man hurled from heaven and the wars of
-the angels.
-
-G. F. Watts is so deeply committed to, and so unalterably steeped in,
-this early Victorian seriousness and air of dealing with great matters,
-that unless we sharply apprehend that spirit, and its difference from
-our own, we shall misunderstand his work from the outset. Splendid as is
-the art of Watts technically or obviously considered, we shall yet find
-much in it to perplex and betray us, unless we understand his original
-theory and intention, a theory and intention dyed deeply with the
-colours of a great period which is gone. The great technical
-inequalities of his work, its bursts of stupendous simplicity in colour
-and design, its daring failures, its strange symbolical portraits, all
-will mislead or bewilder if we have not the thread of intention. In
-order to hold that, we must hold something which runs through and
-supports, as a string supports jewels, all the wars and treaties and
-reforms of the nineteenth century.
-
-There are at least three essential and preliminary points on which Watts
-is so completely at one with the nineteenth century and so completely
-out of accord with the twentieth, that it may be advisable to state them
-briefly before we proceed to the narrower but not more cogent facts of
-his life and growth. The first of these is a nineteenth-century
-atmosphere which is so difficult to describe, that we can only convey it
-by a sort of paradox. It is difficult to know whether it should be
-called doubt or faith. For if, on the one hand, real faith would have
-been more confident, real doubt, on the other hand, would have been more
-indifferent. The attitude of that age of which the middle and best parts
-of Watts’ work is most typical, was an attitude of devouring and
-concentrated interest in things which were, by their own system,
-impossible or unknowable. Men were, in the main, agnostics: they said,
-“We do not know”; but not one of them ever ventured to say, “We do not
-care.” In most eras of revolt and question, the sceptics reap something
-from their scepticism: if a man were a believer in the eighteenth
-century, there was Heaven; if he were an unbeliever, there was the
-Hell-Fire Club. But these men restrained themselves more than hermits
-for a hope that was more than half hopeless, and sacrificed hope itself
-for a liberty which they would not enjoy; they were rebels without
-deliverance and saints without reward. There may have been and there was
-something arid and over-pompous about them: a newer and gayer philosophy
-may be passing before us and changing many things for the better; but
-we shall not easily see any nobler race of men, and of them all most
-assuredly there was none nobler than Watts. If anyone wishes to see that
-spirit, he will see it in pictures painted by Watts in a form beyond
-expression sad and splendid. _Hope_ that is dim and delicate and yet
-immortal, the indestructible minimum of the spirit; _Love and Death_
-that is awful and yet the reverse of horrible; _The Court of Death_ that
-is like a page of Epictetus and might have been dreamt by a dead Stoic:
-these are the visions of that spirit and the incarnations of that time.
-Its faith was doubtful, but its doubt was faithful. And its supreme and
-acute difference from most periods of scepticism, from the later
-Renaissance, from the Restoration and from the hedonism of our own time
-was this, that when the creeds crumbled and the gods seemed to break up
-and vanish, it did not fall back, as we do, on things yet more solid and
-definite, upon art and wine and high finance and industrial efficiency
-and vices. It fell in love with abstractions and became enamoured of
-great and desolate words.
-
-The second point of _rapport_ between Watts and his time was a more
-personal matter, a matter more concerned with the man, or, at least, the
-type; but it throws so much light upon almost every step of his career
-that it may with advantage be suggested here. Those who know the man
-himself, the quaint and courtly old man down at Limnerslease, know that
-if he has one trait more arresting than another, it is his almost absurd
-humility. He even disparages his own talent that he may insist rather
-upon his aims. His speech and gesture are simple, his manner polite to
-the point of being deprecating, his soul to all appearance of an almost
-confounding clarity and innocence. But although these appearances
-accurately represent the truth about him, though he is in reality modest
-and even fantastically modest, there is another element in him, an
-element which was in almost all the great men of his time, and it is
-something which many in these days would call a kind of splendid and
-inspired impudence. It is that wonderful if simple power of preaching,
-of claiming to be heard, of believing in an internal message and
-destiny: it is the audacious faculty of mounting a pulpit. Those would
-be very greatly mistaken who, misled by the childlike and humble manner
-of this monk of art, expected to find in him any sort of doubt, or any
-sort of fear, or any sort of modesty about the aims he follows or the
-cause he loves. He has the one great certainty which marks off all the
-great Victorians from those who have come after them: he may not be
-certain that he is successful, or certain that he is great, or certain
-that he is good, or certain that he is capable: but he is certain that
-he is right. It is of course the very element of confidence which has in
-our day become least common and least possible. We know we are brilliant
-and distinguished, but we do not know we are right. We swagger in
-fantastic artistic costumes; we praise ourselves; we fling epigrams
-right and left; we have the courage to play the egoist and the courage
-to play the fool, but we have not the courage to preach. If we are to
-deliver a philosophy it must be in the manner of the late Mr. Whistler
-and the _ridentem dicere verum_. If our heart is to be aimed at it must
-be with the rapier of Stevenson which runs us through without either
-pain or puncture. It is only just to say, that good elements as well as
-bad ones have joined in making this old Victorian preaching difficult or
-alien to us.
-
-[Illustration: LESLIE STEPHEN.]
-
-Humility as well as fear, camaraderie as well as cynicism, a sense of
-complexity and a kind of gay and worldly charity have led us to avoid
-the pose of the preacher, to be moral by ironies, to whisper a word and
-glide away. But, whatever may be the accidental advantage of this recoil
-from the didactic, it certainly does mean some loss of courage and of
-the old and athletic simplicity. Nay, in some sense it is really a loss
-of a fine pride and self-regard. Mr. Whistler coquetted and bargained
-about the position and sale of his pictures: he praised them; he set
-huge prices on them; but still under all disguise, he treated them as
-trifles. Watts, when scarcely more than a boy and comparatively unknown,
-started his great custom of offering his pictures as gifts worthy of a
-great nation. Thus we came to the conclusion, a conclusion which may
-seem to some to contain a faint element of paradox, that Mr. Whistler
-suffered from an excessive and exaggerated modesty. And this unnatural
-modesty of Mr. Whistler can scarcely be more typically symbolized than
-in his horror of preaching. The new school of art and thought does
-indeed wear an air of audacity, and breaks out everywhere into
-blasphemies, as if it required any courage to say a blasphemy. There is
-only one thing that it requires real courage to say, and that is a
-truism.
-
-Lastly, it would be quite impossible to complete this prefatory
-suggestion of the atmosphere in which the mind of Watts grew and
-prevailed, without saying something about that weary and weather-beaten
-question of the relation of art to ethics on which so much has been said
-in connexion with him and his contemporaries. About the real aim and the
-real value of Watts’ allegorical pictures I shall speak later, but for
-the moment it is only desirable to point out what the early and middle
-Victorian view of the matter really was. According to the later
-æsthetic creed which Mr. Whistler and others did so much to preach, the
-state of the arts under the reign of that Victorian view was a chaos of
-everyone minding everyone else’s business. It was a world in which
-painters were trying to be novelists, and novelists trying to be
-historians, and musicians doing the work of schoolmasters, and sculptors
-doing the work of curates. That is a view which has some truth in it,
-both as a description of the actual state of things and as involving an
-interesting and suggestive philosophy of the arts. But a good deal of
-harm may be done by ceaselessly repeating to ourselves even a true and
-fascinating fashionable theory, and a great deal of good by endeavouring
-to realize the real truth about an older one. The thing from which
-England suffers just now more than from any other evil is not the
-assertion of falsehoods, but the endless and irrepressible repetition of
-half-truths. There is another side to every historic situation, and that
-often a startling one; and the other side of the Victorian view of art,
-now so out of mode, is too little considered. The salient and essential
-characteristic of Watts and men of his school was that they regarded
-life as a whole. They had in their heads, as it were, a synthetic
-philosophy which put everything into a certain relation with God and the
-wheel of things. Thus, psychologically speaking, they were incapable not
-merely of holding such an opinion, but actually of thinking such a
-thought as that of art for art’s sake; it was to them like talking about
-voting for voting’s sake, or amputating for amputating’s sake. To them
-as to the ancient Jews the Spirit of the unity of existence declared in
-thunder that they should not make any graven image, or have any gods but
-Him. Doubtless, they did not give art a
-
-[Illustration: WALTER CRANE.]
-
-relation of unimpeachable correctness: in their scheme of things it may
-be true, or rather it is true, that the æsthetic was confused with the
-utilitarian, that good gardens were turned so to speak into bad
-cornfields, and a valuable temple into a useless post-office. But in so
-far as they had this fundamental idea that art must be linked to life,
-and to the strength and honour of nations, they were a hundred times
-more broad-minded and more right than the new ultra-technical school.
-The idea of following art through everything for itself alone, through
-extravagance, through cruelty, through morbidity, is just exactly as
-superstitious as the idea of following theology for itself alone through
-extravagance and cruelty and morbidity. To deny that Baudelaire is
-loathsome, or Nietzsche inhuman, because we stand in awe of beauty, is
-just the same thing as denying that the Court of Pope Julius was
-loathsome, or the rack inhuman, because we stand in awe of religion. It
-is not necessary and it is not honest. The young critics of the Green
-Carnation, with their nuances and technical mysteries, would doubtless
-be surprised to learn that as a class they resemble ecstatic nuns, but
-their principle is, in reality, the same. There is a great deal to be
-said for them, and a great deal, for that matter, to be said for nuns.
-But there is nothing to be surprised at, nothing to call for any charge
-of inconsistency or lack of enlightenment, about the conduct of Watts
-and the great men of his age, in being unable to separate art from
-ethics. They were nationalists and universalists: they thought that the
-ecstatic isolation of the religious sense had done incalculable harm to
-religion. It is not remarkable or unreasonable that they should think
-that the ecstatic isolation of the artistic sense would do incalculable
-harm to art.
-
-This, then, was the atmosphere of Watts and Victorian idealism: an
-atmosphere so completely vanished from the world of art in which we now
-live that the above somewhat long introduction is really needed to make
-it vivid or human to us. These three elements may legitimately, as I
-have said, be predicated of it as its main characteristics: first, the
-sceptical idealism, the belief that abstract verities remained the chief
-affairs of men when theology left them; second, the didactic simplicity,
-the claim to teach other men and to assume one’s own value and
-rectitude; third, the cosmic utilitarianism, the consideration of any
-such thing as art or philosophy perpetually with reference to a general
-good. They may be right or wrong, they may be returning or gone for
-ever; theories and fashions may change the face of humanity again and
-yet again; but at least in that one old man at Limnerslease, burned, and
-burned until death, these convictions, like three lamps in an old pagan
-temple of stoicism.
-
-Of the ancestry of Watts so little is known that it resolves itself into
-one hypothesis: a hypothesis which brings with it a suggestion, a
-suggestion employed by almost all his existing biographers, but a
-suggestion which cannot, I think, pass unchallenged, although the matter
-may appear somewhat theoretic and remote. Watts was born in London, but
-his family had in the previous generation come from Hereford. The vast
-amount of Welsh blood which is by the nature of the case to be found in
-Herefordshire has led to the statement that Watts is racially a Celt,
-which is very probably true. But it is also said, in almost every notice
-of his life and work, that the Celtic spirit can be detected in his
-painting, that the Celtic principle of mysticism is a characteristic of
-his artistic conceptions. It is in no idly antagonistic spirit that I
-venture to doubt this most profoundly.
-
-[Illustration: THE SLUMBER OF THE AGES]
-
-Watts may or may not be racially a Celt, but there is nothing Celtic
-about his mysticism. The essential Celtic spirit in letters and art may,
-I think, be defined as a sense of the unbearable beauty of things. The
-essential spirit of Watts may, I think, be much better expressed as a
-sense of the joyful austerity of things. The dominant passion of the
-artistic Celt, of Mr. W. B. Yeats or Sir Edward Burne-Jones, is in the
-word “escape”: escape into a land where oranges grow on plum-trees and
-men can sow what they like and reap what they enjoy. To Watts the very
-word “escape” would be horrible, like an obscene word: his ideal is
-altogether duty and the great wheel. To the Celt frivolity is most truly
-the most serious of things, since in the tangle of roses is always the
-old serpent who is wiser than the world. To Watts seriousness is most
-truly the most “joyful of things,” since in it we come nearest to that
-ultimate equilibrium and reconciliation of things whereby alone they
-live and endure life and each other. It is difficult to imagine that
-amid all the varieties of noble temper and elemental desire there could
-possibly be two exhibiting a more total divergence than that between a
-kindly severity and an almost cruel love of sweetness; than that between
-a laborious and open-air charity and a kind of Bacchic asceticism;
-between a joy in peace and a joy in disorder; between a reduction of
-existence to its simplest formula and an extension of it to its most
-frantic corollary; between a lover of justice who accepts the real world
-more submissively than a slave and a lover of pleasure who despises the
-real world more bitterly than a hermit; between a king in battle-harness
-and a vagabond in elf-land; between Watts and Sir Edward Burne-Jones.
-
-It is remarkable that even the technical style of Watts gives a
-contradiction to this Celtic theory. Watts is strong precisely where
-the Celt is weak, and weak precisely where the Celt is strong. The only
-thing that the Celt has lacked in art is that hard mass, that naked
-outline, that ἀρχιτεκτονική, which makes Watts a sort of sculptor of
-draughtsmanship. It is as well for us that the Celt has not had this: if
-he had, he would rule the world with a rod of iron; for he has
-everything else. There are no hard black lines in Burke’s orations, or
-Tom Moore’s songs, or the plays of Mr. W. B. Yeats. Burke is the
-greatest of political philosophers, because in him only are there
-distances and perspectives, as there are on the real earth, with its
-mists of morning and evening, and its blue horizons and broken skies.
-Moore’s songs have neither a pure style nor deep realization, nor
-originality of form, nor thought nor wit nor vigour, but they have
-something else which is none of these things, which is nameless and the
-one thing needful. In Mr. Yeats’ plays there is only one character: the
-hero who rules and kills all the others, and his name is Atmosphere.
-Atmosphere and the gleaming distances are the soul of Celtic greatness
-as they were of Burne-Jones, who was, as I have said, weak precisely
-where Watts is strong, in the statuesque quality in drawing, in the love
-of heavy hands like those of _Mammon_, of a strong back like that of
-_Eve Repentant_, in a single fearless and austere outline like that of
-the angel in _The Court of Death_, in the frame-filling violence of
-_Jonah_, in the half-witted brutality of _The Minotaur_. He is
-deficient, that is to say, in what can only be called the god-like
-materialism of art. Watts, on the other hand, is peculiarly strong in
-it. Idealist as he is, there is nothing frail or phantasmal about the
-things or the figures he loves. Though not himself a robust man, he
-loves robustness; he loves a great bulk of shoulder, an abrupt bend of
-neck, a gigantic stride,
-
-[Illustration: CARDINAL MANNING.]
-
-a large and swinging limb, a breast bound as with bands of brass. Of
-course the deficiency in such a case is very far from being altogether
-on one side. There are abysses in Burne-Jones which Watts could not
-understand, the Celtic madness, older than any sanity, the hunger that
-will remain after the longest feast, the sorrow that is built up of
-stratified delights. From the point of view of the true Celt, Watts, the
-Watts who painted the great stoical pictures _Love and Death_, _Time,
-Death and Judgment_, _The Court of Death_, _Mammon_, and _Cain_, this
-pictorial Watts would probably be, must almost certainly be, simply a
-sad, sane, strong, stupid Englishman. He may or may not be Welsh by
-extraction or by part of his extraction, but in spirit he is an
-Englishman, with all the faults and all the disadvantages of an
-Englishman. He is a great Englishman like Milton or Gladstone, of the
-type, that is to say, that were too much alive for anything but gravity,
-and who enjoyed themselves far too much to trouble to enjoy a joke.
-Matthew Arnold has come near to defining that kind of idealism, so
-utterly different from the Celtic kind, which is to be found in Milton
-and again in Watts. He has called it, in one of his finest and most
-accurate phrases, “the imaginative reason.”
-
-This racial legend about the Watts family does not seem to rest upon any
-certain foundations, and as I have said, the deduction drawn from it is
-quite loose and misleading. The whole is only another example of that
-unfortunate, if not infamous, modern habit of talking about such things
-as heredity with a vague notion that science has closed the question
-when she has only just opened it. Nobody knows, as a matter of fact,
-whether a Celtic mysticism can be inherited any more than a theory on
-the Education Bill. But the eagerness of the popular mind to snatch at
-a certainty is too impatient for the tardy processes of real hypothesis
-and research. Long before heredity has become a science, it has become a
-superstition. And this curious though incidental case of the origin of
-the Watts genius is just one of those cases which make us wonder what
-has been the real result of the great rise of science. So far the result
-would painfully appear to be that whereas men in the earlier times said
-unscientific things with the vagueness of gossip and legend, they now
-say unscientific things with the plainness and the certainty of science.
-
-The actual artistic education of Watts, though thorough indeed in its
-way, had a somewhat peculiar character, the air of something detached
-and private, and to the external eye something even at random. He works
-hard, but in an elusive and personal manner. He does not remember the
-time when he did not draw: he was an artist in his babyhood as he is an
-artist still in his old age. Like Ruskin and many other of the great and
-serious men of the century, he would seem to have been brought up
-chiefly on what may be called the large legendary literature, on such as
-Homer and Scott. Among his earliest recorded works was a set of coloured
-illustrations to the Waverley Novels, and a sketch of the struggle for
-the body of Patroclus. He went to the Academy schools, but only stayed
-there about a month; never caring for or absorbing the teaching, such as
-it was, of the place. He wandered perpetually in the Greek galleries of
-the British Museum, staring at the Elgin marbles, from which he always
-declared he learnt all the art he knew. “There,” he said, stretching out
-his hand towards the Ilyssus in his studio, “there is my master.” We
-hear of a friendship between him and the sculptor William Behnes, of
-Watts lounging about that artist’s studio, playing with clay, modelling
-busts, and staring
-
-[Illustration: CHAOS.]
-
-at the work of sculpture. His eyes seemed to have been at this time the
-largest and hungriest part of him. Even when the great chance and first
-triumph of his life arrived a year or two later, even when he gained the
-great scholarship which sent him abroad to work amid the marbles of
-Italy, when a famous ambassador was his patron and a brilliant circle
-his encouragement, we do not find anything of the conventional student
-about him. He never painted in the galleries; he only dreamed in them.
-This must not, of course, be held to mean that he did not work; though
-one or two people who have written memoirs of Watts have used a
-phraseology, probably without noticing it, which might be held to imply
-this. Not only is the thing ludicrously incongruous with his exact
-character and morals; but anyone who knows anything whatever about the
-nature of pictorial art will know quite well that a man could not paint
-like that without having worked; just as he would know that a man could
-not be the Living Serpent without any previous practice with his joints.
-To say that he could really learn to paint and draw with the technical
-merit of Watts, or with any technical merit at all, by simply looking at
-other people’s pictures and statues will seem to anyone, with a small
-technical sense, like saying that a man learnt to be a sublime violinist
-by staring at fiddles in a shop window. It is as near a physical
-impossibility as can exist in these matters. Work Watts must have done
-and did do; it is the only conclusion possible which is consistent
-either with the nature of Watts or the nature of painting; and it is
-fully supported by the facts. But what the facts do reveal is that he
-worked in this curiously individual, this curiously invisible way. He
-had his own notion of when to dream and when to draw; as he shrank from
-no toil, so he shrank from no idleness. He was something which is one of
-the most powerful and successful things in the world, something which is
-far more powerful and successful than a legion of students and prizemen:
-he was a serious and industrious truant.
-
-It is worth while to note this in his boyhood, partly, of course,
-because from one end of his life to the other there is this queer note
-of loneliness and liberty. But it is also more immediately and
-practically important because it throws some light on the development
-and character of his art, and even especially of his technique. The
-great singularity of Watts, considered as a mere artist, is that he
-stands alone. He is not connected with any of the groups of the
-nineteenth century: he has neither followed a school nor founded one. He
-is not mediæval; but no one could exactly call him classical: we have
-only to compare him to Leighton to feel the difference at once. His
-artistic style is rather a thing more primitive than paganism; a thing
-to which paganism and mediævalism are alike upstart sects; a style of
-painting there might have been upon the tower of Babel. He is mystical;
-but he is not mediæval: we have only to compare him to Rossetti to feel
-the difference. When he emerged into the artistic world, that world was
-occupied by the pompous and historical school, that school which was so
-exquisitely caricatured by Thackeray in Gandish and his “Boadishia”; but
-Watts was not pompous or historical: he painted one historical picture,
-which brought him a youthful success, and he has scarcely painted
-another. He lived on through the great Pre-Raphaelite time, that very
-noble and very much undervalued time, when men found again what had been
-hidden since the thirteenth century under loads of idle civilization,
-the truth that simplicity and a monastic laboriousness is the happiest
-of all things; the great truth that purity is the only atmosphere for
-passion; the great truth that silver is more beautiful than gold. But
-though there is any quantity of this sentiment in Watts himself, Watts
-never has been a Pre-Raphaelite. He has seen other fashions come and go;
-he has seen the Pre-Raphaelites overwhelmed by a heavy restoration of
-the conventional, headed by Millais with his Scotch moors and his
-English countesses; but he has not heeded it. He has seen these again
-overturned by the wild lancers of Whistler; he has seen the mists of
-Impressionism settle down over the world, making it weird and delicate
-and noncommittal: but he thinks no more of the wet mist of the
-Impressionist than he thought of the dry glare of the Pre-Raphaelite.
-
-He, the most mild of men, has yet never been anything but Watts. He has
-followed the gleam, like some odd modern Merlin. He has escaped all the
-great atmospheres, the divine if deluding intoxications, which have
-whirled one man one way and one another; which flew to the head of a
-perfect stylist like Ruskin and made him an insane scientist; which flew
-to the head of a great artist like Whistler and made him a pessimistic
-dandy. He has passed them with a curious immunity, an immunity which, if
-it were not so nakedly innocent, might almost be called egotism; but
-which is in fact rather the single eye. He said once that he had not
-even consented to illustrate a book; his limitation was that he could
-express no ideas but his own. He admired Tennyson; he thought him the
-greatest of poets; he thought him a far greater man than himself; he
-read him, he adored him, but he could not illustrate him. This is the
-curious secret strength which kept him independent in his youth and
-kept him independent through the great roaring triumph of the
-Pre-Raphaelite and the great roaring triumph of the Impressionist. He
-stands in the world of art as he stood in the studio of Behnes and in
-the Uffizi Gallery. He stands gazing, but not copying.
-
-Of Watts as he was at this time there remains a very interesting
-portrait painted by himself. It represents him at the age of nineteen, a
-dark, slim, and very boyish-looking creature. Something in changed
-conditions may no doubt account for the flowing and voluminous dark
-hair: we see such a mane in many of the portraits of the most
-distinguished men of that time; but if a man appeared now and walked
-down Fleet Street with so neglected a _hure_, he would be mistaken for
-an advertisement of a hair-dresser, or by the more malicious for a minor
-poet. But there is about this picture not a trace of affectation or the
-artistic immunity in these matters: the boy’s dress is rough and
-ordinary, his expression is simple and unconscious. From a modern
-standpoint we should say without hesitation that if his hair is long it
-is because he has forgotten to have it cut. And there is something about
-this contrast between the unconsciously leonine hair and the innocent
-and almost bashful face, there is something like a parable of Watts. His
-air is artistic, if you will. His famous skull cap, which makes him look
-like a Venetian senator, is as pictorial and effective as the boyish
-mane in the picture. But he belongs to that older race of Bohemians, of
-which even Thackeray only saw the sunset, the great old race of art and
-literature who were ragged because they were really poor, frank because
-they were really free, and untidy because they were really forgetful. It
-will not do to confuse Watts with these men; there is
-
-[Illustration: “FOR HE HAD GREAT POSSESSIONS.”]
-
-much about him that is precise and courtly, and which, as I shall have
-occasion to remark, belongs really to a yet older period. But it is more
-right to reckon Watts along with them in their genuine raggedness than
-to suppose that the unquestionable picturesqueness with which he fronts
-the world has any relation with that new Bohemianism which is untidy
-because it is conventional, frank because it follows a fashion, careless
-because it watches for all its effects, and ragged and coarse in its
-tastes because it has too much money.
-
-The first definite encouragement, or at least the first encouragement
-now ascertainable, probably came to the painter from that interesting
-Greek amateur, Mr. Constantine Ionides. It was under his encouragement
-that Watts began all his earlier work of the more ambitious kind, and it
-was the portrait of Mrs. Constantine Ionides which ranks among the
-earliest of his definite successes. He achieved immediate professional
-success, however, at an astonishingly early age, judged by modern
-standards. When he was barely twenty he had three pictures in the Royal
-Academy: the first two were portraits, and the third a picture called
-_The Wounded Heron_. There is always a very considerable temptation to
-fantasticality in dealing with these artistic origins: no doubt it does
-not always follow that a man is destined to be a military conqueror
-because he beats other little boys at school, nor endued with a
-passionate and clamorous nature because he begins this mortal life with
-a yell. But Watts has, to a rather unusual degree, a sincere and
-consistent and homogeneous nature; and this first exhibit of his has
-really a certain amount of symbolism about it. Portraiture, with which
-he thus began, he was destined to raise to a level never before attained
-in English art, so far as significance and humanity are concerned; and
-there is really something a little fascinating about the fact that along
-with these pictures went one picture which had, for all practical
-purposes, an avowedly humanitarian object. The picture of _The Wounded
-Heron_ scarcely ever attracts attention, I imagine, in these days, but
-it may, of course, have been recalled for a moment to the popular mind
-by that curious incident which occurred in connexion with it and which
-has often been told. Long after the painter who produced that picture in
-his struggling boyhood had lost sight of it and in all probability
-forgotten all about its existence, a chance traveller with a taste in
-the arts happened to find it in the dusty curiosity-shop of a
-north-country town. He bought it and gave it back to the now celebrated
-painter, who hung it among the exhibits at Little Holland House. It is,
-as I have said, a thing painted clearly with a humanitarian object: it
-depicts the suffering of a stricken creature; it depicts the
-helplessness of life under the cruelty of the inanimate violence; it
-depicts the pathos of dying and the greater pathos of living. Since
-then, no doubt, Watts has improved his machinery of presentation and
-found larger and more awful things to tell his tale with than a bleeding
-bird. The wings of the heron have widened till they embrace the world
-with the terrible wings of Time or Death: he has summoned the stars to
-help him and sent the angels as his ambassadors. He has changed the plan
-of operations until it includes Heaven and Tartarus. He has never
-changed the theme.
-
-The relations of Watts to Constantine Ionides either arose or became
-important about this time. The painter’s fortunes rose quickly and
-steadily, so far as the Academy was concerned. He continued to exhibit
-with a fair amount of regularity, chiefly in the form of subjects from
-the great romantic or
-
-[Illustration: AN IDLE CHILD OF FANCY.]
-
-historic traditions which were then the whole pabulum of the young
-idealistic artist. In the Academy of 1840 came a picture on the old
-romantic subject of Ferdinand and Isabella; in the following year but
-one, a picture on the old romantic subject of Cymbeline. The portrait of
-Mrs. Constantine Ionides appeared in 1842.
-
-But Watts’ mode of thought from the very beginning had very little
-kinship with the Academy and very little kinship with this kind of
-private and conventional art. An event was shortly to occur, the first
-success of his life, but an event far less important when considered as
-the first success of his life than it is when considered as an essential
-characteristic of his mind. The circumstances are so extremely
-characteristic of something in the whole spirit of the man’s art that it
-may be permissible to dwell at length on the significance of the fact
-rather than on the fact itself.
-
-The great English Parliament, the Senate that broke the English kings,
-had just moved its centre of existence. The new Houses of Parliament had
-opened with what seemed to the men of that time an opening world. A
-competition was started for the decoration of the halls, and Watts
-suddenly sprang into importance: he won the great prize. The cartoon of
-_Caractacus led in triumph through the streets of Rome_ was accepted
-from this almost nameless man by the great central power of English
-history. And until we have understood that fact we have not understood
-Watts: it was (one may be permitted to fancy) the supreme hour of his
-life. For Watts’ nature is essentially public--that is to say, it is
-modest and noble, and has nothing to hide. His art is an outdoor art,
-like that of the healthy ages of the world, like the statuesque art of
-Greece, like the ecclesiastical and external Gothic art of Christianity:
-an art that can look the sun in the face. He ought to be employed to
-paint factory chimneys and railway stations. I know that this will sound
-like an insolence: my only answer is that he, in accordance with this
-great conception of his, actually offered to paint a railway station.
-With a splendid and truly religious imagination, he asked permission to
-decorate Euston. The railway managers (not perceiving, in their dull
-classical routine, the wild poetry of their own station) declined. But
-until we have understood this immense notion of publicity in the soul of
-Watts, we have understood nothing. The fundamental modern fallacy is
-that the public life must be an artificial life. It is like saying that
-the public street must be an artificial air. Men like Watts, men like
-all the great heroes, only breathe in public. What is the use of abusing
-a man for publicity when he utters in public the true and the enduring
-things? What is the use, above all, of prying into his secrecy when he
-has cried his best from the house-tops?
-
-This is the real argument which makes a detailed biography of Watts
-unnecessary for all practical purposes. It is in vain to climb walls and
-hide in cupboards in order to show whether Watts eats mustard or pepper
-with his curry or whether Watts takes sugar or salt with his porridge.
-These things may or may not become public: it matters little. The
-innermost that the biographer could at last discover, after all possible
-creepings and capers, would be what Watts in his inmost soul believes,
-and that Watts has splashed on twenty feet of canvas and given to the
-nation for nothing. Like one of the great orators of the eighteenth
-century, his public virtues, his public ecstasies are far more really
-significant than his private weaknesses. The rest of his life is so
-simple that it is scarcely worth telling. He went with the great
-scholarship he gained with his _Caractacus_ to Italy. There he found a
-new patron--the famous Lord Holland, with the whole of whose great
-literary circle he rapidly became acquainted. He painted many of his
-most famous portraits in connexion with this circle, both in Italy and
-afterwards in Paris. But this great vision of the public idea had
-entered his blood. He offered his cartoons to Euston Station; he painted
-St. George and the Dragon for the House of Lords; he presented a fresco
-to the great hall at Lincoln’s Inn. Of his life there is scarcely more
-to say, except the splendid fact that he three times refused a title. Of
-his character there is a great deal more to say.
-
-There is unquestionably about the personal attitude of Watts something
-that in the vague phraseology of modern times would be called Puritan.
-Puritan, however, is very far from being really the right word. The
-right word is a word which has been singularly little used in English
-nomenclature because historical circumstances have separated us from the
-origin from which it sprang. The right word for the spirit of Watts is
-_Stoicism_. Watts is at one with the Puritans in the actual objects of
-his attack. One of his deepest and most enduring troubles, a matter of
-which he speaks and writes frequently, is the prevalence of gambling.
-With the realism of an enthusiast, he has detected the essential fact
-that the problem of gambling is even more of a problem in the case of
-the poorer classes than in the case of the richer. It is, as he asserts,
-a far worse danger than drink. There are many other instances of his
-political identity with Puritanism. He told Mr. W. T. Stead that he had
-defended and was prepared to defend the staggering publications of the
-“Maiden Tribute”; it was the only way, he said, to stem the evil. A
-picturesque irradiation asserts indeed that it was under the glow of
-Hebraic anger against these Babylonian cruelties of Piccadilly and the
-Strand that he painted as a symbol of those cruelties that brutal and
-magnificent picture _The Minotaur_. The pictures themselves of course
-bear sufficient attestation to this general character: _Mammon_ is what
-we call a Puritan picture, and _Jonah_, and _Fata Morgana_, and _For he
-had Great Possessions_. It is not difficult to see that Watts has the
-Puritan vigilance, the Puritan realism, and the Puritan severity in his
-attitude towards public affairs. Nevertheless, as I have said, he is to
-be described rather as a Stoic than a Puritan. The essential difference
-between Christian and Pagan asceticism lies in the fact that Paganism in
-renouncing pleasure gives up something which it does not think
-desirable; whereas Christianity in giving up pleasure gives up something
-which it thinks very desirable indeed. Thus there is a frenzy in
-Christian asceticism; its follies and renunciations are like those of
-first love. There is a passion, and as it were a regret, in the
-Puritanism of Bunyan; there is none in the Puritanism of Watts. He is
-not Bunyan, he is Cato. The difference may be a difficult one to convey,
-but it is one that must not be ignored or great misunderstandings will
-follow. The one self-abnegation is more reasonable but less joyful. The
-Stoic casts away pleasure like the parings of his nails; the Mystic cuts
-it off like his right hand that offends him. In Watts we have the noble
-self-abnegation of a noble type and school; but everything, however
-noble, that has shape has limitation, and we must not look in Watts,
-with his national self-mastery, either for the nightmare of Stylites or
-the gaiety of Francis of Assisi.
-
-It has already been remarked that the chief note
-
-[Illustration: THE MINOTAUR.]
-
-of the painter’s character is a certain mixture of personal delicacy and
-self-effacement with the most immense and audacious aims. But it is so
-essential a trait that it will bear a repetition and the introduction of
-a curious example of it. Watts in his quaint and even shy manner of
-speech often let fall in conversation words which hint at a certain
-principle or practice of his, a principle and practice which are, when
-properly apprehended, beyond expression impressive and daring. The
-spectator who studies his allegorical paintings one after another will
-be vaguely impressed with something uniquely absent, something which is
-usual and familiar in such pictures conspicuous by its withdrawal; a
-blank or difference which makes them things sundered altogether from the
-millions of allegorical pictures that throng the great and small
-galleries of painting. At length the nature of this missing thing may
-suddenly strike him: in the whole range of Watts’ symbolic art there is
-scarcely a single example of the ordinary and arbitrary current symbol,
-the ecclesiastical symbol, the heraldic symbol, the national symbol. A
-primeval vagueness and archaism hang over all the canvases and cartoons,
-like frescoes from some prehistoric temple. There is nothing there but
-the eternal things, clay and fire and the sea, and motherhood and the
-dead. We cannot imagine the rose or the lion of England; the keys or the
-tiara of Rome; the red cap of Liberty or the crescent of Islam in a
-picture by Watts; we cannot imagine the Cross itself. And in light and
-broken phrases, carelessly and humbly expressed, as I have said, the
-painter has admitted that this great omission was observed on principle.
-Its object is that the pictures may be intelligible if they survive the
-whole modern order. Its object is, that is to say, that if some savage
-in a dim futurity dug up one of these dark designs on a lonely
-mountain, though he worshipped strange gods and served laws yet
-unwritten, it might strike the same message to his soul that it strikes
-upon clerks and navvies from the walls of the Tate Gallery. It is
-impossible not to feel a movement of admiration for the magnitude of the
-thought. Here is a man whose self-depreciation is internal and vital;
-whose life is cloistered, whose character is childlike, and he has yet
-within such an unconscious and colossal sense of greatness that he
-paints on the assumption that his work may outlast the cross of the
-Eternal City. As a boy he scarcely expected worldly success: as an old
-man he still said that his worldly success had astonished him. But in
-his nameless youth and in his silent old age he paints like one upon a
-tower looking down the appalling perspective of the centuries towards
-fantastic temples and inconceivable republics.
-
-This union of small self-esteem with a vast ambition is a paradox in the
-very soul of the painter; and when we look at the symbolic pictures in
-the light of this theory of his, it is interesting and typical to
-observe how consistently he pursues any intellectual rule that he laid
-down for himself. An æsthetic or ethical notion of this kind is not to
-him, as to most men with the artistic temperament, a thing to talk about
-sumptuously, to develop in lectures, and to observe when it happens to
-be suitable. It is a thing like his early rising or his personal
-conscience, a thing which is either a rule or nothing. And we find this
-insistence on universal symbols, this rejection of all symbols that are
-local or temporary or topical, even if the locality be a whole
-continent, the time a stretch of centuries, or the topic a vast
-civilization or an undying church--we find this insistence looking out
-very clearly from the allegories of Watts. It would
-
-[Illustration: THE COURT OF DEATH.]
-
-have been easy and effective, as he himself often said, to make the
-meaning of a picture clear by the introduction of some popular and
-immediate image: and it must constantly be remembered that Watts does
-care very much for making the meaning of his pictures clear. His work
-indeed has, as I shall suggest shortly, a far more subtle and unnamable
-quality than the merely hard and didactic; but it must not be for one
-moment pretended that Watts does not claim to teach: to do so would be
-to falsify the man’s life. And it would be easy, as is quite obvious, to
-make the pictures clearer: to hang a crucifix over the _Happy Warrior_,
-to give _Mammon_ some imperial crown or typical heraldic symbols, to
-give a theological machinery to _The Court of Death_. But this is put on
-one side like a temptation of the flesh, because it conflicts with this
-stupendous idea of painting for all peoples and all centuries. I am not
-saying that this extraordinary ambition is necessarily the right view of
-art, or the right view of life. I am only reiterating it as an absolute
-trait of men of the time and type and temper of Watts. It may plausibly
-be maintained, I am not sure that it cannot more truly be maintained,
-that man cannot achieve and need not achieve this frantic universality.
-A man, I fancy, is after all only an animal that has noble preferences.
-It is the very difference between the artistic mind and the mathematical
-that the former sees things as they are in a picture, some nearer and
-larger, some smaller and further away: while to the mathematical mind
-everything, every unit in a million, every fact in a cosmos, must be of
-equal value. That is why mathematicians go mad; and poets scarcely ever
-do. A man may have as wide a view of life as he likes, the wider the
-better; a distant view, a bird’s-eye view, if he will, but still a view
-and not a map. The one thing he cannot attempt in his version of the
-universe is to draw things to scale. I have put myself for a moment
-outside this universalism and doubted its validity because a thing
-always appears more sharp and personal and picturesque if we do not
-wholly agree with it. And this universalism is an essential and dominant
-feature of such great men as Watts and of his time as a whole. Mr.
-Herbert Spencer is a respectable, almost a dapper, figure, his theory is
-agnostic and his tone polite and precise. And yet he threw himself into
-a task more insane and gigantic than that of Dante, an inventory or plan
-of the universe itself; the awful vision of existence as a single
-organism, like an amœba on the disc of a microscope. He claimed, by
-implication, to put in their right places the flaming certainty of the
-martyrs, the wild novelties of the modern world; to arrange the eternal
-rock of Peter and the unbroken trance of Buddhism. It is only in this
-age of specialists, of cryptic experiences in art and faith like the
-present, that we can see how huge was that enterprise; but the spirit of
-it is the spirit of Watts. The man of that aggressive nineteenth century
-had many wild thoughts, but there was one thought that never even for an
-instant strayed across his burning brain. He never once thought, “Why
-should I understand the cat, any more than the cat understands me?” He
-never thought, “Why should I be just to the merits of a Chinaman, any
-more than a pig studies the mystic virtues of a camel?” He affronted
-heaven and the angels, but there was one hard arrogant dogma that he
-never doubted even when he doubted Godhead: he never doubted that he
-himself was as central and as responsible as God.
-
-This paradox, then, we call the first element in the artistic and
-personal claim of Watts, that he
-
-[Illustration: MATTHEW ARNOLD.]
-
-[Illustration: JOHN STUART MILL.]
-
-realizes the great paradox of the Gospel. He is meek, but he claims to
-inherit the earth. But there is, of course, a great deal more to be said
-before this view of the matter can be considered complete. The
-universalism preached by Watts and the other great Victorians was of
-course subject to certain specialisations; it is not necessary to call
-them limitations. Like Matthew Arnold, the last and most sceptical of
-them, who expressed their basic idea in its most detached and
-philosophic form, they held that conduct was three-fourths of life. They
-were ingrainedly ethical; the mere idea of thinking anything more
-important than ethics would have struck them as profane. In this they
-were certainly right, but they were nevertheless partial or partisan;
-they did not really maintain the judicial attitude of the universalist.
-The mere thought of Watts painting a picture called _The Victory of Joy
-over Morality_, or _Nature rebuking Conscience_, is enough to show the
-definite limits of that cosmic equality. This is not, of course, to be
-taken as a fault in the attitude of Watts. He simply draws the line
-somewhere, as all men, including anarchists, draw it somewhere; he is
-dogmatic, as all sane men are dogmatic.
-
-There is another phase of this innocent audacity. It may appear to be
-more fanciful, it is certainly more completely a matter of inference;
-but it throws light on yet another side of the character of Watts.
-
-Watts’ relation to friends and friendship has something about it very
-typical. He is not a man desirous or capable of a very large or rich or
-varied circle of acquaintance. There is nothing Bohemian about him. He
-belongs both chronologically and psychologically to that period which is
-earlier even than Thackeray and his Cave of Harmony: he belongs to the
-quiet, struggling, self-created men of the forties, with their tradition
-of self-abnegating individualism. Much as there is about him of the
-artist and the poet, there is something about him also of the
-industrious apprentice. That strenuous solitude in which Archbishop
-Temple as a boy struggled to carry a bag of ironmongery which crushed
-his back, in which Gladstone cut down trees and John Stuart Mill read
-half the books of the world in boyhood, that strenuous solitude entered
-to some degree into the very soul of Watts and made him independent of
-them. But the friends he made have as a general rule been very
-characteristic: they have marked the strange and haughty fastidiousness
-that goes along with his simplicity. His friends, his intimate friends,
-that is, have been marked by a certain indescribable and stately
-worthiness: more than one of them have been great men like himself. The
-greatest and most intimate of all his friends, probably, was Tennyson,
-and in this there is something singularly characteristic of Watts. About
-the actuality of the intellectual tie that bound him to Tennyson there
-can be little doubt. He painted three, if not four, portraits of him;
-his name was often on his lips; he invoked him always as the typical
-great poet, excusing his faults and expounding his virtues. He invoked
-his authority as that of the purest of poets, and invoked it very finely
-and well in a sharp controversial interview he had on the nature and
-ethics of the nude in art.
-
-At the time I write, there is standing at the end of the garden at
-Limnerslease a vast shed, used for a kind of sculptor’s studio, in which
-there stands a splendid but unfinished statue, on which the veteran of
-the arts is even now at work. It represents Tennyson, wrapped in his
-famous mantle, with his magnificent head bowed, gazing at something in
-the
-
-[Illustration: ROBERT BROWNING.]
-
-[Illustration: LORD TENNYSON.]
-
-hollow of his hand. The subject is _Flower in the Crannied Wall_. There
-is something very characteristic of Watts in the contrast between the
-colossal plan of the figure and the smallness of the central object.
-
-But while the practical nature of the friendship between Watts and
-Tennyson is clear enough, there is something really significant,
-something really relevant to Watts’ attitude in its ultimate and
-psychological character. It is surely most likely that Watts and
-Tennyson were drawn together because they both represented a certain
-relation towards their art which is not common in our time and was
-scarcely properly an attribute of any artists except these two. Watts
-could not have found the thing he most believed in Browning or Swinburne
-or Morris or any of the other poets. Tennyson could not have found the
-thing he most believed in Leighton or Millais or any of the other
-painters. They were brought together, it must be supposed, by the one
-thing that they had really in common, a profound belief in the
-solemnity, the ceremoniousness, the responsibility, and what most men
-would now, in all probability, call the pomposity of the great arts.
-
-Watts has always a singular kind of semi-mystical tact in the matter of
-portrait painting. His portraits are commonly very faultless comments
-and have the same kind of superlative mental delicacy that we see in the
-picture of _Hope_. And the whole truth of this last matter is very well
-expressed in Watts’ famous portrait of Tennyson, particularly if we look
-at it in conjunction with his portrait of Browning. The head of Browning
-is the head of a strong, splendid, joyful, and anxious man who could
-write magnificent poetry. The head of Tennyson is the head of a poet.
-Watts has painted Tennyson with his dark dome-like head relieved
-against a symbolic green and blue of the eternal sea and the eternal
-laurels. He has behind him the bays of Dante and he is wrapped in the
-cloak of the prophets. Browning is dressed like an ordinary modern man,
-and we at once feel that it should and must be so. To dress Browning in
-the prophet’s robe and the poet’s wreath would strike us all as suddenly
-ridiculous; it would be like sending him to a fancy-dress ball. It would
-be like attiring Matthew Arnold in the slashed tights of an Elizabethan,
-or putting Mr. Lecky into a primitive Celto-Irish kilt. But it does not
-strike us as absurd in the case of Tennyson: it does not strike us as
-even eccentric or outlandish or remote. We think of Tennyson in that
-way; we think of him as a lordly and conscious bard. Some part of this
-fact may, of course, be due to his possession of a magnificent physical
-presence; but not, I think, all. Lord Kitchener (let us say) is a
-handsome man, but we should laugh at him very much in silver armour. It
-is much more due to the fact that Tennyson really assumed and was
-granted this stately and epic position. It is not true that Tennyson was
-more of a poet than Browning, if we mean by that statement that Browning
-could not compose forms as artistic and well-managed, lyrics as light
-and poignant, and rhythms as swelling and stirring as any in English
-letters. But it is true that Tennyson was more of a poet than Browning,
-if we mean by that statement that Tennyson was a poet in person, in post
-and circumstance and conception of life; and that Browning was not, in
-that sense, a poet at all. Browning first inaugurated in modern art and
-letters the notion or tradition, in many ways perhaps a more wholesome
-one, that the fact that a man pursued the trade or practice of poetry
-was his own affair and a thing apart,
-
-[Illustration: THE DWELLER IN THE INNERMOST.]
-
-like the fact that he collected coins or earned his living as a hatter.
-But Tennyson really belonged to an older tradition, the tradition that
-believed that the poet, the appointed “Vates,” was a recognized and
-public figure like the bard or jester at the mediæval courts, like the
-prophet in the old Commonwealth of Israel. In Tennyson’s work appeared
-for the last time in English history this notion of the stately and
-public and acknowledged poet: it was the lay of the last minstrel.
-
-Now there is in Watts, gentle and invisible as he is, something that
-profoundly responds to that spirit. Leighton, like Browning, was a
-courtier and man of the world: Millais, like Browning, was a good fellow
-and an ordinary gentleman: but Watts has more of Tennyson in him; he
-believes in a great priesthood of art. He believes in a certain pure and
-childish publicity. If anyone suggested that before a man ventured to
-paint pictures or to daub with plaster he should be initiated with some
-awful rites in some vast and crowded national temple, should swear to
-work worthily before some tremendous altar or over some symbolic flame,
-Millais would have laughed heartily at the idea and Leighton also. But
-it would not seem either absurd or unreasonable to Watts. In the thick
-of this smoky century he is living in a clear age of heroes.
-
-Watts’ relations to Tennyson were indeed very characteristic of what was
-finest, and at the same time quaintest, in the two men. The painter,
-with a typical sincerity, took the poet seriously, I had almost said
-literally, in his daily life, and liked him to live up to his poetry.
-The poet, with that queer sulky humour which gave him, perhaps, more
-breadth than Watts, but less strength, said, after reading some acid and
-unjust criticisms, “I wish I had never written a line.” “Come,” said
-Watts, “you wouldn’t like ‘King Arthur’ to talk like that.” Tennyson
-paused a moment and then spread out his fingers. “Well,” he said, “what
-do you expect? It’s all the gout.” The artist, with a characteristic
-power of juvenile and immortal hero-worship, tells this story as an
-instance of the fundamental essence of odd magnanimity and sombre
-geniality in Tennyson. It is such an instance and a very good one: but
-it is also an instance of the sharp logical idealism, of the prompt
-poetic candour of Watts. He asked Tennyson to be King Arthur, and it
-never occurred to him to think that he was asking Addison to be Cato, or
-Massinger to be Saint Dorothy. The incident is a fine tribute to a
-friendship.
-
-The real difficulty which many cultivated people have in the matter of
-Watts’ allegorical pictures is far more difficult. It is indeed nothing
-else but the great general reaction against allegorical art which has
-arisen during the last artistic period. The only way in which we can
-study, with any real sincerity, the allegoric art of Watts is to ask to
-what is really due the objection to allegory which has thus arisen. The
-real objection to allegory is, it may roughly be said, founded upon the
-conception that allegory involves one art imitating another. This is, up
-to a certain point, true. To paint a figure in a blue robe and call her
-Necessity, and then paint a small figure in a yellow robe and call it
-Invention; to put the second on the knee of the first, and then say that
-you are enunciating the sublime and eternal truth, that Necessity is the
-mother of Invention, this is indeed an idle and foolish affair. It is
-saying in six weeks’ work with brush and palette knife what could be
-said much better in six words. And there can be no reasonable dispute
-that of this character were a considerable
-
-[Illustration: GEORGE MEREDITH.]
-
-number of the allegorical pictures that have crowded the galleries and
-sprawled over the ceilings of ancient and modern times. Of such were the
-monstrous pictures of Rubens, which depicted a fat Religion and a
-bloated Temperance dancing before some foreign conqueror; of such were
-the florid designs of the eighteenth century, which showed Venus and
-Apollo encouraging Lord Peterborough to get over the inconvenience of
-his breastplate; of such, again, were the meek Victorian allegories
-which showed Mercy and Foresight urging men to found a Society for the
-Preservation of Young Game. Of such were almost all the allegories which
-have dominated the art of Europe for many centuries back. Of such, most
-emphatically, the allegories of Watts are not. They are not mere
-pictorial forms, combined as in a kind of cryptogram to express
-theoretic views or relations. They are not proverbs or verbal relations
-rendered with a cumbrous exactitude in oil and Chinese white. They are
-not, in short, the very thing that the opponents of Watts and his school
-say that they are. They are not merely literary. There is one definite
-current conception on which this idea that Watts’ allegorical art is
-merely literary is eventually based. It is based upon the idea that lies
-at the root of rationalism, at the root of useless logomachies, at the
-root, in no small degree, of the whole modern evil. It is based on the
-assumption of the perfection of language. Every religion and every
-philosophy must, of course, be based on the assumption of the authority
-or the accuracy of something. But it may well be questioned whether it
-is not saner and more satisfactory to ground our faith on the
-infallibility of the Pope, or the infallibility of the Book of Mormon,
-than on this astounding modern dogma of the infallibility of human
-speech. Every time one man says to another, “Tell us plainly what you
-mean?” he is assuming the infallibility of language: that is to say, he
-is assuming that there is a perfect scheme of verbal expression for all
-the internal moods and meanings of men. Whenever a man says to another,
-“Prove your case; defend your faith,” he is assuming the infallibility
-of language: that is to say, he is assuming that a man has a word for
-every reality in earth, or heaven, or hell. He knows that there are in
-the soul tints more bewildering, more numberless, and more nameless than
-the colours of an autumn forest; he knows that there are abroad in the
-world and doing strange and terrible service in it crimes that have
-never been condemned and virtues that have never been christened. Yet he
-seriously believes that these things can every one of them, in all their
-tones and semi-tones, in all their blends and unions, be accurately
-represented by an arbitrary system of grunts and squeals. He believes
-that an ordinary civilized stockbroker can really produce out of his own
-inside noises which denote all the mysteries of memory and all the
-agonies of desire. Whenever, on the other hand, a man rebels faintly or
-vaguely against this way of speaking, whenever a man says that he cannot
-explain what he means, and that he hates argument, that his enemy is
-misrepresenting him, but he cannot explain how; that man is a true sage,
-and has seen into the heart of the real nature of language. Whenever a
-man refuses to be caught by some dilemma about reason and passion, or
-about reason and faith, or about fate and free-will, he has seen the
-truth. Whenever a man declines to be cornered as an egotist, or an
-altruist, or any such modern monster, he has seen the truth. For the
-truth is that language is not a scientific thing at all, but wholly an
-artistic thing, a thing invented by hunters, and killers, and such
-artists long before science was
-
-[Illustration: ORPHEUS AND EURYDICE.]
-
-dreamed of. The truth is simply that--that the tongue is not a reliable
-instrument, like a theodolite or a camera. The tongue is most truly an
-unruly member, as the wise saint has called it, a thing poetic and
-dangerous, like music or fire.
-
-Now we can easily imagine an alternative state of things, roughly
-similar to that produced in Watts’ allegories, a system, that is to say,
-whereby the moods or facts of the human spirit were conveyed by
-something other than speech, by shapes or colours or some such things.
-As a matter of fact, of course, there are a great many other languages
-besides the verbal. Descriptions of spiritual states and mental purposes
-are conveyed by a variety of things, by hats, by bells, by guns, by
-fires on a headland, or by jerks of the head. In fact there does exist
-an example which is singularly analogous to decorative and symbolic
-painting. This is a scheme of æsthetic signs or emblems, simple indeed
-and consisting only of a few elemental colours, which is actually
-employed to convey great lessons in human safety and great necessities
-of the commonwealth. It need hardly be said that I allude to the railway
-signals. They are as much a language, and surely as solemn a language,
-as the colour sequence of ecclesiastical vestments, which sets us red
-for martyrdom, and white for resurrection. For the green and red of the
-night-signals depict the two most fundamental things of all, which lie
-at the back of all language. Yes and no, good and bad, safe and unsafe,
-life and death. It is perfectly conceivable that a degree of flexibility
-or subtlety might be introduced into these colours so as to suggest
-other and more complex meanings. We might (under the influence of some
-large poetic station-masters) reach a state of things in which a certain
-rich tinge of purple in the crimson light would mean “Travel for a few
-seconds at a slightly more lingering pace, that a romantic old lady in a
-first-class carriage may admire the scenery of the forest.” A tendency
-towards peacock blue in the green might mean “An old gentleman with a
-black necktie has just drunk a glass of sherry at the station
-restaurant.” But however much we modified or varied this colour sequence
-or colour language, there would remain one thing which it would be quite
-ridiculous and untrue to say about it. It would be quite ridiculous and
-untrue to say that this colour sequence was simply a symbol representing
-language. It would be another language: it would convey its meaning to
-aliens who had another word for forest, and another word for sherry, and
-another word for old lady. It would not be a symbol of language, a
-symbol of a symbol; it would be one symbol of the reality, and language
-would be another. That is precisely the true position touching
-allegorical art in general, and, above all, the allegorical art of
-Watts.
-
-So long as we conceive that it is, fundamentally, the symbolizing of
-literature in paint, we shall certainly misunderstand it and the rare
-and peculiar merits, both technical and philosophical, which really
-characterize it. If the ordinary spectator at the art galleries finds
-himself, let us say, opposite a picture of a dancing flower-crowned
-figure in a rose-coloured robe, he feels a definite curiosity to know
-the title, looks it up in the catalogue, and finds that it is called,
-let us say, “Hope.” He is immediately satisfied, as he would have been
-if the title had run “Portrait of Lady Warwick,” a “View of Kilchurn
-Castle.” It represents a certain definite thing, the word “hope.” But
-what does the word “hope” represent? It represents only a broken
-instantaneous glimpse of something that is immeasurably older and
-wilder
-
-[Illustration: HOPE.]
-
-than language, that is immeasurably older and wilder than man; a mystery
-to saints and a reality to wolves. To suppose that such a thing is dealt
-with by the word “hope,” any more than America is represented by a
-distant view of Cape Horn, would indeed be ridiculous. It is not merely
-true that the word itself is, like any other word, arbitrary; that it
-might as well be “pig” or “parasol”; but it is true that the
-philosophical meaning of the word, in the conscious mind of man, is
-merely a part of something immensely larger in the unconscious mind,
-that the gusty light of language only falls for a moment on a fragment,
-and that obviously a semi-detached, unfinished fragment of a certain
-definite pattern on the dark tapestries of reality. It is vain and worse
-than vain to declaim against the allegoric, for the very word “hope” is
-an allegory, and the very word “allegory” is an allegory.
-
-Now let us suppose that instead of coming before that hypothetical
-picture of _Hope_ in conventional flowers and conventional pink robes,
-the spectator came before another picture. Suppose that he found himself
-in the presence of a dim canvas with a bowed and stricken and secretive
-figure cowering over a broken lyre in the twilight. What would he think?
-His first thought, of course, would be that the picture was called
-_Despair_; his second (when he discovered his error in the catalogue),
-that it has been entered under the wrong number; his third, that the
-painter was mad. But if we imagine that he overcame these preliminary
-feelings and that as he stared at that queer twilight picture a dim and
-powerful sense of meaning began to grow upon him--what would he see? He
-would see something for which there is neither speech nor language,
-which has been too vast for any eye to see and too secret for any
-religion to utter, even as an esoteric doctrine. Standing before that
-picture, he finds himself in the presence of a great truth. He perceives
-that there is something in man which is always apparently on the eve of
-disappearing, but never disappears, an assurance which is always
-apparently saying farewell and yet illimitably lingers, a string which
-is always stretched to snapping and yet never snaps. He perceives that
-the queerest and most delicate thing in us, the most fragile, the most
-fantastic, is in truth the backbone and indestructible. He knows a great
-moral fact: that there never was an age of assurance, that there never
-was an age of faith. Faith is always at a disadvantage; it is a
-perpetually defeated thing which survives all its conquerors. The
-desperate modern talk about dark days and reeling altars, and the end of
-Gods and angels, is the oldest talk in the world: lamentations over the
-growth of agnosticism can be found in the monkish sermons of the dark
-ages; horror at youthful impiety can be found in the Iliad. This is the
-thing that never deserts men and yet always, with daring diplomacy,
-threatens to desert them. It has indeed dwelt among and controlled all
-the kings and crowds, but only with the air of a pilgrim passing by. It
-has indeed warmed and lit men from the beginning of Eden with an
-unending glow, but it was the glow of an eternal sunset.
-
-Here, in this dim picture, its trick is almost betrayed. No one can name
-this picture properly, but Watts, who painted it, has named it _Hope_.
-But the point is that this title is not (as those think who call it
-“literary”) the reality behind the symbol, but another symbol for the
-same thing, or, to speak yet more strictly, another symbol describing
-another part or aspect of the same complex reality. Two men felt a
-swift, violent, invisible thing in the world: one said the word “hope,”
-the other painted a
-
-[Illustration: JONAH.]
-
-picture in blue and green paint. The picture is inadequate; the word
-“hope” is inadequate; but between them, like two angles in the
-calculation of a distance, they almost locate a mystery, a mystery that
-for hundreds of ages has been hunted by men and evaded them. And the
-title is therefore not so much the substance of one of Watts’ pictures,
-it is rather an epigram upon it. It is merely an approximate attempt to
-convey, by snatching up the tool of another craftsman, the direction
-attempted in the painter’s own craft. He calls it _Hope_, and that is
-perhaps the best title. It reminds us among other things of a fact which
-is too little remembered, that faith, hope, and charity, the three
-mystical virtues of Christianity, are also the gayest of the virtues.
-Paganism, as I have suggested, is not gay, but rather nobly sad; the
-spirit of Watts, which is as a rule nobly sad also, here comes nearer
-perhaps than anywhere else to mysticism in the strict sense, the
-mysticism which is full of secret passion and belief, like that of Fra
-Angelico or Blake. But though Watts calls his tremendous reality _Hope_,
-we may call it many other things. Call it faith, call it vitality, call
-it the will to live, call it the religion of to-morrow morning, call it
-the immortality of man, call it self-love and vanity; it is the thing
-that explains why man survives all things and why there is no such thing
-as a pessimist. It cannot be found in any dictionary or rewarded in any
-commonwealth: there is only one way in which it can even be noticed and
-recognized. If there be anywhere a man who has really lost it, his face
-out of a whole crowd of men will strike us like a blow. He may hang
-himself or become Prime Minister; it matters nothing. The man is dead.
-
-Now, of course the ordinary objection to allegory, and it is a very
-sound objection, can be sufficiently well stated by saying that the
-pictorial figures are mere arbitrary symbols of the words. An allegorist
-of the pompous school might paint some group of Peace and Commerce doing
-something to Britannia. There might be a figure of Commerce in a Greek
-robe with a cornucopia or bag of gold or an argosy or any other
-conventional symbol. But it is surely quite evident that such a figure
-is a mere sign like the word commerce: the word might just as well be
-“dandelion,” and the Greek lady with the cornucopia might just as well
-be a Hebrew prophet standing on his head. It is scarcely even a
-language: it is a cipher-code. Nobody can maintain that the figure,
-taken as a figure, makes one think of commerce, of the forces that
-effect commerce, of a thousand ports, of a thousand streets, of a
-thousand warehouses and bills of lading, of a thousand excited men in
-black coats who certainly would not know what to do with a cornucopia.
-If we find ourselves gazing at some monument of the fragile and eternal
-faith of man, at some ruined chapel, at some nameless altar, at some
-scrap of old Jacobin eloquence, we might actually find our own minds
-moving in certain curves that centre in the curved back of Watts’
-_Hope_: we might almost think for ourselves of a bowed figure in the
-twilight, holding to her breast something damaged but undestroyed. But
-can anyone say that by merely looking at the Stock Exchange on a busy
-day we should think of a Greek lady with an argosy? Can anyone say that
-Threadneedle Street, in itself, would inspire our minds to move in the
-curves which centre in a cornucopia? Can anyone say that a very stolid
-figure in a very outlandish drapery is anything but a purely arbitrary
-sign, like _x_ or _y_, for such a thing as modern commerce, for the
-savagery of the rich, for the hunger of the satisfied, for the vast
-tachycardia or galloping of the heart that has fallen on all the great
-new centres of civilization, for the sudden madness of all the mills of
-the world?
-
-Watts’ _Hope_ does tell us something more about the nature of hope than
-we can be told by merely noticing that hope is shown in individual
-cases: that a man rehearses successful love speeches when he is in love,
-and takes a return ticket when he goes out to fight a duel. But the
-figure of Commerce with the cornucopia gives us less insight into what
-is behind commerce than we might get from reading a circular or staring
-out into the street. In the case of Commerce the figure is merely a
-symbol of commerce, which is a symbol. In the case of Hope the matter is
-quite the other way; the figure brings us nearer to something which is
-not a symbol, but the reality behind symbols. In the one case we go
-further down towards the river’s delta; in the other, further up towards
-its fountain; that at least may be called a difference. And now, suppose
-that our imaginary sight-seer who had seen so much of the pompous
-allegory of Commerce in her Grecian draperies were to see, for the
-second time, a second picture. Suppose he saw before him a throned
-figure clad in splendid, heavy scarlet and gold, above the lustre and
-dignity of which rose, in abrupt contrast, a face like the face of a
-blind beast. Suppose that as this imperial thing, with closed eyes and
-fat, sightless face, sat upon his magnificent seat, he let his heavy
-hand and feet fall, as if by a mere pulverizing accident, on the naked
-and god-like figures of the young, on men and women. Suppose that in the
-background there rose straight into the air a raw and turgid smoke, as
-if from some invisible and horrible sacrifice, and that by one final,
-fantastic, and triumphal touch this all-destroying god and king were
-adorned with the ears of an ass, declaring that he was royal, imperial,
-irresistible, and, when all is said, imbecile. Suppose that a man sick
-of argosies and cornucopias came before that picture, would he not say,
-perhaps even before he looked in the catalogue and found that the
-painter had called it _Mammon_, would he not say, “This is something
-which in spirit and in essence I have seen before, something which in
-spirit and in essence I have seen everywhere. That bloated, unconscious
-face, so heavy, so violent, so wicked, so innocent, have I not seen it
-at street corners, in billiard-rooms, in saloon bars, laying down the
-law about Chartered shares or gaping at jokes about women? Those huge
-and smashing limbs, so weighty, so silly, so powerless, and yet so
-powerful, have I not seen them in the pompous movements, the morbid
-health of the prosperous in the great cities? The hard, straight pillars
-of that throne, have I not seen them in the hard, straight, hideous
-tiers of modern warehouses and factories? That tawny and sulky smoke,
-have I not seen it going up to heaven from all the cities of the coming
-world? This is no trifling with argosies and Greek drapery. This is
-commerce. This is the home of the god himself. This is why men hate him,
-and why men fear him, and why men endure him.”
-
-Now, of course, it is at once obvious that this view would be very
-unjust to commerce; but that modification, as a matter of fact, very
-strongly supports the general theory at the moment under consideration.
-Commerce is really an arbitrary phrase, a thing including a million
-motives, from the motive which makes a man drink to the motive which
-makes him reform; from the motive that makes a starving man eat a horse
-to the motive which makes an idle man chase a butterfly. But whatever
-other spirits there are in commerce, there is, beyond all reasonable
-
-[Illustration: MAMMON.]
-
-question, in it this powerful and enduring spirit which Watts has
-painted. There is, as a ruling element in modern life, in all life, this
-blind and asinine appetite for mere power. There is a spirit abroad
-among the nations of the earth which drives men incessantly on to
-destroy what they cannot understand, and to capture what they cannot
-enjoy. This, and not commerce, is what Watts has painted. He has
-painted, not the allegory of a great institution, but the vision of a
-great appetite, the vision of a great motive. It is not true that this
-is a picture of Commerce; but that Commerce and Watts’ picture spring
-from the same source. There does exist a certain dark and driving force
-in the world; one of its products is this picture, another is Commerce.
-The picture is not Commerce, it is Mammon. And, indeed, so powerfully
-and perfectly has Watts, in this case, realized the awful being whom he
-was endeavouring to call up by his artistic incantation, that we may
-even say the common positions of allegory and reality are reversed. The
-fact is not that here we have an effective presentation under a certain
-symbol of red robes and smoke and a throne, of what the financial world
-is, but rather that here we have something of the truth that is hidden
-behind the symbol of white waistcoats and hats on the back of the head,
-of financial papers and sporting prophets, of butter closing quiet and
-Pendragon being meant to win. This is not a symbol of commerce: commerce
-is a symbol of this.
-
-In sketching this general and necessary attitude towards the art of
-Watts, particularly in the matter of allegory, I have taken deliberately
-these two very famous and obvious pictures, and I have occupied, equally
-deliberately, a considerable amount of space in expounding them. It is
-far better in a subject so subtle and so bewildering as the relation
-between art and philosophy, that we should see how our conceptions and
-hypotheses really get on when applied systematically and at some length
-to some perfectly familiar and existent object. A philosopher cannot
-talk about any single thing, down to a pumpkin, without showing whether
-he is wise or foolish; but he can easily talk about everything with
-anyone having any views about him beyond gloomy suspicions. But at this
-point I become fully conscious of another and most important kind of
-criticism, which has been and can be levelled against the allegories of
-Watts; and which must be, by the nature of things, evoked by the
-particular line of discussion or reflection that I have here adopted.
-
-It may be admitted that Watts’ art is not merely literary in the sense
-in which I have originally used the term. It may be admitted that there
-is truth in the general position I have sketched out--that Watts is not
-a man copying literature or philosophy, but rather a man copying the
-great spiritual and central realities which literature and philosophy
-also set out to copy. It may be admitted that _Mammon_ is obviously an
-attempt to portray, not a twopenny phrase, but a great idea. But along
-with all these admissions it will certainly be said, by the most
-powerful and recent school in art criticism, that all this amounts to
-little more than a difference between a mean and a magnificent blunder.
-Pictorial art, it will be said, has no more business, as such, to
-portray great ideas than small ideas. Its affair is with its own
-technique, with the love of a great billowing line for its own sake, of
-a subtle and perfect tint for its own sake. If a man mistakes his trade
-and attends to the technique of another, the sublimity of his mind is
-only a very slight consolation. If I summon a paperhanger
-
-[Illustration: DEATH CROWNING INNOCENCE.]
-
-to cover the walls, and he insists on playing the piano, it matters
-little whether he plays Beethoven or “The Yachmak.” If I charter a
-pianist, and he is found drinking in the wine cellar, it matters little
-whether he has made his largest hole in good Burgundy or bad Marsala. If
-the whole of this question of great ideas and small ideas, of large
-atmospheres and superficial definitions, of the higher and the lower
-allegory--if all this be really irrelevant to the discussion of the
-position of a painter, then, indeed, we have been upon an idle track. As
-I think I shall show in a moment, this is a very inadequate view of the
-matter. But it does draw our attention to an aspect of the matter which
-must, without further delay, be discussed. That aspect, as I need hardly
-say, is the technique of Watts.
-
-There is of course a certain tendency among all interesting and novel
-critical philosophers to talk as if they had discovered things which it
-is perfectly impossible that any human being could ever have denied; to
-shout that the birds fly, and declare that in spite of persecution they
-will still assert that cows have four legs. In this way some raw
-pseudo-scientists talk about heredity or the physical basis of life as
-if it were not a thing embedded in every creed and legend, and even the
-very languages of men. In this way some of the new oligarchists of
-to-day imagine they are attacking the doctrine of human equality by
-pointing out that some men are stronger or cleverer than others; as if
-they really believed that Danton and Washington thought that every man
-was the same height and had the same brains. And something of this
-preliminary cloud of folly or misunderstanding attaches doubtless to the
-question of the technical view--that is, the solely technical view--of
-painting. If the principle of “art for art’s sake” means simply that
-there is a solely technical view of painting, and that it must be
-supreme on its own ground, it appears a piece of pure madness to suppose
-it other than true. Surely there never was really a man who held that a
-picture that was vile in colour and weak in drawing was a good picture
-because it was a picture of Florence Nightingale! Surely there never was
-really a man who said that when one leg in a drawing was longer than
-another, yet they were both the same length because the artist painted
-it for an altar-piece! When the new critics with a burst of music and a
-rocket shower of epigrams enunciated their new criticism, they must at
-any rate have meant something more than this. Undoubtedly they did mean
-something more; they meant that a picture was not a good vehicle for
-moral sentiment at all; they meant that not only was it not the better
-for having a philosophic meaning, but that it was worse. This, if it be
-true, is beyond all question a real indictment of Watts.
-
-About the whole of this Watts controversy about didactic art there is at
-least one perfectly plain and preliminary thing to be said. It is said
-that art cannot teach a lesson. This is true, and the only proper
-addition is the statement that neither, for the matter of that, can
-morality teach a lesson. For a thing to be didactic, in the strict and
-narrow and scholastic sense, it must be something about facts or the
-physical sciences: you can only teach a lesson about such a thing as
-Euclid or the making of paper boats. The thing is quite inapplicable to
-the great needs of man, whether moral or æsthetic. Nobody ever held a
-class in philanthropy with fifteen millionaires in a row writing
-cheques. Nobody ever held evening continuation classes in martyrdom, or
-drilled boys in a playground to die for their country. A
-
-[Illustration: A STORY FROM BOCCACCIO.]
-
-picture cannot give a plain lesson in morals; neither can a sermon. A
-didactic poem was a thing known indeed among the ancients and the old
-Latin civilization, but as a matter of fact it scarcely ever professed
-to teach people how to live the higher life. It taught people how to
-keep bees.
-
-Since we find, therefore, that ethics is like art, a mystic and
-intuitional affair, the only question that remains is, have they any
-kinship? If they have not, a man is not a man, but two men and probably
-more: if they have, there is, to say the least of it, at any rate a
-reasonable possibility that a note in moral feeling might have affinity
-with a note in art, that a curve in law, so to speak, may repeat a curve
-in draughtsmanship, that there may be genuine and not artificial
-correspondences between a state of morals and an effect in painting.
-This would, I should tentatively suggest, appear to be a most reasonable
-hypothesis. It is not so much the fact that there is no such thing as
-allegorical art, but rather the fact that there is no art that is not
-allegorical. But the meanings expressed in high and delicate art are not
-to be classed under cheap and external ethical formulæ, they deal with
-strange vices and stranger virtues. Art is only unmoral in so far as
-most morality is immoral. Thus Mr. Whistler when he drops a spark of
-perfect yellow or violet into some glooming pool of the nocturnal Thames
-is, in all probability, enunciating some sharp and wholesome moral
-comment. When the young Impressionists paint dim corners of meadows or
-splashes of sunlight in the wood, this does not mean necessarily that
-they are unmoral; it may only mean that they are a very original and
-sincere race of stern young moralists.
-
-Now if we adopt this general theory of the existence of genuine
-correspondences between art and moral beauty, of the existence, that is
-to say, of genuine allegories, it is perfectly clear wherein the test of
-such genuineness must consist. It must consist in the nature of the
-technique. If the technique, considered as technique, is calculated to
-evoke in us a certain kind of pleasure, and there is an analogous
-pleasure in the meaning considered as meaning, then there is a true
-wedding of the arts. But if the pleasure in the technique be of a kind
-quite dissimilar in its own sphere to the pleasure in the spiritual
-suggestion, then it is a mechanical and unlawful union, and this
-philosophy, at any rate, forbids the banns. If the intellectual
-conceptions uttered in Michel Angelo’s _Day of Judgment_ in the Sistine
-Chapel were the effect of a perfect and faultless workmanship, but the
-workmanship such as we should admire in a Gothic missal or a picture by
-Gerard Dow, we should then say that absolute excellence in both
-departments did not excuse their being joined. The thing would have been
-a mere accident, or convenience. Just as two plotters might communicate
-by means of a bar or two of music, so these subtle harmonies of colour
-and form would have been used for their detached and private ends by the
-dark conspirators of morality.
-
-Now there is nothing in the world that is really so thoroughly
-characteristic of Watts’ technique as the fact that it does almost
-startlingly correspond to the structure of his spiritual sense. If such
-pictures as _The Dweller in the Innermost_ and _Mammon_ and _Diana and
-Endymion_ and _Eve Repentant_ had neither title nor author, if no one
-had heard of Watts or heard of Eve; if, for the matter of that, the
-pictures had neither human nor animal form, it would be possible to
-guess something of the painter’s attitude from the mere colour and line.
-If Watts painted an arabesque, it would be moral; if he designed a
-Turkey
-
-[Illustration: LORD LYTTON.]
-
-carpet, it would be stoical. So individual is his handling that his very
-choice and scale of colours betray him. A man with a keen sense of the
-spiritual and symbolic history of colours could guess at something about
-Watts from the mess on his palette. He would see giants and the sea and
-cold primeval dawns and brown earth-men and red earth-women lying in the
-heaps of greens and whites and reds, like forces in chaos before the
-first day of creation. A certain queer and yet very simple blue there
-is, for instance, which is like Titian’s and yet not like it, which is
-more lustrous and yet not less opaque, and which manages to suggest the
-north rather than Titian’s south, in spite of its intensity; which
-suggests also the beginning of things rather than their maturity; a hot
-spring of the earth rather than Titian’s opulent summer. Then there is
-that tremendous autochthonous red, which was the colour of Adam, whose
-name was Red Earth. It is, if one may say so, the clay in which no one
-works, except Watts and the Eternal Potter. There are other colours that
-have this character, a character indescribable except by saying that
-they come from the palette of Creation--a green especially that
-reappears through portraits, allegories, landscapes, heroic designs, but
-always has the same fierce and elfish look, like a green that has a
-secret. It may be seen in the signet ring of Owen Meredith, and in the
-eyes of the _Dweller in the Innermost_. But all these colours have, as I
-say, the first and most characteristic and most obvious of the mental
-qualities of Watts; they are simple and like things just made by God.
-Nor is it, I think, altogether fanciful to push this analogy or harmony
-a step further and to see in the colours and the treatment of them the
-other side or typical trait which I have frequently mentioned as making
-up the identity of the painter. He is, as I say, a stoic; therefore to
-some extent, at least, a pagan; he has no special sympathy with Celtic
-intensity, with Catholic mysticism, with Romanticism, with all the
-things that deal with the cells of the soul, with agonies and dreams.
-And I think a broad distinction between the finest pagan and the finest
-Christian point of view may be found in such an approximate phrase as
-this, that paganism deals always with a light shining on things,
-Christianity with a light shining through them. That is why the whole
-Renaissance colouring is opaque, the whole Pre-Raphaelite colouring
-transparent. The very sky of Rubens is more solid than the rocks of
-Giotto: it is like a noble cliff of immemorial blue marble. The artists
-of the devout age seemed to regret that they could not make the light
-show through everything, as it shows through the little wood in the
-wonderful _Nativity_ of Botticelli. And that is why, again,
-Christianity, which has been attacked so strangely as dull and austere,
-invented the thing which is more intoxicating than all the wines of the
-world, stained-glass windows.
-
-Now Watts, with all his marvellous spirituality, or rather because of
-his peculiar type of marvellous spirituality, has the Platonic, the
-philosophic, rather than the Catholic order of mysticism. And it can
-scarcely be a coincidence that here again we feel it to be something
-that could almost be deduced from the colours if they were splashed at
-random about a canvas. The colours are mystical, but they are not
-transparent; that is, not transparent in the very curious but
-unmistakable sense in which the colours of Botticelli or Rossetti are
-transparent. What they are can only be described as iridescent. A
-curious lustre or glitter, conveyed chiefly by a singular and individual
-brushwork, lies over all his great pictures.
-
-[Illustration: DAWN.]
-
-It is the dawn of things: it is the glow of the primal sense of wonder;
-it is the sun of the childhood of the world; it is the light that never
-was on sea or land; but still it is a light shining on things, not
-shining through them. It is a light which exhibits and does honour to
-this world, not a light that breaks in upon this world to bring it
-terror or comfort, like the light that suddenly peers round the corner
-of some dark Gothic chapel with its green or golden or blood-red eyes.
-The Gothic artists, as I say, would have liked men’s bodies to become
-like burning glass (as the figures in their windows do), that the light
-might pass through them. There is no fear of light passing through
-Watts’ _Cain_.
-
-These analogies must inevitably appear fantastic to those who do not
-accept the general hypothesis of a possible kinship between pictorial
-and moral harmonies in the psychology of men; but to those who do accept
-this not very extravagant hypothesis, it may, I think, be repeated by
-way of summary, that the purely technical question of Watts’ colour
-scheme does provide us, at least suggestively, with these two parallels.
-Watts, so far as his moral and mental attitude can be expressed by any
-phrases of such brevity, has two main peculiarities: first, a large
-infantile poetry which delights in things fresh, raw, and gigantic;
-second, a certain Greek restraint and agnostic severity, which throws a
-strong light on this world as it is. The colours he uses have also two
-main peculiarities: first, a fresh, raw, and, as it were, gigantic
-character; secondly, an opaque reflected light, unlike the mediæval
-lighting, a strong light thrown on this world as it is.
-
-Similar lines of comparison, so far as they appear to possess any value,
-could, of course, be very easily pointed out in connexion with the
-character of Watts’ draughtsmanship. That his lines are simple and
-powerful, that both in strength and weakness they are candid and
-austere, that they are not Celtic, not Catholic, and not romantic lines
-of draughtsmanship, would, I think, appear sufficiently clear to anyone
-who has any instinct for this mode of judgment at all. In the matter of
-line and composition, of course, the same general contention applies as
-in the case of colour. The curve of the bent figure of _Hope_,
-considered simply as a curve, half repeating as it does the upper curve
-of the globe, suggests a feeling, a sense of fear, of simplicity, of
-something which lies near to the nature of the idea itself, the idea
-which inspires the title of the picture. The splendid rushing whirlpool
-of curves which constitutes, as it were, the ellipse of the two figures
-in _Diana and Endymion_ is a positive inspiration. It is, simply as a
-form for a picture, a mere scheme of lines, the very soul of Greece. It
-is simple; it is full and free; it follows great laws of harmony, but it
-follows them swiftly and at will; it is headlong, and yet at rest, like
-the solid arch of a waterfall. It is a rushing and passionate meeting of
-two superb human figures; and it is almost a mathematical harmony.
-Technically, at least, and as a matter of outlines, it is probably the
-artist’s masterpiece.
-
-Before we quit this second department of the temperament of Watts, as
-expressed in his line, mention must be made of what is beyond all
-question the most interesting and most supremely personal of all the
-elements in the painter’s designs and draughtsmanship. That is, of
-course, his magnificent discovery of the artistic effect of the human
-back. The back is the most awful and mysterious thing in the universe:
-it is impossible to speak about it. It is the part of man that he knows
-nothing of; like an
-
-[Illustration: EVE REPENTANT.]
-
-outlying province forgotten by an emperor. It is a common saying that
-anything may happen behind our backs: transcendentally considered the
-thing has an eerie truth about it. Eden may be behind our backs, or
-Fairyland. But this mystery of the human back has again its other side
-in the strange impression produced on those behind: to walk behind
-anyone along a lane is a thing that, properly speaking, touches the
-oldest nerve of awe. Watts has realized this as no one in art or letters
-has realized it in the whole history of the world: it has made him
-great. There is one possible exception to his monopoly of this
-magnificent craze. Two thousand years before, in the dark scriptures of
-a nomad people, it had been said that their prophet saw the immense
-Creator of all things, but only saw Him from behind. I do not know
-whether even Watts would dare to paint that. But it reads like one of
-his pictures, like the most terrific of all his pictures, which he has
-kept veiled.
-
-I need not instance the admirable and innumerable cases of this fine and
-individual effect. _Eve Repentant_ (that fine picture), in which the
-agony of a gigantic womanhood is conveyed as it could not be conveyed by
-any power of visage, in the powerful contortion of the muscular and yet
-beautiful back, is the first that occurs to the mind. The sad and
-sardonic picture painted in later years, _For He had Great
-Possessions_--showing the young man of the Gospel loaded with his
-intolerable pomp of garments and his head sunken out of sight--is of
-course another. Others are slighter instances, like _Good Luck to your
-Fishing_. He has again carried the principle, in one instance, to an
-extreme seldom adopted, I should fancy, either by artist or man. He has
-painted a very graceful portrait of his wife, in which that lady’s face
-is entirely omitted, the head being abruptly turned away. But it is
-indeed idle to multiply these instances of the painter’s hobby (if one
-may use the phrase) of the worship of the human back, when all such
-instances have been dwarfed and overshadowed by the one famous and
-tremendous instance that everyone knows. _Love and Death_ is truly a
-great achievement: if it stood alone it would have made a man great. And
-it fits in with a peculiar importance with the general view I am
-suggesting of the Watts technique. For the whole picture really hangs,
-both technically and morally, upon one single line, a line that could be
-drawn across a blank canvas, the spine-line of the central figure of
-Death with its great falling garment. The whole composition, the whole
-conception, and, I was going to say, the whole moral of the picture,
-could be deduced from that single line. The moral of the picture (if
-moral were the right phrase for these things) is, it is scarcely
-necessary to point out, the monument of about as noble a silence and
-suppression as the human mind ever bent itself to in its pride. It is
-the great masterpiece of agnosticism. In that picture agnosticism--not
-the cheap and querulous incredulity which abuses the phrase, but loyal
-and consistent agnosticism, which is as willing to believe good as evil
-and to harbour faith as doubt--has here its great and pathetic place and
-symbol in the house of the arts. It is the artistic embodiment of
-reverent ignorance at its highest, fully as much as the Divine Comedy is
-the artistic embodiment of Christianity.
-
-Technically, in a large number of cases, it is probably true that Watts’
-portraits, or some of them at least, are his most successful
-achievements. But here also we find our general conclusion: for if his
-portraits are his best pictures, it is certainly not because they
-
-[Illustration: LOVE AND DEATH.]
-
-are merely portraits; if they are in some cases better than his symbolic
-designs, it is certainly not because they are less symbolic. In his
-gallery of great men, indeed, we find Watts almost more himself than
-anywhere else. Most men are allegorical when they are painting
-allegories, but Watts is allegorical when he is painting an old
-alderman. A change passes over that excellent being, a change of a kind
-to which aldermen are insufficiently inured. He begins to resolve into
-the primal elements, to become dust and the shadow, to become the red
-clay of Adam and the wind of God. His eyes become, in spite of his
-earnest wish, the fixed stars in the sky of the spirit; his complexion
-begins to show, not the unmeaning red of portraits and miniatures, but
-that secret and living red which is within us, and which is the river of
-man. The astounding manner in which Watts has, in some cases, treated
-his sitters is one of the most remarkable things about his character. He
-is not (it is almost absurd to have to mention such a thing about the
-almost austere old democrat) a man likely to flatter a sitter in any
-worldly or conventional sense. Nor is he, for the matter of that, a man
-likely to push compliments far from any motive: he is a strict, and I
-should infer a candid, man. The type of virtues he chiefly admires and
-practises are the reverse of those which would encourage a courtier or
-even a universalist. But he scarcely ever paints a man without making
-him about five times as magnificent as he really looks. The real men
-appear, if they present themselves afterwards, like mean and
-unsympathetic sketches from the Watts original.
-
-The fact is that this indescribable primalism, which we have noted as
-coming out in the designs, in the titles, and in Watts’ very
-oil-colours, is present in this matter in a most extraordinary way.
-Watts does not copy men at all: he makes them over again. He dips his
-hand in the clay of chaos and begins to model a man named William Morris
-or a man named Richard Burton: he is assisted, no doubt, in some degree
-by a quaint old text-book called Reality, with its stiff but suggestive
-woodcuts and its shrewd and simple old hints. But the most that can be
-said for the portraiture is that Watts asks a hint to come and stop with
-him, puts the hint in a chair in his studio and stares at him. The thing
-that comes out at last upon the canvas is not generally a very precise
-picture of the sitter, though, of course, it is almost always a very
-accurate picture of the universe.
-
-And yet while this, on the one side, is true enough, the portraits are
-portraits, and very fine portraits. But they are dominated by an element
-which is the antithesis of the whole tendency of modern art, that
-tendency which for want of a better word we have to call by the absurd
-name of optimism. It is not, of course, in reality a question of
-optimism in the least, but of an illimitable worship and wonder directed
-towards the fact of existence. There is a great deal of difference
-between the optimism which says that things are perfect and the optimism
-which merely says (with a more primeval modesty) that they are very
-good. One optimism says that a one-legged man has two legs because it
-would be so dreadful if he had not. The other optimism says that the
-fact that the one-legged was born of a woman, has a soul, has been in
-love, and has stood alive under the stars, is a fact so enormous and
-thrilling that, in comparison, it does not matter whether he has one leg
-or five. One optimism says that this is the best of all possible worlds.
-The other says that it is certainly not the best of all possible worlds,
-but
-
-[Illustration: WILLIAM MORRIS.]
-
-it is the best of all possible things that a world should be possible.
-Watts, as has been more than once more or less definitely suggested, is
-dominated throughout by this prehistoric wonder. A man to him,
-especially a great man, is a thing to be painted as Fra Angelico painted
-angels, on his knees. He has indeed, like many brilliant men in the age
-that produced Carlyle and Ruskin, an overwhelming tendency to
-hero-worship. That worship had not, of course, in the case of these men
-any trace of that later and more denaturalized hero-worship, the
-tendency to worship madmen--to dream of vast crimes as one dreams of a
-love-affair, and to take the malformation of the soul to be the only
-originality. To the Carlylean (and Watts has been to some by no means
-inconsiderable extent a Carlylean), to the Carlylean the hero, the great
-man, was a man more human than humanity itself. In worshipping him you
-were worshipping humanity in a sacrament: and Watts seems to express in
-almost every line of his brush this ardent and reverent view of the
-great man. He overdoes it. Tennyson, fine as he was both physically and
-mentally, was not quite so much of a demi-god as Watts’ splendid
-pictures would seem to suggest. Many other sitters have been subjected,
-past all recognition, to this kind of devout and ethereal caricature.
-But the essential of the whole matter was that the attitude of Watts was
-one which might almost be called worship. It was not, of course, that he
-always painted men as handsome in the conventional sense, or even as
-handsome as they were. William Morris impressed most people as a very
-handsome man: in Watts’ marvellous portrait, so much is made of the
-sanguine face, the bold stare, the almost volcanic suddenness of the
-emergence of the head from the dark green background, that the effect
-of ordinary good looks, on which many of Morris’s intimates would
-probably have prided themselves, is in some degree lost. Carlyle, again,
-when he saw the painter’s fine rendering of him, said with
-characteristic surliness that he “looked like a mad labourer.”
-Conventionally speaking, it is of course, therefore, to be admitted that
-the sitters did not always come off well. But the exaggeration or the
-distortion, if exaggeration or distortion there were, was always
-effected in obedience to some almost awestruck notion of the greatness
-or goodness of the great or good sitter. The point is not whether Watts
-sometimes has painted men as ugly as they were painted by the primary
-religious painters; the point is, as I have said, that he painted as
-they did, on his knees. Now no one thinks that Mr. Sargent paints the
-Misses Wertheimer on his knees. His grimness and decision of drawing and
-colouring are not due to a sacred optimism. But those of Watts are due
-to this: are due to an intense conviction that there is within the
-sitter a great reality which has to give up its secret before he leaves
-the seat or the model’s throne. Hence come the red violent face and
-minatory eyes of William Morris: the painter sought to express, and he
-did most successfully express, the main traits and meaning of
-Morris--the appearance of a certain plain masculine passion in the realm
-of decorative art. Morris was a man who wanted good wall-papers, not as
-a man wants a coin of the Emperor Constantine, which was the cloistered
-or abnormal way in which men had commonly devised such things: he wanted
-good wall-papers as a man wants beer. He clamoured for art: he brawled
-for it. He asserted the perfectly virile and ordinary character of the
-appetite for beauty. And he possessed and developed a power of moral
-violence on pure
-
-[Illustration: DANTE GABRIEL ROSSETTI.]
-
-matters of taste which startled the flabby world of connoisseurship and
-opened a new era. He grew furious with furniture and denounced the union
-of wrong colours as men denounce an adultery. All this is expressed far
-more finely than in these clumsy sentences in that living and leonine
-head in the National Portrait Gallery. It is exactly the same with
-Carlyle. Watts’ Carlyle is immeasurably more subtle and true than the
-Carlyle of Millais, which simply represents him as a shaggy, handsome,
-magnificent old man. The uglier Carlyle of Watts has more of the truth
-about him, the strange combination of a score of sane and healthy
-visions and views, with something that was not sane, which bloodshot and
-embittered them all, the great tragedy of the union of a strong
-countryside mind and body with a disease of the vitals and something
-like a disease of the spirit. In fact, Watts painted Carlyle “like a mad
-labourer” because Carlyle was a mad labourer.
-
-This general characteristic might of course be easily traced in all the
-portraits one by one. If space permitted, indeed, such a process might
-be profitable; for while we take careful note of all the human
-triviality of faces, the one thing that we all tend to forget is that
-divine and common thing which Watts celebrates. It is the misfortune of
-the nonreligious ages that they tend to cultivate a sense of
-individuality, not only at the expense of religion, but at the expense
-of humanity itself. For the modern portrait-painter not only does not
-see the image of God in his sitters, he does not even see the image of
-man. His object is not to insist on the glorious and solemn heritage
-which is common to Sir William Harcourt and Mr. Albert Chevalier, to
-Count Tolstoy and Mr. Wanklyn, that is the glorious and solemn heritage
-of a nose and two eyes and a mouth. The effort of the dashing modern is
-rather to make each of these features individual almost to the point of
-being incredible: it is his desire to paint the mouth whose grimace is
-inimitable, the eyes that could be only in one head, and the nose that
-never was on sea or land. There is value in this purely personal
-treatment, but something in it so constantly lost: the quality of the
-common humanity. The new art gallery is too like a museum of freaks, it
-is too wild and wonderful, like a realistic novel. Watts errs
-undoubtedly on the other side. He makes all his portraits too classical.
-It may seem like a paradox to say that he makes them too human; but
-humanity is a _classis_ and therefore classical. He recurs too much to
-the correct type which includes all men. He has, for instance, a worship
-of great men so complete that it makes him tend in the direction of
-painting them all alike. There may be too much of Browning in his
-Tennyson, too much of Tennyson in his Browning. There is certainly a
-touch of Manning in his John Stuart Mill, and a touch of the Minotaur in
-many of his portraits of Imperial politicians. While he celebrates the
-individual with a peculiar insight, it is nevertheless always referred
-to a general human type. We feel when we look at even the most
-extraordinary of Watts’ portraits, as, for instance, the portrait of
-Lord Stratford de Redcliffe, that before Lord Stratford de Redcliffe was
-born, and apart from that fact, there was such a thing as a human being.
-When we look at a brilliant modern canvas like that of Mr. Sargent’s
-portrait of Wertheimer, we do not feel that any human being analogous to
-him had of necessity existed. We feel that Mr. Wertheimer might have
-been created before the stars. Watts has a tendency to resume his
-characters into his background as if they were half returning
-
-[Illustration: THOMAS CARLYLE.]
-
-to the forces of nature. In his more successful portraits the actual
-physical characteristics of the sitter appear to be something of the
-nature of artistic creations; they are decorative and belong to a whole.
-We feel that he has filled in the fiery orange of Swinburne’s hair as
-one might fill in a gold or copper panel. We know that he was
-historically correct in making the hair orange, but we cannot get rid of
-a haunting feeling that if his scheme had been a little different he
-would have made it green. This indescribable sentiment is particularly
-strong in the case of the portrait of Rossetti. Rossetti is dressed in a
-dark green coat which perfectly expresses his sumptuous Pre-Raphaelite
-affectation. But we do not feel that Rossetti has adopted the dark green
-coat to suit his dark red beard. We rather feel that if anyone had
-seized Rossetti and forcibly buttoned him up in the dark green coat he
-would have grown the red beard by sheer force of will.
-
-Before we quit the subject of portraiture a word ought to be said about
-two exceedingly noble portraits, those of Matthew Arnold and Cardinal
-Manning. The former is interesting because, as an able critic said
-somewhere (I wish I could remember who he was or where he wrote), this
-is the one instance of Watts approaching tentatively a man whom he in
-all reasonable probability did not understand. In this particular case
-the picture is a hundred times better for that. The portrait-painter of
-Matthew Arnold obviously ought not to understand him, since he did not
-understand himself. And the bewilderment which the artist felt for those
-few hours reproduced in a perfect, almost in an immortal, picture the
-bewilderment which the sitter felt from the cradle to the grave. The
-bewilderment of Matthew Arnold was more noble and faithful than most
-men’s certainty, and Watts has not failed to give that nobility a place
-even greater perhaps than that which he would have given to it had he
-been working on that fixed theory of admiration in which he dealt with
-Tennyson or Morris. The sad sea-blue eyes of Matthew Arnold seemed to
-get near to the fundamental sadness of blue. It is a certain eternal
-bleakness in the colour which may for all I know have given rise to the
-legend of blue devils. There are times at any rate when the bluest
-heavens appear only blue with those devils. The portrait of Cardinal
-Manning is worth a further and special notice, because it is an
-illustration of the fact to which I have before alluded: the fact that
-while Watts in one sense always gets the best out of his sitters, he
-does not by any means always get the handsomest out of them. Manning was
-a singularly fine-looking man, even in his emaciation. A friend of mine,
-who was particularly artistic both by instinct and habits, gazed for a
-long time at a photograph of the terrible old man clad in those
-Cardinal’s robes and regalia in which he exercised more than a
-Cardinal’s power, and said reflectively, “He would have made his fortune
-as a model.” A great many of the photographs of Manning, indeed almost
-any casual glimpses of him, present him as more beautiful than he
-appears in Watts’ portrait. To the ordinary onlooker there was behind
-the wreck of flesh and the splendid skeleton the remains of a very
-handsome English gentleman; relics of one who might have hunted foxes
-and married an American heiress. Watts has no eyes for anything except
-that sublime vow which he would himself repudiate, that awful Church
-which he would himself disown. He exaggerates the devotionalism of
-Manning. He is more ascetic than the ascetics; more Catholic than
-Catholicism. Just so, he would be, if he were painting the
-Sheik-el-Islam, more Moslem than the Mohammedans. He has no eyes but
-for ideas.
-
-Watts’ allegories and Watts’ portraits exhaust the subject of his art.
-It is true that he has on rare occasions attempted pictures merely
-reproducing the externals of the ordinary earth. It is characteristic of
-him that he should have once, for no apparent reason in particular,
-painted a picture of two carthorses and a man. It is still more
-characteristic of him that this one picture of a trivial group in the
-street should be so huge as to dwarf many of his largest and most
-transcendental canvases; that the incidental harmless drayman should be
-more gigantic than the Prince of this World or Adam or the Angel of
-Death. He condescends to a detail and makes the detail more vast than a
-cosmic allegory. One picture, called “The First Oyster,” he is reported
-to have painted in response to a challenge which accused him or his art
-of lacking altogether the element of humour. The charge is interesting,
-because it suggests a comparison with the similar charge commonly
-brought against Gladstone. In both charges there is an element of truth,
-though not complete truth. Watts proved no doubt that he was not wholly
-without humour by this admirable picture. Gladstone proved that he was
-not wholly without humour by his reply to Mr. Chaplin, by his singing of
-“Doo-dah,” and by his support of a grant to the Duke of Coburg. But both
-men were singularly little possessed by the mood or the idea of humour.
-To them had been in peculiar fullness revealed the one great truth which
-our modern thought does not know and which it may possibly perish
-through not knowing. They knew that to enjoy life means to take it
-seriously. There is an eternal kinship between solemnity and high
-spirits, and almost the very name of it is Gladstone. Its other name is
-Watts. They knew that not only life, but every detail of life, is most a
-pleasure when it is studied with the gloomiest intensity. They knew that
-the men who collect beetles are jollier than the men who kill them, and
-that the men who worshipped beetles (in ancient Egypt) were probably the
-jolliest of all. The startling cheerfulness of the old age of Gladstone,
-the startling cheerfulness of the old age of Watts, are both entirely
-redolent of this exuberant seriousness, this uproarious gravity. They
-were as happy as the birds, because, like the birds, they were untainted
-by the disease of laughter. They are as awful and philosophical as
-children at play: indeed they remind us of a truth true for all of us,
-though capable of misunderstanding, that the great aim of a man’s life
-is to get into his second childhood.
-
-Of his work we have concluded our general survey. It has been hard in
-conducting such a survey to avoid the air of straying from the subject.
-But the greatest hardness of the subject is that we cannot stray from
-the subject. This man has attempted, whether he has succeeded or no, to
-paint such pictures of such things that no one shall be able to get
-outside them; that everyone should be lost in them for ever like
-wanderers in a mighty park. Whether we strike a match or win the
-Victoria Cross, we are still giants sprawling in Chaos. Whether we hide
-in a monastery or thunder on a platform, we are still standing in the
-Court of Death. If any experience at all is genuine, it affects the
-philosophy of these pictures; if any halfpenny stamp supports them, they
-are the better pictures; if any dead cat in a dust-bin contradicts them,
-they are the worse pictures. This is the great pathos and the great
-dignity of philosophy and theology. Men talk of philosophy and theology
-as if they were something specialistic and arid and
-
-[Illustration: GOOD LUCK TO YOUR FISHING.]
-
-academic. But philosophy and theology are not only the only democratic
-things, they are democratic to the point of being vulgar, to the point,
-I was going to say, of being rowdy. They alone admit all matters; they
-alone lie open to all attacks. All other sciences may, while studying
-their own, laugh at the rag-tag and bobtail of other sciences. An
-astronomer may sneer at animalculæ, which are very like stars; an
-entomologist may scorn the stars, which are very like animalculæ.
-Physiologists may think it dirty to grub about in the grass; botanists
-may think it dirtier to grub about in an animal’s inside. But there is
-nothing that is not relevant to these more ancient studies. There is no
-detail, from buttons to kangaroos, that does not enter into the gay
-confusion of philosophy. There is no fact of life, from the death of a
-donkey to the General Post Office, which has not its place to dance and
-sing in, in the glorious Carnival of theology.
-
-Therefore I make no apology if I have asked the reader, in the course of
-these remarks, to think about things in general. It is not I, but George
-Frederick Watts, who asks the reader to think about things in general.
-If he has not done this, he has failed. If he has not started in us such
-trains of reflection as I am now concluding and many more and many
-better, he has failed. And this brings me to my last word. Now and again
-Watts has failed. I am afraid that it may possibly be inferred from the
-magniloquent language which I have frequently, and with a full
-consciousness of my act, applied to this great man, that I think the
-whole of his work technically triumphant. Clearly it is not. For I
-believe that often he has scarcely known what he was doing; I believe
-that he has been in the dark when the lines came wrong; that he has been
-still deeper in the dark and things came right. As I have already
-pointed out, the vague lines which his mere physical instinct would
-make him draw, have in them the curves of the Cosmos. His automatic
-manual action was, I think, certainly a revelation to others, certainly
-a revelation to himself. Standing before a dark canvas upon some quiet
-evening, he has made lines and something has happened. In such an hour
-the strange and splendid phrase of the Psalm he has literally fulfilled.
-He has gone on because of the word of meekness and truth and of
-righteousness. And his right hand has taught him terrible things.
-
-*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK G. F. WATTS ***
-
-***** This file should be named 64074-0.txt or 64074-0.zip *****
-This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
- https://www.gutenberg.org/6/4/0/7/64074/
-
-Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will
-be renamed.
-
-Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
-law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
-so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
-States without permission and without paying copyright
-royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
-of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
-concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
-and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive
-specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this
-eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook
-for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports,
-performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given
-away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks
-not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the
-trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.
-
-START: FULL LICENSE
-
-THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
-PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
-
-To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
-distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
-(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
-Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at
-www.gutenberg.org/license.
-
-Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-
-1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
-and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
-(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
-the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
-destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your
-possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
-Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
-by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
-person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
-1.E.8.
-
-1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
-used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
-agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
-things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
-paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this
-agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
-
-1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the
-Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
-of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual
-works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
-States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
-United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
-claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
-displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
-all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
-that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting
-free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm
-works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
-Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily
-comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
-same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when
-you share it without charge with others.
-
-1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
-what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
-in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
-check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
-agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
-distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
-other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no
-representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
-country outside the United States.
-
-1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
-
-1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
-immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear
-prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work
-on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the
-phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed,
-performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
-
- This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
- most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
- restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
- under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
- eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
- United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
- you are located before using this eBook.
-
-1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is
-derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
-contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
-copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
-the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
-redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
-either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
-obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm
-trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-
-1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
-with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
-must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
-additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
-will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works
-posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
-beginning of this work.
-
-1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
-License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
-work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
-
-1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
-electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
-prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
-active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm License.
-
-1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
-compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
-any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
-to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format
-other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official
-version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site
-(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
-to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
-of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain
-Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the
-full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
-
-1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
-performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
-unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-
-1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
-access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-provided that
-
-* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
- the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
- you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
- to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has
- agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
- Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
- within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
- legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
- payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
- Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
- Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
- Literary Archive Foundation."
-
-* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
- you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
- does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
- License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
- copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
- all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm
- works.
-
-* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
- any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
- electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
- receipt of the work.
-
-* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
- distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
-
-1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than
-are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
-from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The
-Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm
-trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
-
-1.F.
-
-1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
-effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
-works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
-Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
-contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
-or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
-intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
-other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
-cannot be read by your equipment.
-
-1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
-of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
-liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
-fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
-LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
-PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
-TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
-LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
-INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
-DAMAGE.
-
-1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
-defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
-receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
-written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
-received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
-with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
-with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
-lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
-or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
-opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
-the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
-without further opportunities to fix the problem.
-
-1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
-in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO
-OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
-LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
-
-1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
-warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
-damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
-violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
-agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
-limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
-unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
-remaining provisions.
-
-1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
-trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
-providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in
-accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
-production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
-including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
-the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
-or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or
-additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any
-Defect you cause.
-
-Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
-electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
-computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
-exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
-from people in all walks of life.
-
-Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
-assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
-goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
-remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
-and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future
-generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
-Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
-www.gutenberg.org
-
-Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation
-
-The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
-501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
-state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
-Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
-number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
-U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
-
-The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the
-mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its
-volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous
-locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt
-Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to
-date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and
-official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
-
-For additional contact information:
-
- Dr. Gregory B. Newby
- Chief Executive and Director
- gbnewby@pglaf.org
-
-Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
-Literary Archive Foundation
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
-spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
-increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
-freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
-array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
-($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
-status with the IRS.
-
-The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
-charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
-States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
-considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
-with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
-where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
-DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
-state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate
-
-While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
-have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
-against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
-approach us with offers to donate.
-
-International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
-any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
-outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
-
-Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
-methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
-ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
-donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
-
-Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works.
-
-Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be
-freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
-distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of
-volunteer support.
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
-editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
-the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
-necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
-edition.
-
-Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search
-facility: www.gutenberg.org
-
-This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
-including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
-subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
diff --git a/old/64074-0.zip b/old/64074-0.zip
deleted file mode 100644
index 3d2ddd5..0000000
--- a/old/64074-0.zip
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h.zip b/old/64074-h.zip
deleted file mode 100644
index 73ea84c..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h.zip
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/64074-h.htm b/old/64074-h/64074-h.htm
deleted file mode 100644
index ade9a7e..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/64074-h.htm
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,2809 +0,0 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
-"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
-
-<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en">
- <head> <link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" />
-<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" />
-<title>
- The Project Gutenberg eBook of G. F. Watts, by G. K. Chesterton.
-</title>
-<style type="text/css">
-
-a:link {background-color:#ffffff;color:blue;text-decoration:none;}
-
- link {background-color:#ffffff;color:blue;text-decoration:none;}
-
-a:visited {background-color:#ffffff;color:purple;text-decoration:none;}
-
-a:hover {background-color:#ffffff;color:#FF0000;text-decoration:underline;}
-
-big {font-size: 130%;}
-
-body{margin-left:4%;margin-right:6%;background:#ffffff;color:black;font-family:"Times New Roman", serif;font-size:medium;}
-
-.blockquot {margin: 2% 15% 2% 15%;}
-
-.c {text-align:center;text-indent:0%;}
-
-.caption {font-weight:normal;}
-.caption p{font-size:100%;text-align:center;text-indent:0%;}
-
-.cb {text-align:center;text-indent:0%;font-weight:bold;}
-
-.cbig {text-align:center;text-indent:0%;font-weight:bold;
-font-size:175%;letter-spacing:.2em;}
-
-.figcenter {margin:3% auto 3% auto;clear:both;
-text-align:center;text-indent:0%;}
-
- h1 {margin-top:1em;margin-bottom:.1em;text-align:center;clear:both;
-font-weight:bold;font-size:450%;letter-spacing:.1em;}
-
- h2 {margin-top:4%;margin-bottom:2%;text-align:center;clear:both;
- font-size:150%;font-weight:normal;}
-
- hr.full {width: 60%;margin:2% auto 2% auto;border-top:1px solid black;
-padding:.1em;border-bottom:1px solid black;border-left:none;border-right:none;}
-
- img {border:none;}
-
-.letra {font-size:250%;float:left;margin-top:-1%;}
- @media print, handheld
- { .letra
- {font-size:250%;padding:0%;}
- }
-
-.nind {text-indent:0%;}
-
- p {margin-top:.2em;text-align:justify;margin-bottom:.2em;text-indent:4%;}
-
-.pagenum {font-style:normal;position:absolute;
-left:95%;font-size:55%;text-align:right;color:gray;
-background-color:#ffffff;font-variant:normal;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;text-decoration:none;text-indent:0em;}
-@media print, handheld
-{.pagenum
- {display: none;}
- }
-
-.rt {text-align:right;}
-
-small {font-size: 70%;}
-
-table {margin-top:2%;margin-bottom:2%;margin-left:auto;margin-right:auto;border:none;}
-</style>
- </head>
-<body>
-<div style='text-align:center; font-size:1.2em; font-weight:bold;'>The Project Gutenberg eBook of G. F. Watts, by G. K. Chesterton</div>
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
-most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
-whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
-of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
-at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you
-are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the
-country where you are located before using this eBook.
-</div>
-<div style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:1em; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Title: G. F. Watts</div>
-<div style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:1em; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Author: G. K. Chesterton</div>
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>Release Date: December 22, 2020 [eBook #64074]</div>
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>Language: English</div>
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>Character set encoding: UTF-8</div>
-<div style='display:block; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Produced by: Tim Lindell, Chuck Greif and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries)</div>
-<div style='margin-top:2em;margin-bottom:4em'>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK G. F. WATTS ***</div>
-<hr class="full" />
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<a href="images/cover.jpg">
-<img src="images/cover.jpg" height="550" alt="" /></a>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_1" id="page_1">{1}</a></span>&nbsp; </p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_2" id="page_2">{2}</a></span>&nbsp; </p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_3" id="page_3">{3}</a></span>&nbsp; </p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_4" id="page_4">{4}</a></span>&nbsp; </p>
-
-<p class="cbig">G. F. WATTS</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_5" id="page_5">{5}</a></span>&nbsp; </p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_1" id="ill_1"></a><a name="front" id="front"></a>
-<a href="images/i_frontispiece.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_frontispiece.jpg" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>THE HABIT DOES NOT MAKE THE MONK.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<h1>G. F. WATTS</h1>
-
-<p class="cbig">BY G. K. CHESTERTON<br />
-</p>
-
-<p class="c" style="margin-top:2em;">
-<img src="images/colophon.jpg"
-width="150"
-alt=""
-/>
-<br />
-<br /><br />
-LONDON<br />
-<br />
-D U C K W O R T H &nbsp; &amp; &nbsp; C O.<br />
-<br />
-HENRIETTA ST. COVENT GARDEN<br />
-<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_6" id="page_6">{6}</a></span><br />
-<br />
-<i>Published 1904</i><br />
-<i>Reprinted 1906, 1909, 1913, 1914</i><br />
-<br />
-<br />
-PRINTED AT<br />
-THE BALLANTYNE PRESS<br />
-LONDON<br /></p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_7" id="page_7">{7}</a></span>&nbsp; </p>
-
-<h2><a name="LIST_OF_PHOTOGRAVURES" id="LIST_OF_PHOTOGRAVURES"></a>LIST OF PHOTOGRAVURES</h2>
-
-<table border="0" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0" summary="">
-<tr><td>&nbsp;</td><td class="rt"><small><i>Facing p.</i></small></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_1">THE HABIT DOES NOT MAKE THE MONK</a> &nbsp; &nbsp; <a href="#front"><i>Frontispiece</i></a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_2">G. F. WATTS, R.A.</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_8">8</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_3">THE RIDER ON THE WHITE HORSE</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_10">10</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_4">LESLIE STEPHEN</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_14">14</a></td></tr>
-
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_5">WALTER CRANE</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_16">16</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_6">THE SLUMBER OF THE AGES</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_18">18</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_7">CARDINAL MANNING</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_20">20</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_8">CHAOS</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_22">22</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_9">“FOR HE HAD GREAT POSSESSIONS”</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_26">26</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_10">AN IDLE CHILD OF FANCY</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_28">28</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_11">THE MINOTAUR</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_32">32</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_12">THE COURT OF DEATH</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_34">34</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_13">MATTHEW ARNOLD</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_36">36</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_14">JOHN STUART MILL</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_36">36</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_15">ROBERT BROWNING</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_38">38</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_16">LORD TENNYSON</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_38">38</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_17">THE DWELLER IN THE INNERMOST</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_40">40</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_18">GEORGE MEREDITH</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_42">42</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_19">ORPHEUS AND EURYDICE</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_44">44</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_20">HOPE</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_46">46</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_21">JONAH</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_48">48</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_8" id="page_8">{8}</a></span>
-<a href="#ill_22">MAMMON</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_52">52</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_23">DEATH CROWNING INNOCENCE</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_54">54</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_24">A STORY FROM BOCCACCIO</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_56">56</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_25">LORD LYTTON</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_58">58</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_26">DAWN</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_60">60</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_27">EVE REPENTANT</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_62">62</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_28">LOVE AND DEATH</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_64">64</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_29">WILLIAM MORRIS</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_66">66</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_30">DANTE GABRIEL ROSSETTI</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_68">68</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_31">THOMAS CARLYLE</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_70">70</a></td></tr>
-<tr><td valign="top"><a href="#ill_32">GOOD LUCK TO YOUR FISHING</a></td><td class="rt"><a href="#page_74">74</a></td></tr>
-
-</table>
-
-<div class="blockquot"><p class="nind"><i>The Photogravures are from photographs by Fredk. Hollyer.
-Permanent photographs of works of Watts, Rossetti, Burne-Jones,
-Holbein, and of pictures in the Dublin and Hague Galleries can be
-obtained of Fredk. Hollyer, 9 Pembroke Square, Kensington.</i></p></div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_2" id="ill_2"></a>
-<a href="images/i_008fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_008fp.jpg" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>G. F. WATTS, R.A.</p>
-
-<p>Photograph from Life by Frederick Hollyer.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_9" id="page_9">{9}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind"><span class="letra">G</span>EORGE FREDERICK WATTS was born on 23rd February 1817. His whole rise
-and career synchronizes roughly with the rise and career of the
-nineteenth century. As a rule, no doubt, such chronological parallels
-are peculiarly fanciful and unmeaning. Nothing can be imagined more
-idle, in a general way, than talking about a century as if it were some
-kind of animal with a head and tail, instead of an arbitrary length cut
-from an unending scroll. Nor is it less erroneous to assume that even if
-a period be definitely vital or disturbing, art must be a mirror of it;
-the greatest political storm flutters only a fringe of humanity; poets,
-like bricklayers, work on through a century of wars, and Bewick’s birds,
-to take an instance, have the air of persons unaffected by the French
-Revolution. But in the case of Watts there are two circumstances which
-render the dates relevant. The first is that the nineteenth century was
-self-conscious, believed itself to be an idea and an atmosphere, and
-changed its name from a chronological almost to a philosophical term. I
-do not know whether all centuries do this or whether an advanced and
-progressive organ called “The Eleventh Century” was ever in
-contemplation in the dawn of the Middle Ages. But with us it is clear
-that a certain spirit was rightly or wrongly associated with the late
-century and that it called up images and thoughts like any historic or
-ritual date, like the Fourth<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_10" id="page_10">{10}</a></span> of July or the First of April. What these
-images and thoughts were we shall be obliged in a few minutes and in the
-interests of the subject to inquire. But this is the first circumstance
-which renders the period important; and the second is that it has always
-been so regarded by Watts himself. He, more than any other modern man,
-more than politicians who thundered on platforms or financiers who
-captured continents, has sought in the midst of his quiet and hidden
-life to mirror his age. He was born in the white and austere dawn of
-that great reforming century, and he has lingered after its grey and
-doubtful close. He is above all things a typical figure, a survival of
-the nineteenth century.</p>
-
-<p>It will appear to many a somewhat grotesque matter to talk about a
-period in which most of us were born and which has only been dead a year
-or two, as if it were a primal Babylonian empire of which only a few
-columns are left crumbling in the desert. And yet such is, in spirit,
-the fact. There is no more remarkable psychological element in history
-than the way in which a period can suddenly become unintelligible. To
-the early Victorian period we have in a moment lost the key: the Crystal
-Palace is the temple of a forgotten creed. The thing always happens
-sharply: a whisper runs through the salons, Mr. Max Beerbohm waves a
-wand and a whole generation of great men and great achievement suddenly
-looks mildewed and unmeaning. We see precisely the same thing in that
-other great reaction towards art and the vanities, the Restoration of
-Charles II. In that hour both the great schools of faith and valour
-which had seemed either angels or devils to all men: the dreams of
-Strafford and the great High Churchmen on the one hand; the Moslem
-frenzy of the English Commons, the worship of the English law upon the<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_11" id="page_11">{11}</a></span></p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_3" id="ill_3"></a>
-<a href="images/i_010fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_010fp.jpg" width="478" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>THE RIDER ON THE WHITE HORSE</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_12" id="page_12">{12}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">other; both seemed distant and ridiculous. The new Cavalier despised the
-old Cavalier even more than he despised the Roundhead. The last stand of
-English chivalry dwindled sharply to the solitary figure of the absurd
-old country gentleman drinking wine out of an absurd old flagon. The
-great roar of Roundhead psalms which cried out that the God of Battles
-was loose in English meadows shrank to a single snuffle. The new and
-polite age saw the old and serious one exactly as we see the early
-Victorian era: they saw it, that is to say, not as splendid, not as
-disastrous, not as fruitful, not as infamous, not as good or bad, but
-simply as ugly. Just as we can see nothing about Lord Shaftesbury but
-his hat, they could see nothing about Cromwell but his nose. There is no
-doubt of the shock and sharpness of the silent transition. The only
-difference is that accordingly as we think of man and his nature,
-according to our deepest intuitions about things, we shall see in the
-Restoration and the <i>fin de siècle</i> philosophy a man waking from a
-turbid and pompous dream, or a man hurled from heaven and the wars of
-the angels.</p>
-
-<p>G. F. Watts is so deeply committed to, and so unalterably steeped in,
-this early Victorian seriousness and air of dealing with great matters,
-that unless we sharply apprehend that spirit, and its difference from
-our own, we shall misunderstand his work from the outset. Splendid as is
-the art of Watts technically or obviously considered, we shall yet find
-much in it to perplex and betray us, unless we understand his original
-theory and intention, a theory and intention dyed deeply with the
-colours of a great period which is gone. The great technical
-inequalities of his work, its bursts of stupendous simplicity in colour
-and design, its daring failures, its strange symbolical portraits, all
-will mislead or bewilder if we have not the thread of intention. In
-order to hold that, we must hold something which runs through and
-supports, as a string supports jewels, all the wars and treaties and
-reforms of the nineteenth century.</p>
-
-<p>There are at least three essential and preliminary points on which Watts
-is so completely at one with the nineteenth century and so completely
-out of accord with the twentieth, that it may be advisable to state them
-briefly before we proceed to the narrower but not more cogent facts of
-his life and growth. The first of these is a nineteenth-century
-atmosphere which is so difficult to describe, that we can only convey it
-by a sort of paradox. It is difficult to know whether it should be
-called doubt or faith. For if, on the one hand, real faith would have
-been more confident, real doubt, on the other hand, would have been more
-indifferent. The attitude of that age of which the middle and best parts
-of Watts’ work is most typical, was an attitude of devouring and
-concentrated interest in things which were, by their own system,
-impossible or unknowable. Men were, in the main, agnostics: they said,
-“We do not know”; but not one of them ever ventured to say, “We do not
-care.” In most eras of revolt and question, the sceptics reap something
-from their scepticism: if a man were a believer in the eighteenth
-century, there was Heaven; if he were an unbeliever, there was the
-Hell-Fire Club. But these men restrained themselves more than hermits
-for a hope that was more than half hopeless, and sacrificed hope itself
-for a liberty which they would not enjoy; they were rebels without
-deliverance and saints without reward. There may have been and there was
-something arid and over-pompous about them: a newer and gayer philosophy
-may be passing before us and<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_13" id="page_13">{13}</a></span> changing many things for the better; but
-we shall not easily see any nobler race of men, and of them all most
-assuredly there was none nobler than Watts. If anyone wishes to see that
-spirit, he will see it in pictures painted by Watts in a form beyond
-expression sad and splendid. <i>Hope</i> that is dim and delicate and yet
-immortal, the indestructible minimum of the spirit; <i>Love and Death</i>
-that is awful and yet the reverse of horrible; <i>The Court of Death</i> that
-is like a page of Epictetus and might have been dreamt by a dead Stoic:
-these are the visions of that spirit and the incarnations of that time.
-Its faith was doubtful, but its doubt was faithful. And its supreme and
-acute difference from most periods of scepticism, from the later
-Renaissance, from the Restoration and from the hedonism of our own time
-was this, that when the creeds crumbled and the gods seemed to break up
-and vanish, it did not fall back, as we do, on things yet more solid and
-definite, upon art and wine and high finance and industrial efficiency
-and vices. It fell in love with abstractions and became enamoured of
-great and desolate words.</p>
-
-<p>The second point of <i>rapport</i> between Watts and his time was a more
-personal matter, a matter more concerned with the man, or, at least, the
-type; but it throws so much light upon almost every step of his career
-that it may with advantage be suggested here. Those who know the man
-himself, the quaint and courtly old man down at Limnerslease, know that
-if he has one trait more arresting than another, it is his almost absurd
-humility. He even disparages his own talent that he may insist rather
-upon his aims. His speech and gesture are simple, his manner polite to
-the point of being deprecating, his soul to all appearance of an almost
-con<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_14" id="page_14">{14}</a></span>founding clarity and innocence. But although these appearances
-accurately represent the truth about him, though he is in reality modest
-and even fantastically modest, there is another element in him, an
-element which was in almost all the great men of his time, and it is
-something which many in these days would call a kind of splendid and
-inspired impudence. It is that wonderful if simple power of preaching,
-of claiming to be heard, of believing in an internal message and
-destiny: it is the audacious faculty of mounting a pulpit. Those would
-be very greatly mistaken who, misled by the childlike and humble manner
-of this monk of art, expected to find in him any sort of doubt, or any
-sort of fear, or any sort of modesty about the aims he follows or the
-cause he loves. He has the one great certainty which marks off all the
-great Victorians from those who have come after them: he may not be
-certain that he is successful, or certain that he is great, or certain
-that he is good, or certain that he is capable: but he is certain that
-he is right. It is of course the very element of confidence which has in
-our day become least common and least possible. We know we are brilliant
-and distinguished, but we do not know we are right. We swagger in
-fantastic artistic costumes; we praise ourselves; we fling epigrams
-right and left; we have the courage to play the egoist and the courage
-to play the fool, but we have not the courage to preach. If we are to
-deliver a philosophy it must be in the manner of the late Mr. Whistler
-and the <i>ridentem dicere verum</i>. If our heart is to be aimed at it must
-be with the rapier of Stevenson which runs us through without either
-pain or puncture. It is only just to say, that good elements as well as
-bad ones have joined in making this old Victorian preaching difficult or
-alien to us.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_4" id="ill_4"></a>
-<a href="images/i_014fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_014fp.jpg" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>LESLIE STEPHEN.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_15" id="page_15">{15}</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Humility as well as fear, camaraderie as well as cynicism, a sense of
-complexity and a kind of gay and worldly charity have led us to avoid
-the pose of the preacher, to be moral by ironies, to whisper a word and
-glide away. But, whatever may be the accidental advantage of this recoil
-from the didactic, it certainly does mean some loss of courage and of
-the old and athletic simplicity. Nay, in some sense it is really a loss
-of a fine pride and self-regard. Mr. Whistler coquetted and bargained
-about the position and sale of his pictures: he praised them; he set
-huge prices on them; but still under all disguise, he treated them as
-trifles. Watts, when scarcely more than a boy and comparatively unknown,
-started his great custom of offering his pictures as gifts worthy of a
-great nation. Thus we came to the conclusion, a conclusion which may
-seem to some to contain a faint element of paradox, that Mr. Whistler
-suffered from an excessive and exaggerated modesty. And this unnatural
-modesty of Mr. Whistler can scarcely be more typically symbolized than
-in his horror of preaching. The new school of art and thought does
-indeed wear an air of audacity, and breaks out everywhere into
-blasphemies, as if it required any courage to say a blasphemy. There is
-only one thing that it requires real courage to say, and that is a
-truism.</p>
-
-<p>Lastly, it would be quite impossible to complete this prefatory
-suggestion of the atmosphere in which the mind of Watts grew and
-prevailed, without saying something about that weary and weather-beaten
-question of the relation of art to ethics on which so much has been said
-in connexion with him and his contemporaries. About the real aim and the
-real value of Watts’ allegorical pictures I shall speak later, but for
-the moment it is only desirable to point out what the early and middle
-Victorian view of<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_16" id="page_16">{16}</a></span> the matter really was. According to the later
-æsthetic creed which Mr. Whistler and others did so much to preach, the
-state of the arts under the reign of that Victorian view was a chaos of
-everyone minding everyone else’s business. It was a world in which
-painters were trying to be novelists, and novelists trying to be
-historians, and musicians doing the work of schoolmasters, and sculptors
-doing the work of curates. That is a view which has some truth in it,
-both as a description of the actual state of things and as involving an
-interesting and suggestive philosophy of the arts. But a good deal of
-harm may be done by ceaselessly repeating to ourselves even a true and
-fascinating fashionable theory, and a great deal of good by endeavouring
-to realize the real truth about an older one. The thing from which
-England suffers just now more than from any other evil is not the
-assertion of falsehoods, but the endless and irrepressible repetition of
-half-truths. There is another side to every historic situation, and that
-often a startling one; and the other side of the Victorian view of art,
-now so out of mode, is too little considered. The salient and essential
-characteristic of Watts and men of his school was that they regarded
-life as a whole. They had in their heads, as it were, a synthetic
-philosophy which put everything into a certain relation with God and the
-wheel of things. Thus, psychologically speaking, they were incapable not
-merely of holding such an opinion, but actually of thinking such a
-thought as that of art for art’s sake; it was to them like talking about
-voting for voting’s sake, or amputating for amputating’s sake. To them
-as to the ancient Jews the Spirit of the unity of existence declared in
-thunder that they should not make any graven image, or have any gods but
-Him. Doubtless, they did not give art a</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_5" id="ill_5"></a>
-<a href="images/i_016fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_016fp.jpg" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>WALTER CRANE.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_17" id="page_17">{17}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">relation of unimpeachable correctness: in their scheme of things it may
-be true, or rather it is true, that the æsthetic was confused with the
-utilitarian, that good gardens were turned so to speak into bad
-cornfields, and a valuable temple into a useless post-office. But in so
-far as they had this fundamental idea that art must be linked to life,
-and to the strength and honour of nations, they were a hundred times
-more broad-minded and more right than the new ultra-technical school.
-The idea of following art through everything for itself alone, through
-extravagance, through cruelty, through morbidity, is just exactly as
-superstitious as the idea of following theology for itself alone through
-extravagance and cruelty and morbidity. To deny that Baudelaire is
-loathsome, or Nietzsche inhuman, because we stand in awe of beauty, is
-just the same thing as denying that the Court of Pope Julius was
-loathsome, or the rack inhuman, because we stand in awe of religion. It
-is not necessary and it is not honest. The young critics of the Green
-Carnation, with their nuances and technical mysteries, would doubtless
-be surprised to learn that as a class they resemble ecstatic nuns, but
-their principle is, in reality, the same. There is a great deal to be
-said for them, and a great deal, for that matter, to be said for nuns.
-But there is nothing to be surprised at, nothing to call for any charge
-of inconsistency or lack of enlightenment, about the conduct of Watts
-and the great men of his age, in being unable to separate art from
-ethics. They were nationalists and universalists: they thought that the
-ecstatic isolation of the religious sense had done incalculable harm to
-religion. It is not remarkable or unreasonable that they should think
-that the ecstatic isolation of the artistic sense would do incalculable
-harm to art.</p>
-
-<p>This, then, was the atmosphere of Watts and<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_18" id="page_18">{18}</a></span> Victorian idealism: an
-atmosphere so completely vanished from the world of art in which we now
-live that the above somewhat long introduction is really needed to make
-it vivid or human to us. These three elements may legitimately, as I
-have said, be predicated of it as its main characteristics: first, the
-sceptical idealism, the belief that abstract verities remained the chief
-affairs of men when theology left them; second, the didactic simplicity,
-the claim to teach other men and to assume one’s own value and
-rectitude; third, the cosmic utilitarianism, the consideration of any
-such thing as art or philosophy perpetually with reference to a general
-good. They may be right or wrong, they may be returning or gone for
-ever; theories and fashions may change the face of humanity again and
-yet again; but at least in that one old man at Limnerslease, burned, and
-burned until death, these convictions, like three lamps in an old pagan
-temple of stoicism.</p>
-
-<p>Of the ancestry of Watts so little is known that it resolves itself into
-one hypothesis: a hypothesis which brings with it a suggestion, a
-suggestion employed by almost all his existing biographers, but a
-suggestion which cannot, I think, pass unchallenged, although the matter
-may appear somewhat theoretic and remote. Watts was born in London, but
-his family had in the previous generation come from Hereford. The vast
-amount of Welsh blood which is by the nature of the case to be found in
-Herefordshire has led to the statement that Watts is racially a Celt,
-which is very probably true. But it is also said, in almost every notice
-of his life and work, that the Celtic spirit can be detected in his
-painting, that the Celtic principle of mysticism is a characteristic of
-his artistic conceptions. It is in no idly antagonistic spirit that I
-venture to doubt this most profoundly.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_6" id="ill_6"></a>
-<a href="images/i_018fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_018fp.jpg" width="531" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>THE SLUMBER OF THE AGES</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_19" id="page_19">{19}</a></span></p>
-
-<p>Watts may or may not be racially a Celt, but there is nothing Celtic
-about his mysticism. The essential Celtic spirit in letters and art may,
-I think, be defined as a sense of the unbearable beauty of things. The
-essential spirit of Watts may, I think, be much better expressed as a
-sense of the joyful austerity of things. The dominant passion of the
-artistic Celt, of Mr. W. B. Yeats or Sir Edward Burne-Jones, is in the
-word “escape”: escape into a land where oranges grow on plum-trees and
-men can sow what they like and reap what they enjoy. To Watts the very
-word “escape” would be horrible, like an obscene word: his ideal is
-altogether duty and the great wheel. To the Celt frivolity is most truly
-the most serious of things, since in the tangle of roses is always the
-old serpent who is wiser than the world. To Watts seriousness is most
-truly the most “joyful of things,” since in it we come nearest to that
-ultimate equilibrium and reconciliation of things whereby alone they
-live and endure life and each other. It is difficult to imagine that
-amid all the varieties of noble temper and elemental desire there could
-possibly be two exhibiting a more total divergence than that between a
-kindly severity and an almost cruel love of sweetness; than that between
-a laborious and open-air charity and a kind of Bacchic asceticism;
-between a joy in peace and a joy in disorder; between a reduction of
-existence to its simplest formula and an extension of it to its most
-frantic corollary; between a lover of justice who accepts the real world
-more submissively than a slave and a lover of pleasure who despises the
-real world more bitterly than a hermit; between a king in battle-harness
-and a vagabond in elf-land; between Watts and Sir Edward Burne-Jones.</p>
-
-<p>It is remarkable that even the technical style of Watts gives a
-contradiction to this Celtic theory.<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_20" id="page_20">{20}</a></span> Watts is strong precisely where
-the Celt is weak, and weak precisely where the Celt is strong. The only
-thing that the Celt has lacked in art is that hard mass, that naked
-outline, that ἀρχιτεκτονική, which makes Watts a sort of sculptor of
-draughtsmanship. It is as well for us that the Celt has not had this: if
-he had, he would rule the world with a rod of iron; for he has
-everything else. There are no hard black lines in Burke’s orations, or
-Tom Moore’s songs, or the plays of Mr. W. B. Yeats. Burke is the
-greatest of political philosophers, because in him only are there
-distances and perspectives, as there are on the real earth, with its
-mists of morning and evening, and its blue horizons and broken skies.
-Moore’s songs have neither a pure style nor deep realization, nor
-originality of form, nor thought nor wit nor vigour, but they have
-something else which is none of these things, which is nameless and the
-one thing needful. In Mr. Yeats’ plays there is only one character: the
-hero who rules and kills all the others, and his name is Atmosphere.
-Atmosphere and the gleaming distances are the soul of Celtic greatness
-as they were of Burne-Jones, who was, as I have said, weak precisely
-where Watts is strong, in the statuesque quality in drawing, in the love
-of heavy hands like those of <i>Mammon</i>, of a strong back like that of
-<i>Eve Repentant</i>, in a single fearless and austere outline like that of
-the angel in <i>The Court of Death</i>, in the frame-filling violence of
-<i>Jonah</i>, in the half-witted brutality of <i>The Minotaur</i>. He is
-deficient, that is to say, in what can only be called the god-like
-materialism of art. Watts, on the other hand, is peculiarly strong in
-it. Idealist as he is, there is nothing frail or phantasmal about the
-things or the figures he loves. Though not himself a robust man, he
-loves robustness; he loves a great bulk of shoulder, an abrupt bend of
-neck, a gigantic stride,</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_7" id="ill_7"></a>
-<a href="images/i_020fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_020fp.jpg" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>CARDINAL MANNING.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_21" id="page_21">{21}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">a large and swinging limb, a breast bound as with bands of brass. Of
-course the deficiency in such a case is very far from being altogether
-on one side. There are abysses in Burne-Jones which Watts could not
-understand, the Celtic madness, older than any sanity, the hunger that
-will remain after the longest feast, the sorrow that is built up of
-stratified delights. From the point of view of the true Celt, Watts, the
-Watts who painted the great stoical pictures <i>Love and Death</i>, <i>Time,
-Death and Judgment</i>, <i>The Court of Death</i>, <i>Mammon</i>, and <i>Cain</i>, this
-pictorial Watts would probably be, must almost certainly be, simply a
-sad, sane, strong, stupid Englishman. He may or may not be Welsh by
-extraction or by part of his extraction, but in spirit he is an
-Englishman, with all the faults and all the disadvantages of an
-Englishman. He is a great Englishman like Milton or Gladstone, of the
-type, that is to say, that were too much alive for anything but gravity,
-and who enjoyed themselves far too much to trouble to enjoy a joke.
-Matthew Arnold has come near to defining that kind of idealism, so
-utterly different from the Celtic kind, which is to be found in Milton
-and again in Watts. He has called it, in one of his finest and most
-accurate phrases, “the imaginative reason.”</p>
-
-<p>This racial legend about the Watts family does not seem to rest upon any
-certain foundations, and as I have said, the deduction drawn from it is
-quite loose and misleading. The whole is only another example of that
-unfortunate, if not infamous, modern habit of talking about such things
-as heredity with a vague notion that science has closed the question
-when she has only just opened it. Nobody knows, as a matter of fact,
-whether a Celtic mysticism can be inherited any more than a theory on
-the Education Bill. But the eagerness of the popular mind to snatch<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_22" id="page_22">{22}</a></span> at
-a certainty is too impatient for the tardy processes of real hypothesis
-and research. Long before heredity has become a science, it has become a
-superstition. And this curious though incidental case of the origin of
-the Watts genius is just one of those cases which make us wonder what
-has been the real result of the great rise of science. So far the result
-would painfully appear to be that whereas men in the earlier times said
-unscientific things with the vagueness of gossip and legend, they now
-say unscientific things with the plainness and the certainty of science.</p>
-
-<p>The actual artistic education of Watts, though thorough indeed in its
-way, had a somewhat peculiar character, the air of something detached
-and private, and to the external eye something even at random. He works
-hard, but in an elusive and personal manner. He does not remember the
-time when he did not draw: he was an artist in his babyhood as he is an
-artist still in his old age. Like Ruskin and many other of the great and
-serious men of the century, he would seem to have been brought up
-chiefly on what may be called the large legendary literature, on such as
-Homer and Scott. Among his earliest recorded works was a set of coloured
-illustrations to the Waverley Novels, and a sketch of the struggle for
-the body of Patroclus. He went to the Academy schools, but only stayed
-there about a month; never caring for or absorbing the teaching, such as
-it was, of the place. He wandered perpetually in the Greek galleries of
-the British Museum, staring at the Elgin marbles, from which he always
-declared he learnt all the art he knew. “There,” he said, stretching out
-his hand towards the Ilyssus in his studio, “there is my master.” We
-hear of a friendship between him and the sculptor William Behnes, of
-Watts lounging about that artist’s studio, playing with clay, modelling
-busts, and staring</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_8" id="ill_8"></a>
-<a href="images/i_022fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_022fp.jpg" width="600" height="218" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>CHAOS.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_23" id="page_23">{23}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">at the work of sculpture. His eyes seemed to have been at this time the
-largest and hungriest part of him. Even when the great chance and first
-triumph of his life arrived a year or two later, even when he gained the
-great scholarship which sent him abroad to work amid the marbles of
-Italy, when a famous ambassador was his patron and a brilliant circle
-his encouragement, we do not find anything of the conventional student
-about him. He never painted in the galleries; he only dreamed in them.
-This must not, of course, be held to mean that he did not work; though
-one or two people who have written memoirs of Watts have used a
-phraseology, probably without noticing it, which might be held to imply
-this. Not only is the thing ludicrously incongruous with his exact
-character and morals; but anyone who knows anything whatever about the
-nature of pictorial art will know quite well that a man could not paint
-like that without having worked; just as he would know that a man could
-not be the Living Serpent without any previous practice with his joints.
-To say that he could really learn to paint and draw with the technical
-merit of Watts, or with any technical merit at all, by simply looking at
-other people’s pictures and statues will seem to anyone, with a small
-technical sense, like saying that a man learnt to be a sublime violinist
-by staring at fiddles in a shop window. It is as near a physical
-impossibility as can exist in these matters. Work Watts must have done
-and did do; it is the only conclusion possible which is consistent
-either with the nature of Watts or the nature of painting; and it is
-fully supported by the facts. But what the facts do reveal is that he
-worked in this curiously individual, this curiously invisible way. He
-had his own notion of when to dream and when to draw; as he shrank<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_24" id="page_24">{24}</a></span> from
-no toil, so he shrank from no idleness. He was something which is one of
-the most powerful and successful things in the world, something which is
-far more powerful and successful than a legion of students and prizemen:
-he was a serious and industrious truant.</p>
-
-<p>It is worth while to note this in his boyhood, partly, of course,
-because from one end of his life to the other there is this queer note
-of loneliness and liberty. But it is also more immediately and
-practically important because it throws some light on the development
-and character of his art, and even especially of his technique. The
-great singularity of Watts, considered as a mere artist, is that he
-stands alone. He is not connected with any of the groups of the
-nineteenth century: he has neither followed a school nor founded one. He
-is not mediæval; but no one could exactly call him classical: we have
-only to compare him to Leighton to feel the difference at once. His
-artistic style is rather a thing more primitive than paganism; a thing
-to which paganism and mediævalism are alike upstart sects; a style of
-painting there might have been upon the tower of Babel. He is mystical;
-but he is not mediæval: we have only to compare him to Rossetti to feel
-the difference. When he emerged into the artistic world, that world was
-occupied by the pompous and historical school, that school which was so
-exquisitely caricatured by Thackeray in Gandish and his “Boadishia”; but
-Watts was not pompous or historical: he painted one historical picture,
-which brought him a youthful success, and he has scarcely painted
-another. He lived on through the great Pre-Raphaelite time, that very
-noble and very much undervalued time, when men found again what had been
-hidden since the thirteenth century under loads<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_25" id="page_25">{25}</a></span> of idle civilization,
-the truth that simplicity and a monastic laboriousness is the happiest
-of all things; the great truth that purity is the only atmosphere for
-passion; the great truth that silver is more beautiful than gold. But
-though there is any quantity of this sentiment in Watts himself, Watts
-never has been a Pre-Raphaelite. He has seen other fashions come and go;
-he has seen the Pre-Raphaelites overwhelmed by a heavy restoration of
-the conventional, headed by Millais with his Scotch moors and his
-English countesses; but he has not heeded it. He has seen these again
-overturned by the wild lancers of Whistler; he has seen the mists of
-Impressionism settle down over the world, making it weird and delicate
-and noncommittal: but he thinks no more of the wet mist of the
-Impressionist than he thought of the dry glare of the Pre-Raphaelite.</p>
-
-<p>He, the most mild of men, has yet never been anything but Watts. He has
-followed the gleam, like some odd modern Merlin. He has escaped all the
-great atmospheres, the divine if deluding intoxications, which have
-whirled one man one way and one another; which flew to the head of a
-perfect stylist like Ruskin and made him an insane scientist; which flew
-to the head of a great artist like Whistler and made him a pessimistic
-dandy. He has passed them with a curious immunity, an immunity which, if
-it were not so nakedly innocent, might almost be called egotism; but
-which is in fact rather the single eye. He said once that he had not
-even consented to illustrate a book; his limitation was that he could
-express no ideas but his own. He admired Tennyson; he thought him the
-greatest of poets; he thought him a far greater man than himself; he
-read him, he adored him, but he could not illustrate him. This is the
-curious secret strength which kept him inde<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_26" id="page_26">{26}</a></span>pendent in his youth and
-kept him independent through the great roaring triumph of the
-Pre-Raphaelite and the great roaring triumph of the Impressionist. He
-stands in the world of art as he stood in the studio of Behnes and in
-the Uffizi Gallery. He stands gazing, but not copying.</p>
-
-<p>Of Watts as he was at this time there remains a very interesting
-portrait painted by himself. It represents him at the age of nineteen, a
-dark, slim, and very boyish-looking creature. Something in changed
-conditions may no doubt account for the flowing and voluminous dark
-hair: we see such a mane in many of the portraits of the most
-distinguished men of that time; but if a man appeared now and walked
-down Fleet Street with so neglected a <i>hure</i>, he would be mistaken for
-an advertisement of a hair-dresser, or by the more malicious for a minor
-poet. But there is about this picture not a trace of affectation or the
-artistic immunity in these matters: the boy’s dress is rough and
-ordinary, his expression is simple and unconscious. From a modern
-standpoint we should say without hesitation that if his hair is long it
-is because he has forgotten to have it cut. And there is something about
-this contrast between the unconsciously leonine hair and the innocent
-and almost bashful face, there is something like a parable of Watts. His
-air is artistic, if you will. His famous skull cap, which makes him look
-like a Venetian senator, is as pictorial and effective as the boyish
-mane in the picture. But he belongs to that older race of Bohemians, of
-which even Thackeray only saw the sunset, the great old race of art and
-literature who were ragged because they were really poor, frank because
-they were really free, and untidy because they were really forgetful. It
-will not do to confuse Watts with these men; there is</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_9" id="ill_9"></a>
-<a href="images/i_026fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_026fp.jpg" width="258" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>“FOR HE HAD GREAT POSSESSIONS.<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_27" id="page_27">{27}</a></span>”</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p class="nind">much about him that is precise and courtly, and which, as I shall have
-occasion to remark, belongs really to a yet older period. But it is more
-right to reckon Watts along with them in their genuine raggedness than
-to suppose that the unquestionable picturesqueness with which he fronts
-the world has any relation with that new Bohemianism which is untidy
-because it is conventional, frank because it follows a fashion, careless
-because it watches for all its effects, and ragged and coarse in its
-tastes because it has too much money.</p>
-
-<p>The first definite encouragement, or at least the first encouragement
-now ascertainable, probably came to the painter from that interesting
-Greek amateur, Mr. Constantine Ionides. It was under his encouragement
-that Watts began all his earlier work of the more ambitious kind, and it
-was the portrait of Mrs. Constantine Ionides which ranks among the
-earliest of his definite successes. He achieved immediate professional
-success, however, at an astonishingly early age, judged by modern
-standards. When he was barely twenty he had three pictures in the Royal
-Academy: the first two were portraits, and the third a picture called
-<i>The Wounded Heron</i>. There is always a very considerable temptation to
-fantasticality in dealing with these artistic origins: no doubt it does
-not always follow that a man is destined to be a military conqueror
-because he beats other little boys at school, nor endued with a
-passionate and clamorous nature because he begins this mortal life with
-a yell. But Watts has, to a rather unusual degree, a sincere and
-consistent and homogeneous nature; and this first exhibit of his has
-really a certain amount of symbolism about it. Portraiture, with which
-he thus began, he was destined to raise to a level never before attained
-in English art, so far as significance and humanity<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_28" id="page_28">{28}</a></span> are concerned; and
-there is really something a little fascinating about the fact that along
-with these pictures went one picture which had, for all practical
-purposes, an avowedly humanitarian object. The picture of <i>The Wounded
-Heron</i> scarcely ever attracts attention, I imagine, in these days, but
-it may, of course, have been recalled for a moment to the popular mind
-by that curious incident which occurred in connexion with it and which
-has often been told. Long after the painter who produced that picture in
-his struggling boyhood had lost sight of it and in all probability
-forgotten all about its existence, a chance traveller with a taste in
-the arts happened to find it in the dusty curiosity-shop of a
-north-country town. He bought it and gave it back to the now celebrated
-painter, who hung it among the exhibits at Little Holland House. It is,
-as I have said, a thing painted clearly with a humanitarian object: it
-depicts the suffering of a stricken creature; it depicts the
-helplessness of life under the cruelty of the inanimate violence; it
-depicts the pathos of dying and the greater pathos of living. Since
-then, no doubt, Watts has improved his machinery of presentation and
-found larger and more awful things to tell his tale with than a bleeding
-bird. The wings of the heron have widened till they embrace the world
-with the terrible wings of Time or Death: he has summoned the stars to
-help him and sent the angels as his ambassadors. He has changed the plan
-of operations until it includes Heaven and Tartarus. He has never
-changed the theme.</p>
-
-<p>The relations of Watts to Constantine Ionides either arose or became
-important about this time. The painter’s fortunes rose quickly and
-steadily, so far as the Academy was concerned. He continued to exhibit
-with a fair amount of regularity, chiefly in the form of subjects from
-the great romantic or</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_10" id="ill_10"></a>
-<a href="images/i_028fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_028fp.jpg" width="432" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>AN IDLE CHILD OF FANCY.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_29" id="page_29">{29}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">historic traditions which were then the whole pabulum of the young
-idealistic artist. In the Academy of 1840 came a picture on the old
-romantic subject of Ferdinand and Isabella; in the following year but
-one, a picture on the old romantic subject of Cymbeline. The portrait of
-Mrs. Constantine Ionides appeared in 1842.</p>
-
-<p>But Watts’ mode of thought from the very beginning had very little
-kinship with the Academy and very little kinship with this kind of
-private and conventional art. An event was shortly to occur, the first
-success of his life, but an event far less important when considered as
-the first success of his life than it is when considered as an essential
-characteristic of his mind. The circumstances are so extremely
-characteristic of something in the whole spirit of the man’s art that it
-may be permissible to dwell at length on the significance of the fact
-rather than on the fact itself.</p>
-
-<p>The great English Parliament, the Senate that broke the English kings,
-had just moved its centre of existence. The new Houses of Parliament had
-opened with what seemed to the men of that time an opening world. A
-competition was started for the decoration of the halls, and Watts
-suddenly sprang into importance: he won the great prize. The cartoon of
-<i>Caractacus led in triumph through the streets of Rome</i> was accepted
-from this almost nameless man by the great central power of English
-history. And until we have understood that fact we have not understood
-Watts: it was (one may be permitted to fancy) the supreme hour of his
-life. For Watts’ nature is essentially public&mdash;that is to say, it is
-modest and noble, and has nothing to hide. His art is an outdoor art,
-like that of the healthy ages of the world, like the statuesque art of
-Greece, like the ecclesiastical and external Gothic art of Christianity:
-an art that<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_30" id="page_30">{30}</a></span> can look the sun in the face. He ought to be employed to
-paint factory chimneys and railway stations. I know that this will sound
-like an insolence: my only answer is that he, in accordance with this
-great conception of his, actually offered to paint a railway station.
-With a splendid and truly religious imagination, he asked permission to
-decorate Euston. The railway managers (not perceiving, in their dull
-classical routine, the wild poetry of their own station) declined. But
-until we have understood this immense notion of publicity in the soul of
-Watts, we have understood nothing. The fundamental modern fallacy is
-that the public life must be an artificial life. It is like saying that
-the public street must be an artificial air. Men like Watts, men like
-all the great heroes, only breathe in public. What is the use of abusing
-a man for publicity when he utters in public the true and the enduring
-things? What is the use, above all, of prying into his secrecy when he
-has cried his best from the house-tops?</p>
-
-<p>This is the real argument which makes a detailed biography of Watts
-unnecessary for all practical purposes. It is in vain to climb walls and
-hide in cupboards in order to show whether Watts eats mustard or pepper
-with his curry or whether Watts takes sugar or salt with his porridge.
-These things may or may not become public: it matters little. The
-innermost that the biographer could at last discover, after all possible
-creepings and capers, would be what Watts in his inmost soul believes,
-and that Watts has splashed on twenty feet of canvas and given to the
-nation for nothing. Like one of the great orators of the eighteenth
-century, his public virtues, his public ecstasies are far more really
-significant than his private weaknesses. The rest of his life is so
-simple that it is scarcely worth telling. He went<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_31" id="page_31">{31}</a></span> with the great
-scholarship he gained with his <i>Caractacus</i> to Italy. There he found a
-new patron&mdash;the famous Lord Holland, with the whole of whose great
-literary circle he rapidly became acquainted. He painted many of his
-most famous portraits in connexion with this circle, both in Italy and
-afterwards in Paris. But this great vision of the public idea had
-entered his blood. He offered his cartoons to Euston Station; he painted
-St. George and the Dragon for the House of Lords; he presented a fresco
-to the great hall at Lincoln’s Inn. Of his life there is scarcely more
-to say, except the splendid fact that he three times refused a title. Of
-his character there is a great deal more to say.</p>
-
-<p>There is unquestionably about the personal attitude of Watts something
-that in the vague phraseology of modern times would be called Puritan.
-Puritan, however, is very far from being really the right word. The
-right word is a word which has been singularly little used in English
-nomenclature because historical circumstances have separated us from the
-origin from which it sprang. The right word for the spirit of Watts is
-<i>Stoicism</i>. Watts is at one with the Puritans in the actual objects of
-his attack. One of his deepest and most enduring troubles, a matter of
-which he speaks and writes frequently, is the prevalence of gambling.
-With the realism of an enthusiast, he has detected the essential fact
-that the problem of gambling is even more of a problem in the case of
-the poorer classes than in the case of the richer. It is, as he asserts,
-a far worse danger than drink. There are many other instances of his
-political identity with Puritanism. He told Mr. W. T. Stead that he had
-defended and was prepared to defend the staggering publications of the
-“Maiden Tribute”; it was the only way, he said, to stem the evil. A<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_32" id="page_32">{32}</a></span>
-picturesque irradiation asserts indeed that it was under the glow of
-Hebraic anger against these Babylonian cruelties of Piccadilly and the
-Strand that he painted as a symbol of those cruelties that brutal and
-magnificent picture <i>The Minotaur</i>. The pictures themselves of course
-bear sufficient attestation to this general character: <i>Mammon</i> is what
-we call a Puritan picture, and <i>Jonah</i>, and <i>Fata Morgana</i>, and <i>For he
-had Great Possessions</i>. It is not difficult to see that Watts has the
-Puritan vigilance, the Puritan realism, and the Puritan severity in his
-attitude towards public affairs. Nevertheless, as I have said, he is to
-be described rather as a Stoic than a Puritan. The essential difference
-between Christian and Pagan asceticism lies in the fact that Paganism in
-renouncing pleasure gives up something which it does not think
-desirable; whereas Christianity in giving up pleasure gives up something
-which it thinks very desirable indeed. Thus there is a frenzy in
-Christian asceticism; its follies and renunciations are like those of
-first love. There is a passion, and as it were a regret, in the
-Puritanism of Bunyan; there is none in the Puritanism of Watts. He is
-not Bunyan, he is Cato. The difference may be a difficult one to convey,
-but it is one that must not be ignored or great misunderstandings will
-follow. The one self-abnegation is more reasonable but less joyful. The
-Stoic casts away pleasure like the parings of his nails; the Mystic cuts
-it off like his right hand that offends him. In Watts we have the noble
-self-abnegation of a noble type and school; but everything, however
-noble, that has shape has limitation, and we must not look in Watts,
-with his national self-mastery, either for the nightmare of Stylites or
-the gaiety of Francis of Assisi.</p>
-
-<p>It has already been remarked that the chief note</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_11" id="ill_11"></a>
-<a href="images/i_032fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_032fp.jpg" width="482" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>THE MINOTAUR.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_33" id="page_33">{33}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">of the painter’s character is a certain mixture of personal delicacy and
-self-effacement with the most immense and audacious aims. But it is so
-essential a trait that it will bear a repetition and the introduction of
-a curious example of it. Watts in his quaint and even shy manner of
-speech often let fall in conversation words which hint at a certain
-principle or practice of his, a principle and practice which are, when
-properly apprehended, beyond expression impressive and daring. The
-spectator who studies his allegorical paintings one after another will
-be vaguely impressed with something uniquely absent, something which is
-usual and familiar in such pictures conspicuous by its withdrawal; a
-blank or difference which makes them things sundered altogether from the
-millions of allegorical pictures that throng the great and small
-galleries of painting. At length the nature of this missing thing may
-suddenly strike him: in the whole range of Watts’ symbolic art there is
-scarcely a single example of the ordinary and arbitrary current symbol,
-the ecclesiastical symbol, the heraldic symbol, the national symbol. A
-primeval vagueness and archaism hang over all the canvases and cartoons,
-like frescoes from some prehistoric temple. There is nothing there but
-the eternal things, clay and fire and the sea, and motherhood and the
-dead. We cannot imagine the rose or the lion of England; the keys or the
-tiara of Rome; the red cap of Liberty or the crescent of Islam in a
-picture by Watts; we cannot imagine the Cross itself. And in light and
-broken phrases, carelessly and humbly expressed, as I have said, the
-painter has admitted that this great omission was observed on principle.
-Its object is that the pictures may be intelligible if they survive the
-whole modern order. Its object is, that is to say, that if some savage
-in a dim futurity dug<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_34" id="page_34">{34}</a></span> up one of these dark designs on a lonely
-mountain, though he worshipped strange gods and served laws yet
-unwritten, it might strike the same message to his soul that it strikes
-upon clerks and navvies from the walls of the Tate Gallery. It is
-impossible not to feel a movement of admiration for the magnitude of the
-thought. Here is a man whose self-depreciation is internal and vital;
-whose life is cloistered, whose character is childlike, and he has yet
-within such an unconscious and colossal sense of greatness that he
-paints on the assumption that his work may outlast the cross of the
-Eternal City. As a boy he scarcely expected worldly success: as an old
-man he still said that his worldly success had astonished him. But in
-his nameless youth and in his silent old age he paints like one upon a
-tower looking down the appalling perspective of the centuries towards
-fantastic temples and inconceivable republics.</p>
-
-<p>This union of small self-esteem with a vast ambition is a paradox in the
-very soul of the painter; and when we look at the symbolic pictures in
-the light of this theory of his, it is interesting and typical to
-observe how consistently he pursues any intellectual rule that he laid
-down for himself. An æsthetic or ethical notion of this kind is not to
-him, as to most men with the artistic temperament, a thing to talk about
-sumptuously, to develop in lectures, and to observe when it happens to
-be suitable. It is a thing like his early rising or his personal
-conscience, a thing which is either a rule or nothing. And we find this
-insistence on universal symbols, this rejection of all symbols that are
-local or temporary or topical, even if the locality be a whole
-continent, the time a stretch of centuries, or the topic a vast
-civilization or an undying church&mdash;we find this insistence looking out
-very clearly from the allegories of Watts. It would</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_12" id="ill_12"></a>
-<a href="images/i_034fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_034fp.jpg" width="420" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>THE COURT OF DEATH.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_35" id="page_35">{35}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">have been easy and effective, as he himself often said, to make the
-meaning of a picture clear by the introduction of some popular and
-immediate image: and it must constantly be remembered that Watts does
-care very much for making the meaning of his pictures clear. His work
-indeed has, as I shall suggest shortly, a far more subtle and unnamable
-quality than the merely hard and didactic; but it must not be for one
-moment pretended that Watts does not claim to teach: to do so would be
-to falsify the man’s life. And it would be easy, as is quite obvious, to
-make the pictures clearer: to hang a crucifix over the <i>Happy Warrior</i>,
-to give <i>Mammon</i> some imperial crown or typical heraldic symbols, to
-give a theological machinery to <i>The Court of Death</i>. But this is put on
-one side like a temptation of the flesh, because it conflicts with this
-stupendous idea of painting for all peoples and all centuries. I am not
-saying that this extraordinary ambition is necessarily the right view of
-art, or the right view of life. I am only reiterating it as an absolute
-trait of men of the time and type and temper of Watts. It may plausibly
-be maintained, I am not sure that it cannot more truly be maintained,
-that man cannot achieve and need not achieve this frantic universality.
-A man, I fancy, is after all only an animal that has noble preferences.
-It is the very difference between the artistic mind and the mathematical
-that the former sees things as they are in a picture, some nearer and
-larger, some smaller and further away: while to the mathematical mind
-everything, every unit in a million, every fact in a cosmos, must be of
-equal value. That is why mathematicians go mad; and poets scarcely ever
-do. A man may have as wide a view of life as he likes, the wider the
-better; a distant view, a bird’s-eye view, if he will, but still a view
-and not a map.<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_36" id="page_36">{36}</a></span> The one thing he cannot attempt in his version of the
-universe is to draw things to scale. I have put myself for a moment
-outside this universalism and doubted its validity because a thing
-always appears more sharp and personal and picturesque if we do not
-wholly agree with it. And this universalism is an essential and dominant
-feature of such great men as Watts and of his time as a whole. Mr.
-Herbert Spencer is a respectable, almost a dapper, figure, his theory is
-agnostic and his tone polite and precise. And yet he threw himself into
-a task more insane and gigantic than that of Dante, an inventory or plan
-of the universe itself; the awful vision of existence as a single
-organism, like an amœba on the disc of a microscope. He claimed, by
-implication, to put in their right places the flaming certainty of the
-martyrs, the wild novelties of the modern world; to arrange the eternal
-rock of Peter and the unbroken trance of Buddhism. It is only in this
-age of specialists, of cryptic experiences in art and faith like the
-present, that we can see how huge was that enterprise; but the spirit of
-it is the spirit of Watts. The man of that aggressive nineteenth century
-had many wild thoughts, but there was one thought that never even for an
-instant strayed across his burning brain. He never once thought, “Why
-should I understand the cat, any more than the cat understands me?” He
-never thought, “Why should I be just to the merits of a Chinaman, any
-more than a pig studies the mystic virtues of a camel?” He affronted
-heaven and the angels, but there was one hard arrogant dogma that he
-never doubted even when he doubted Godhead: he never doubted that he
-himself was as central and as responsible as God.</p>
-
-<p>This paradox, then, we call the first element in the artistic and
-personal claim of Watts, that he</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_13" id="ill_13"></a>
-<a href="images/i_036fp_1.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_036fp_1.jpg" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>MATTHEW ARNOLD.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_14" id="ill_14"></a>
-<a href="images/i_036fp_2.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_036fp_2.jpg" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>JOHN STUART MILL.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_37" id="page_37">{37}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">realizes the great paradox of the Gospel. He is meek, but he claims to
-inherit the earth. But there is, of course, a great deal more to be said
-before this view of the matter can be considered complete. The
-universalism preached by Watts and the other great Victorians was of
-course subject to certain specialisations; it is not necessary to call
-them limitations. Like Matthew Arnold, the last and most sceptical of
-them, who expressed their basic idea in its most detached and
-philosophic form, they held that conduct was three-fourths of life. They
-were ingrainedly ethical; the mere idea of thinking anything more
-important than ethics would have struck them as profane. In this they
-were certainly right, but they were nevertheless partial or partisan;
-they did not really maintain the judicial attitude of the universalist.
-The mere thought of Watts painting a picture called <i>The Victory of Joy
-over Morality</i>, or <i>Nature rebuking Conscience</i>, is enough to show the
-definite limits of that cosmic equality. This is not, of course, to be
-taken as a fault in the attitude of Watts. He simply draws the line
-somewhere, as all men, including anarchists, draw it somewhere; he is
-dogmatic, as all sane men are dogmatic.</p>
-
-<p>There is another phase of this innocent audacity. It may appear to be
-more fanciful, it is certainly more completely a matter of inference;
-but it throws light on yet another side of the character of Watts.</p>
-
-<p>Watts’ relation to friends and friendship has something about it very
-typical. He is not a man desirous or capable of a very large or rich or
-varied circle of acquaintance. There is nothing Bohemian about him. He
-belongs both chronologically and psychologically to that period which is
-earlier even than Thackeray and his Cave of Harmony: he belongs<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_38" id="page_38">{38}</a></span> to the
-quiet, struggling, self-created men of the forties, with their tradition
-of self-abnegating individualism. Much as there is about him of the
-artist and the poet, there is something about him also of the
-industrious apprentice. That strenuous solitude in which Archbishop
-Temple as a boy struggled to carry a bag of ironmongery which crushed
-his back, in which Gladstone cut down trees and John Stuart Mill read
-half the books of the world in boyhood, that strenuous solitude entered
-to some degree into the very soul of Watts and made him independent of
-them. But the friends he made have as a general rule been very
-characteristic: they have marked the strange and haughty fastidiousness
-that goes along with his simplicity. His friends, his intimate friends,
-that is, have been marked by a certain indescribable and stately
-worthiness: more than one of them have been great men like himself. The
-greatest and most intimate of all his friends, probably, was Tennyson,
-and in this there is something singularly characteristic of Watts. About
-the actuality of the intellectual tie that bound him to Tennyson there
-can be little doubt. He painted three, if not four, portraits of him;
-his name was often on his lips; he invoked him always as the typical
-great poet, excusing his faults and expounding his virtues. He invoked
-his authority as that of the purest of poets, and invoked it very finely
-and well in a sharp controversial interview he had on the nature and
-ethics of the nude in art.</p>
-
-<p>At the time I write, there is standing at the end of the garden at
-Limnerslease a vast shed, used for a kind of sculptor’s studio, in which
-there stands a splendid but unfinished statue, on which the veteran of
-the arts is even now at work. It represents Tennyson, wrapped in his
-famous mantle, with his magnificent head bowed, gazing at something in
-the</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_15" id="ill_15"></a>
-<a href="images/i_038fp_1.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_038fp_1.jpg" width="491" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>ROBERT BROWNING.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_16" id="ill_16"></a>
-<a href="images/i_038fp_2.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_038fp_2.jpg" width="486" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>LORD TENNYSON.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_39" id="page_39">{39}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">hollow of his hand. The subject is <i>Flower in the Crannied Wall</i>. There
-is something very characteristic of Watts in the contrast between the
-colossal plan of the figure and the smallness of the central object.</p>
-
-<p>But while the practical nature of the friendship between Watts and
-Tennyson is clear enough, there is something really significant,
-something really relevant to Watts’ attitude in its ultimate and
-psychological character. It is surely most likely that Watts and
-Tennyson were drawn together because they both represented a certain
-relation towards their art which is not common in our time and was
-scarcely properly an attribute of any artists except these two. Watts
-could not have found the thing he most believed in Browning or Swinburne
-or Morris or any of the other poets. Tennyson could not have found the
-thing he most believed in Leighton or Millais or any of the other
-painters. They were brought together, it must be supposed, by the one
-thing that they had really in common, a profound belief in the
-solemnity, the ceremoniousness, the responsibility, and what most men
-would now, in all probability, call the pomposity of the great arts.</p>
-
-<p>Watts has always a singular kind of semi-mystical tact in the matter of
-portrait painting. His portraits are commonly very faultless comments
-and have the same kind of superlative mental delicacy that we see in the
-picture of <i>Hope</i>. And the whole truth of this last matter is very well
-expressed in Watts’ famous portrait of Tennyson, particularly if we look
-at it in conjunction with his portrait of Browning. The head of Browning
-is the head of a strong, splendid, joyful, and anxious man who could
-write magnificent poetry. The head of Tennyson is the head of a poet.
-Watts has painted Tennyson with his dark<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_40" id="page_40">{40}</a></span> dome-like head relieved
-against a symbolic green and blue of the eternal sea and the eternal
-laurels. He has behind him the bays of Dante and he is wrapped in the
-cloak of the prophets. Browning is dressed like an ordinary modern man,
-and we at once feel that it should and must be so. To dress Browning in
-the prophet’s robe and the poet’s wreath would strike us all as suddenly
-ridiculous; it would be like sending him to a fancy-dress ball. It would
-be like attiring Matthew Arnold in the slashed tights of an Elizabethan,
-or putting Mr. Lecky into a primitive Celto-Irish kilt. But it does not
-strike us as absurd in the case of Tennyson: it does not strike us as
-even eccentric or outlandish or remote. We think of Tennyson in that
-way; we think of him as a lordly and conscious bard. Some part of this
-fact may, of course, be due to his possession of a magnificent physical
-presence; but not, I think, all. Lord Kitchener (let us say) is a
-handsome man, but we should laugh at him very much in silver armour. It
-is much more due to the fact that Tennyson really assumed and was
-granted this stately and epic position. It is not true that Tennyson was
-more of a poet than Browning, if we mean by that statement that Browning
-could not compose forms as artistic and well-managed, lyrics as light
-and poignant, and rhythms as swelling and stirring as any in English
-letters. But it is true that Tennyson was more of a poet than Browning,
-if we mean by that statement that Tennyson was a poet in person, in post
-and circumstance and conception of life; and that Browning was not, in
-that sense, a poet at all. Browning first inaugurated in modern art and
-letters the notion or tradition, in many ways perhaps a more wholesome
-one, that the fact that a man pursued the trade or practice of poetry
-was his own affair and a thing apart,</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_17" id="ill_17"></a>
-<a href="images/i_040fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_040fp.jpg" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>THE DWELLER IN THE INNERMOST.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_41" id="page_41">{41}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">like the fact that he collected coins or earned his living as a hatter.
-But Tennyson really belonged to an older tradition, the tradition that
-believed that the poet, the appointed “Vates,” was a recognized and
-public figure like the bard or jester at the mediæval courts, like the
-prophet in the old Commonwealth of Israel. In Tennyson’s work appeared
-for the last time in English history this notion of the stately and
-public and acknowledged poet: it was the lay of the last minstrel.</p>
-
-<p>Now there is in Watts, gentle and invisible as he is, something that
-profoundly responds to that spirit. Leighton, like Browning, was a
-courtier and man of the world: Millais, like Browning, was a good fellow
-and an ordinary gentleman: but Watts has more of Tennyson in him; he
-believes in a great priesthood of art. He believes in a certain pure and
-childish publicity. If anyone suggested that before a man ventured to
-paint pictures or to daub with plaster he should be initiated with some
-awful rites in some vast and crowded national temple, should swear to
-work worthily before some tremendous altar or over some symbolic flame,
-Millais would have laughed heartily at the idea and Leighton also. But
-it would not seem either absurd or unreasonable to Watts. In the thick
-of this smoky century he is living in a clear age of heroes.</p>
-
-<p>Watts’ relations to Tennyson were indeed very characteristic of what was
-finest, and at the same time quaintest, in the two men. The painter,
-with a typical sincerity, took the poet seriously, I had almost said
-literally, in his daily life, and liked him to live up to his poetry.
-The poet, with that queer sulky humour which gave him, perhaps, more
-breadth than Watts, but less strength, said, after reading some acid and
-unjust criticisms, “I wish I had never<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_42" id="page_42">{42}</a></span> written a line.” “Come,” said
-Watts, “you wouldn’t like ‘King Arthur’ to talk like that.” Tennyson
-paused a moment and then spread out his fingers. “Well,” he said, “what
-do you expect? It’s all the gout.” The artist, with a characteristic
-power of juvenile and immortal hero-worship, tells this story as an
-instance of the fundamental essence of odd magnanimity and sombre
-geniality in Tennyson. It is such an instance and a very good one: but
-it is also an instance of the sharp logical idealism, of the prompt
-poetic candour of Watts. He asked Tennyson to be King Arthur, and it
-never occurred to him to think that he was asking Addison to be Cato, or
-Massinger to be Saint Dorothy. The incident is a fine tribute to a
-friendship.</p>
-
-<p>The real difficulty which many cultivated people have in the matter of
-Watts’ allegorical pictures is far more difficult. It is indeed nothing
-else but the great general reaction against allegorical art which has
-arisen during the last artistic period. The only way in which we can
-study, with any real sincerity, the allegoric art of Watts is to ask to
-what is really due the objection to allegory which has thus arisen. The
-real objection to allegory is, it may roughly be said, founded upon the
-conception that allegory involves one art imitating another. This is, up
-to a certain point, true. To paint a figure in a blue robe and call her
-Necessity, and then paint a small figure in a yellow robe and call it
-Invention; to put the second on the knee of the first, and then say that
-you are enunciating the sublime and eternal truth, that Necessity is the
-mother of Invention, this is indeed an idle and foolish affair. It is
-saying in six weeks’ work with brush and palette knife what could be
-said much better in six words. And there can be no reasonable dispute
-that of this character were a considerable</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_18" id="ill_18"></a>
-<a href="images/i_042fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_042fp.jpg" width="449" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>GEORGE MEREDITH.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_43" id="page_43">{43}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">number of the allegorical pictures that have crowded the galleries and
-sprawled over the ceilings of ancient and modern times. Of such were the
-monstrous pictures of Rubens, which depicted a fat Religion and a
-bloated Temperance dancing before some foreign conqueror; of such were
-the florid designs of the eighteenth century, which showed Venus and
-Apollo encouraging Lord Peterborough to get over the inconvenience of
-his breastplate; of such, again, were the meek Victorian allegories
-which showed Mercy and Foresight urging men to found a Society for the
-Preservation of Young Game. Of such were almost all the allegories which
-have dominated the art of Europe for many centuries back. Of such, most
-emphatically, the allegories of Watts are not. They are not mere
-pictorial forms, combined as in a kind of cryptogram to express
-theoretic views or relations. They are not proverbs or verbal relations
-rendered with a cumbrous exactitude in oil and Chinese white. They are
-not, in short, the very thing that the opponents of Watts and his school
-say that they are. They are not merely literary. There is one definite
-current conception on which this idea that Watts’ allegorical art is
-merely literary is eventually based. It is based upon the idea that lies
-at the root of rationalism, at the root of useless logomachies, at the
-root, in no small degree, of the whole modern evil. It is based on the
-assumption of the perfection of language. Every religion and every
-philosophy must, of course, be based on the assumption of the authority
-or the accuracy of something. But it may well be questioned whether it
-is not saner and more satisfactory to ground our faith on the
-infallibility of the Pope, or the infallibility of the Book of Mormon,
-than on this astounding modern dogma of the infallibility of human
-speech. Every time one man says to another, “Tell us plainly<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_44" id="page_44">{44}</a></span> what you
-mean?” he is assuming the infallibility of language: that is to say, he
-is assuming that there is a perfect scheme of verbal expression for all
-the internal moods and meanings of men. Whenever a man says to another,
-“Prove your case; defend your faith,” he is assuming the infallibility
-of language: that is to say, he is assuming that a man has a word for
-every reality in earth, or heaven, or hell. He knows that there are in
-the soul tints more bewildering, more numberless, and more nameless than
-the colours of an autumn forest; he knows that there are abroad in the
-world and doing strange and terrible service in it crimes that have
-never been condemned and virtues that have never been christened. Yet he
-seriously believes that these things can every one of them, in all their
-tones and semi-tones, in all their blends and unions, be accurately
-represented by an arbitrary system of grunts and squeals. He believes
-that an ordinary civilized stockbroker can really produce out of his own
-inside noises which denote all the mysteries of memory and all the
-agonies of desire. Whenever, on the other hand, a man rebels faintly or
-vaguely against this way of speaking, whenever a man says that he cannot
-explain what he means, and that he hates argument, that his enemy is
-misrepresenting him, but he cannot explain how; that man is a true sage,
-and has seen into the heart of the real nature of language. Whenever a
-man refuses to be caught by some dilemma about reason and passion, or
-about reason and faith, or about fate and free-will, he has seen the
-truth. Whenever a man declines to be cornered as an egotist, or an
-altruist, or any such modern monster, he has seen the truth. For the
-truth is that language is not a scientific thing at all, but wholly an
-artistic thing, a thing invented by hunters, and killers, and such
-artists long before science was</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_19" id="ill_19"></a>
-<a href="images/i_044fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_044fp.jpg" width="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>ORPHEUS AND EURYDICE.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_45" id="page_45">{45}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">dreamed of. The truth is simply that&mdash;that the tongue is not a reliable
-instrument, like a theodolite or a camera. The tongue is most truly an
-unruly member, as the wise saint has called it, a thing poetic and
-dangerous, like music or fire.</p>
-
-<p>Now we can easily imagine an alternative state of things, roughly
-similar to that produced in Watts’ allegories, a system, that is to say,
-whereby the moods or facts of the human spirit were conveyed by
-something other than speech, by shapes or colours or some such things.
-As a matter of fact, of course, there are a great many other languages
-besides the verbal. Descriptions of spiritual states and mental purposes
-are conveyed by a variety of things, by hats, by bells, by guns, by
-fires on a headland, or by jerks of the head. In fact there does exist
-an example which is singularly analogous to decorative and symbolic
-painting. This is a scheme of æsthetic signs or emblems, simple indeed
-and consisting only of a few elemental colours, which is actually
-employed to convey great lessons in human safety and great necessities
-of the commonwealth. It need hardly be said that I allude to the railway
-signals. They are as much a language, and surely as solemn a language,
-as the colour sequence of ecclesiastical vestments, which sets us red
-for martyrdom, and white for resurrection. For the green and red of the
-night-signals depict the two most fundamental things of all, which lie
-at the back of all language. Yes and no, good and bad, safe and unsafe,
-life and death. It is perfectly conceivable that a degree of flexibility
-or subtlety might be introduced into these colours so as to suggest
-other and more complex meanings. We might (under the influence of some
-large poetic station-masters) reach a state of things in which a certain
-rich tinge of purple in the crimson light would mean “Travel for a few<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_46" id="page_46">{46}</a></span>
-seconds at a slightly more lingering pace, that a romantic old lady in a
-first-class carriage may admire the scenery of the forest.” A tendency
-towards peacock blue in the green might mean “An old gentleman with a
-black necktie has just drunk a glass of sherry at the station
-restaurant.” But however much we modified or varied this colour sequence
-or colour language, there would remain one thing which it would be quite
-ridiculous and untrue to say about it. It would be quite ridiculous and
-untrue to say that this colour sequence was simply a symbol representing
-language. It would be another language: it would convey its meaning to
-aliens who had another word for forest, and another word for sherry, and
-another word for old lady. It would not be a symbol of language, a
-symbol of a symbol; it would be one symbol of the reality, and language
-would be another. That is precisely the true position touching
-allegorical art in general, and, above all, the allegorical art of
-Watts.</p>
-
-<p>So long as we conceive that it is, fundamentally, the symbolizing of
-literature in paint, we shall certainly misunderstand it and the rare
-and peculiar merits, both technical and philosophical, which really
-characterize it. If the ordinary spectator at the art galleries finds
-himself, let us say, opposite a picture of a dancing flower-crowned
-figure in a rose-coloured robe, he feels a definite curiosity to know
-the title, looks it up in the catalogue, and finds that it is called,
-let us say, “Hope.” He is immediately satisfied, as he would have been
-if the title had run “Portrait of Lady Warwick,” a “View of Kilchurn
-Castle.” It represents a certain definite thing, the word “hope.” But
-what does the word “hope” represent? It represents only a broken
-instantaneous glimpse of something that is immeasurably older and
-wilder</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_20" id="ill_20"></a>
-<a href="images/i_046fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_046fp.jpg" width="480" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>HOPE.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_47" id="page_47">{47}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">than language, that is immeasurably older and wilder than man; a mystery
-to saints and a reality to wolves. To suppose that such a thing is dealt
-with by the word “hope,” any more than America is represented by a
-distant view of Cape Horn, would indeed be ridiculous. It is not merely
-true that the word itself is, like any other word, arbitrary; that it
-might as well be “pig” or “parasol”; but it is true that the
-philosophical meaning of the word, in the conscious mind of man, is
-merely a part of something immensely larger in the unconscious mind,
-that the gusty light of language only falls for a moment on a fragment,
-and that obviously a semi-detached, unfinished fragment of a certain
-definite pattern on the dark tapestries of reality. It is vain and worse
-than vain to declaim against the allegoric, for the very word “hope” is
-an allegory, and the very word “allegory” is an allegory.</p>
-
-<p>Now let us suppose that instead of coming before that hypothetical
-picture of <i>Hope</i> in conventional flowers and conventional pink robes,
-the spectator came before another picture. Suppose that he found himself
-in the presence of a dim canvas with a bowed and stricken and secretive
-figure cowering over a broken lyre in the twilight. What would he think?
-His first thought, of course, would be that the picture was called
-<i>Despair</i>; his second (when he discovered his error in the catalogue),
-that it has been entered under the wrong number; his third, that the
-painter was mad. But if we imagine that he overcame these preliminary
-feelings and that as he stared at that queer twilight picture a dim and
-powerful sense of meaning began to grow upon him&mdash;what would he see? He
-would see something for which there is neither speech nor language,
-which has been too vast for any eye to see and too secret for any
-religion to utter, even as an esoteric doctrine. Standing before<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_48" id="page_48">{48}</a></span> that
-picture, he finds himself in the presence of a great truth. He perceives
-that there is something in man which is always apparently on the eve of
-disappearing, but never disappears, an assurance which is always
-apparently saying farewell and yet illimitably lingers, a string which
-is always stretched to snapping and yet never snaps. He perceives that
-the queerest and most delicate thing in us, the most fragile, the most
-fantastic, is in truth the backbone and indestructible. He knows a great
-moral fact: that there never was an age of assurance, that there never
-was an age of faith. Faith is always at a disadvantage; it is a
-perpetually defeated thing which survives all its conquerors. The
-desperate modern talk about dark days and reeling altars, and the end of
-Gods and angels, is the oldest talk in the world: lamentations over the
-growth of agnosticism can be found in the monkish sermons of the dark
-ages; horror at youthful impiety can be found in the Iliad. This is the
-thing that never deserts men and yet always, with daring diplomacy,
-threatens to desert them. It has indeed dwelt among and controlled all
-the kings and crowds, but only with the air of a pilgrim passing by. It
-has indeed warmed and lit men from the beginning of Eden with an
-unending glow, but it was the glow of an eternal sunset.</p>
-
-<p>Here, in this dim picture, its trick is almost betrayed. No one can name
-this picture properly, but Watts, who painted it, has named it <i>Hope</i>.
-But the point is that this title is not (as those think who call it
-“literary”) the reality behind the symbol, but another symbol for the
-same thing, or, to speak yet more strictly, another symbol describing
-another part or aspect of the same complex reality. Two men felt a
-swift, violent, invisible thing in the world: one said the word “hope,”
-the other painted a</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_21" id="ill_21"></a>
-<a href="images/i_048fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_048fp.jpg" width="361" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>JONAH.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_49" id="page_49">{49}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">picture in blue and green paint. The picture is inadequate; the word
-“hope” is inadequate; but between them, like two angles in the
-calculation of a distance, they almost locate a mystery, a mystery that
-for hundreds of ages has been hunted by men and evaded them. And the
-title is therefore not so much the substance of one of Watts’ pictures,
-it is rather an epigram upon it. It is merely an approximate attempt to
-convey, by snatching up the tool of another craftsman, the direction
-attempted in the painter’s own craft. He calls it <i>Hope</i>, and that is
-perhaps the best title. It reminds us among other things of a fact which
-is too little remembered, that faith, hope, and charity, the three
-mystical virtues of Christianity, are also the gayest of the virtues.
-Paganism, as I have suggested, is not gay, but rather nobly sad; the
-spirit of Watts, which is as a rule nobly sad also, here comes nearer
-perhaps than anywhere else to mysticism in the strict sense, the
-mysticism which is full of secret passion and belief, like that of Fra
-Angelico or Blake. But though Watts calls his tremendous reality <i>Hope</i>,
-we may call it many other things. Call it faith, call it vitality, call
-it the will to live, call it the religion of to-morrow morning, call it
-the immortality of man, call it self-love and vanity; it is the thing
-that explains why man survives all things and why there is no such thing
-as a pessimist. It cannot be found in any dictionary or rewarded in any
-commonwealth: there is only one way in which it can even be noticed and
-recognized. If there be anywhere a man who has really lost it, his face
-out of a whole crowd of men will strike us like a blow. He may hang
-himself or become Prime Minister; it matters nothing. The man is dead.</p>
-
-<p>Now, of course the ordinary objection to allegory,<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_50" id="page_50">{50}</a></span> and it is a very
-sound objection, can be sufficiently well stated by saying that the
-pictorial figures are mere arbitrary symbols of the words. An allegorist
-of the pompous school might paint some group of Peace and Commerce doing
-something to Britannia. There might be a figure of Commerce in a Greek
-robe with a cornucopia or bag of gold or an argosy or any other
-conventional symbol. But it is surely quite evident that such a figure
-is a mere sign like the word commerce: the word might just as well be
-“dandelion,” and the Greek lady with the cornucopia might just as well
-be a Hebrew prophet standing on his head. It is scarcely even a
-language: it is a cipher-code. Nobody can maintain that the figure,
-taken as a figure, makes one think of commerce, of the forces that
-effect commerce, of a thousand ports, of a thousand streets, of a
-thousand warehouses and bills of lading, of a thousand excited men in
-black coats who certainly would not know what to do with a cornucopia.
-If we find ourselves gazing at some monument of the fragile and eternal
-faith of man, at some ruined chapel, at some nameless altar, at some
-scrap of old Jacobin eloquence, we might actually find our own minds
-moving in certain curves that centre in the curved back of Watts’
-<i>Hope</i>: we might almost think for ourselves of a bowed figure in the
-twilight, holding to her breast something damaged but undestroyed. But
-can anyone say that by merely looking at the Stock Exchange on a busy
-day we should think of a Greek lady with an argosy? Can anyone say that
-Threadneedle Street, in itself, would inspire our minds to move in the
-curves which centre in a cornucopia? Can anyone say that a very stolid
-figure in a very outlandish drapery is anything but a purely arbitrary
-sign, like <i>x</i> or <i>y</i>, for such a thing as modern commerce, for the
-savagery of the rich, for the hunger of the<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_51" id="page_51">{51}</a></span> satisfied, for the vast
-tachycardia or galloping of the heart that has fallen on all the great
-new centres of civilization, for the sudden madness of all the mills of
-the world?</p>
-
-<p>Watts’ <i>Hope</i> does tell us something more about the nature of hope than
-we can be told by merely noticing that hope is shown in individual
-cases: that a man rehearses successful love speeches when he is in love,
-and takes a return ticket when he goes out to fight a duel. But the
-figure of Commerce with the cornucopia gives us less insight into what
-is behind commerce than we might get from reading a circular or staring
-out into the street. In the case of Commerce the figure is merely a
-symbol of commerce, which is a symbol. In the case of Hope the matter is
-quite the other way; the figure brings us nearer to something which is
-not a symbol, but the reality behind symbols. In the one case we go
-further down towards the river’s delta; in the other, further up towards
-its fountain; that at least may be called a difference. And now, suppose
-that our imaginary sight-seer who had seen so much of the pompous
-allegory of Commerce in her Grecian draperies were to see, for the
-second time, a second picture. Suppose he saw before him a throned
-figure clad in splendid, heavy scarlet and gold, above the lustre and
-dignity of which rose, in abrupt contrast, a face like the face of a
-blind beast. Suppose that as this imperial thing, with closed eyes and
-fat, sightless face, sat upon his magnificent seat, he let his heavy
-hand and feet fall, as if by a mere pulverizing accident, on the naked
-and god-like figures of the young, on men and women. Suppose that in the
-background there rose straight into the air a raw and turgid smoke, as
-if from some invisible and horrible sacrifice, and that by one final,
-fantastic, and triumphal touch this all-destroying god<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_52" id="page_52">{52}</a></span> and king were
-adorned with the ears of an ass, declaring that he was royal, imperial,
-irresistible, and, when all is said, imbecile. Suppose that a man sick
-of argosies and cornucopias came before that picture, would he not say,
-perhaps even before he looked in the catalogue and found that the
-painter had called it <i>Mammon</i>, would he not say, “This is something
-which in spirit and in essence I have seen before, something which in
-spirit and in essence I have seen everywhere. That bloated, unconscious
-face, so heavy, so violent, so wicked, so innocent, have I not seen it
-at street corners, in billiard-rooms, in saloon bars, laying down the
-law about Chartered shares or gaping at jokes about women? Those huge
-and smashing limbs, so weighty, so silly, so powerless, and yet so
-powerful, have I not seen them in the pompous movements, the morbid
-health of the prosperous in the great cities? The hard, straight pillars
-of that throne, have I not seen them in the hard, straight, hideous
-tiers of modern warehouses and factories? That tawny and sulky smoke,
-have I not seen it going up to heaven from all the cities of the coming
-world? This is no trifling with argosies and Greek drapery. This is
-commerce. This is the home of the god himself. This is why men hate him,
-and why men fear him, and why men endure him.”</p>
-
-<p>Now, of course, it is at once obvious that this view would be very
-unjust to commerce; but that modification, as a matter of fact, very
-strongly supports the general theory at the moment under consideration.
-Commerce is really an arbitrary phrase, a thing including a million
-motives, from the motive which makes a man drink to the motive which
-makes him reform; from the motive that makes a starving man eat a horse
-to the motive which makes an idle man chase a butterfly. But whatever
-other spirits there are in commerce, there is, beyond all reasonable</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_22" id="ill_22"></a>
-<a href="images/i_052fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_052fp.jpg" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>MAMMON.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_53" id="page_53">{53}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">question, in it this powerful and enduring spirit which Watts has
-painted. There is, as a ruling element in modern life, in all life, this
-blind and asinine appetite for mere power. There is a spirit abroad
-among the nations of the earth which drives men incessantly on to
-destroy what they cannot understand, and to capture what they cannot
-enjoy. This, and not commerce, is what Watts has painted. He has
-painted, not the allegory of a great institution, but the vision of a
-great appetite, the vision of a great motive. It is not true that this
-is a picture of Commerce; but that Commerce and Watts’ picture spring
-from the same source. There does exist a certain dark and driving force
-in the world; one of its products is this picture, another is Commerce.
-The picture is not Commerce, it is Mammon. And, indeed, so powerfully
-and perfectly has Watts, in this case, realized the awful being whom he
-was endeavouring to call up by his artistic incantation, that we may
-even say the common positions of allegory and reality are reversed. The
-fact is not that here we have an effective presentation under a certain
-symbol of red robes and smoke and a throne, of what the financial world
-is, but rather that here we have something of the truth that is hidden
-behind the symbol of white waistcoats and hats on the back of the head,
-of financial papers and sporting prophets, of butter closing quiet and
-Pendragon being meant to win. This is not a symbol of commerce: commerce
-is a symbol of this.</p>
-
-<p>In sketching this general and necessary attitude towards the art of
-Watts, particularly in the matter of allegory, I have taken deliberately
-these two very famous and obvious pictures, and I have occupied, equally
-deliberately, a considerable amount of space in expounding them. It is
-far better in a subject so<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_54" id="page_54">{54}</a></span> subtle and so bewildering as the relation
-between art and philosophy, that we should see how our conceptions and
-hypotheses really get on when applied systematically and at some length
-to some perfectly familiar and existent object. A philosopher cannot
-talk about any single thing, down to a pumpkin, without showing whether
-he is wise or foolish; but he can easily talk about everything with
-anyone having any views about him beyond gloomy suspicions. But at this
-point I become fully conscious of another and most important kind of
-criticism, which has been and can be levelled against the allegories of
-Watts; and which must be, by the nature of things, evoked by the
-particular line of discussion or reflection that I have here adopted.</p>
-
-<p>It may be admitted that Watts’ art is not merely literary in the sense
-in which I have originally used the term. It may be admitted that there
-is truth in the general position I have sketched out&mdash;that Watts is not
-a man copying literature or philosophy, but rather a man copying the
-great spiritual and central realities which literature and philosophy
-also set out to copy. It may be admitted that <i>Mammon</i> is obviously an
-attempt to portray, not a twopenny phrase, but a great idea. But along
-with all these admissions it will certainly be said, by the most
-powerful and recent school in art criticism, that all this amounts to
-little more than a difference between a mean and a magnificent blunder.
-Pictorial art, it will be said, has no more business, as such, to
-portray great ideas than small ideas. Its affair is with its own
-technique, with the love of a great billowing line for its own sake, of
-a subtle and perfect tint for its own sake. If a man mistakes his trade
-and attends to the technique of another, the sublimity of his mind is
-only a very slight consolation. If I summon a paperhanger</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_23" id="ill_23"></a>
-<a href="images/i_054fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_054fp.jpg" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>DEATH CROWNING INNOCENCE.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_55" id="page_55">{55}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">to cover the walls, and he insists on playing the piano, it matters
-little whether he plays Beethoven or “The Yachmak.” If I charter a
-pianist, and he is found drinking in the wine cellar, it matters little
-whether he has made his largest hole in good Burgundy or bad Marsala. If
-the whole of this question of great ideas and small ideas, of large
-atmospheres and superficial definitions, of the higher and the lower
-allegory&mdash;if all this be really irrelevant to the discussion of the
-position of a painter, then, indeed, we have been upon an idle track. As
-I think I shall show in a moment, this is a very inadequate view of the
-matter. But it does draw our attention to an aspect of the matter which
-must, without further delay, be discussed. That aspect, as I need hardly
-say, is the technique of Watts.</p>
-
-<p>There is of course a certain tendency among all interesting and novel
-critical philosophers to talk as if they had discovered things which it
-is perfectly impossible that any human being could ever have denied; to
-shout that the birds fly, and declare that in spite of persecution they
-will still assert that cows have four legs. In this way some raw
-pseudo-scientists talk about heredity or the physical basis of life as
-if it were not a thing embedded in every creed and legend, and even the
-very languages of men. In this way some of the new oligarchists of
-to-day imagine they are attacking the doctrine of human equality by
-pointing out that some men are stronger or cleverer than others; as if
-they really believed that Danton and Washington thought that every man
-was the same height and had the same brains. And something of this
-preliminary cloud of folly or misunderstanding attaches doubtless to the
-question of the technical view&mdash;that is, the solely technical view&mdash;of
-painting. If the principle of “art for ar<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_56" id="page_56">{56}</a></span>t’s sake” means simply that
-there is a solely technical view of painting, and that it must be
-supreme on its own ground, it appears a piece of pure madness to suppose
-it other than true. Surely there never was really a man who held that a
-picture that was vile in colour and weak in drawing was a good picture
-because it was a picture of Florence Nightingale! Surely there never was
-really a man who said that when one leg in a drawing was longer than
-another, yet they were both the same length because the artist painted
-it for an altar-piece! When the new critics with a burst of music and a
-rocket shower of epigrams enunciated their new criticism, they must at
-any rate have meant something more than this. Undoubtedly they did mean
-something more; they meant that a picture was not a good vehicle for
-moral sentiment at all; they meant that not only was it not the better
-for having a philosophic meaning, but that it was worse. This, if it be
-true, is beyond all question a real indictment of Watts.</p>
-
-<p>About the whole of this Watts controversy about didactic art there is at
-least one perfectly plain and preliminary thing to be said. It is said
-that art cannot teach a lesson. This is true, and the only proper
-addition is the statement that neither, for the matter of that, can
-morality teach a lesson. For a thing to be didactic, in the strict and
-narrow and scholastic sense, it must be something about facts or the
-physical sciences: you can only teach a lesson about such a thing as
-Euclid or the making of paper boats. The thing is quite inapplicable to
-the great needs of man, whether moral or æsthetic. Nobody ever held a
-class in philanthropy with fifteen millionaires in a row writing
-cheques. Nobody ever held evening continuation classes in martyrdom, or
-drilled boys in a playground to die for their country. A</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_24" id="ill_24"></a>
-<a href="images/i_056fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_056fp.jpg" width="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>A STORY FROM BOCCACCIO.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_57" id="page_57">{57}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">picture cannot give a plain lesson in morals; neither can a sermon. A
-didactic poem was a thing known indeed among the ancients and the old
-Latin civilization, but as a matter of fact it scarcely ever professed
-to teach people how to live the higher life. It taught people how to
-keep bees.</p>
-
-<p>Since we find, therefore, that ethics is like art, a mystic and
-intuitional affair, the only question that remains is, have they any
-kinship? If they have not, a man is not a man, but two men and probably
-more: if they have, there is, to say the least of it, at any rate a
-reasonable possibility that a note in moral feeling might have affinity
-with a note in art, that a curve in law, so to speak, may repeat a curve
-in draughtsmanship, that there may be genuine and not artificial
-correspondences between a state of morals and an effect in painting.
-This would, I should tentatively suggest, appear to be a most reasonable
-hypothesis. It is not so much the fact that there is no such thing as
-allegorical art, but rather the fact that there is no art that is not
-allegorical. But the meanings expressed in high and delicate art are not
-to be classed under cheap and external ethical formulæ, they deal with
-strange vices and stranger virtues. Art is only unmoral in so far as
-most morality is immoral. Thus Mr. Whistler when he drops a spark of
-perfect yellow or violet into some glooming pool of the nocturnal Thames
-is, in all probability, enunciating some sharp and wholesome moral
-comment. When the young Impressionists paint dim corners of meadows or
-splashes of sunlight in the wood, this does not mean necessarily that
-they are unmoral; it may only mean that they are a very original and
-sincere race of stern young moralists.</p>
-
-<p>Now if we adopt this general theory of the existence of genuine
-correspondences between art and<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_58" id="page_58">{58}</a></span> moral beauty, of the existence, that is
-to say, of genuine allegories, it is perfectly clear wherein the test of
-such genuineness must consist. It must consist in the nature of the
-technique. If the technique, considered as technique, is calculated to
-evoke in us a certain kind of pleasure, and there is an analogous
-pleasure in the meaning considered as meaning, then there is a true
-wedding of the arts. But if the pleasure in the technique be of a kind
-quite dissimilar in its own sphere to the pleasure in the spiritual
-suggestion, then it is a mechanical and unlawful union, and this
-philosophy, at any rate, forbids the banns. If the intellectual
-conceptions uttered in Michel Angelo’s <i>Day of Judgment</i> in the Sistine
-Chapel were the effect of a perfect and faultless workmanship, but the
-workmanship such as we should admire in a Gothic missal or a picture by
-Gerard Dow, we should then say that absolute excellence in both
-departments did not excuse their being joined. The thing would have been
-a mere accident, or convenience. Just as two plotters might communicate
-by means of a bar or two of music, so these subtle harmonies of colour
-and form would have been used for their detached and private ends by the
-dark conspirators of morality.</p>
-
-<p>Now there is nothing in the world that is really so thoroughly
-characteristic of Watts’ technique as the fact that it does almost
-startlingly correspond to the structure of his spiritual sense. If such
-pictures as <i>The Dweller in the Innermost</i> and <i>Mammon</i> and <i>Diana and
-Endymion</i> and <i>Eve Repentant</i> had neither title nor author, if no one
-had heard of Watts or heard of Eve; if, for the matter of that, the
-pictures had neither human nor animal form, it would be possible to
-guess something of the painter’s attitude from the mere colour and line.
-If Watts painted an arabesque, it would be moral; if he designed a
-Turkey</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_25" id="ill_25"></a>
-<a href="images/i_058fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_058fp.jpg" width="487" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>LORD LYTTON.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_59" id="page_59">{59}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">carpet, it would be stoical. So individual is his handling that his very
-choice and scale of colours betray him. A man with a keen sense of the
-spiritual and symbolic history of colours could guess at something about
-Watts from the mess on his palette. He would see giants and the sea and
-cold primeval dawns and brown earth-men and red earth-women lying in the
-heaps of greens and whites and reds, like forces in chaos before the
-first day of creation. A certain queer and yet very simple blue there
-is, for instance, which is like Titian’s and yet not like it, which is
-more lustrous and yet not less opaque, and which manages to suggest the
-north rather than Titian’s south, in spite of its intensity; which
-suggests also the beginning of things rather than their maturity; a hot
-spring of the earth rather than Titian’s opulent summer. Then there is
-that tremendous autochthonous red, which was the colour of Adam, whose
-name was Red Earth. It is, if one may say so, the clay in which no one
-works, except Watts and the Eternal Potter. There are other colours that
-have this character, a character indescribable except by saying that
-they come from the palette of Creation&mdash;a green especially that
-reappears through portraits, allegories, landscapes, heroic designs, but
-always has the same fierce and elfish look, like a green that has a
-secret. It may be seen in the signet ring of Owen Meredith, and in the
-eyes of the <i>Dweller in the Innermost</i>. But all these colours have, as I
-say, the first and most characteristic and most obvious of the mental
-qualities of Watts; they are simple and like things just made by God.
-Nor is it, I think, altogether fanciful to push this analogy or harmony
-a step further and to see in the colours and the treatment of them the
-other side or typical trait which I have frequently mentioned as making
-up the identity<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_60" id="page_60">{60}</a></span> of the painter. He is, as I say, a stoic; therefore to
-some extent, at least, a pagan; he has no special sympathy with Celtic
-intensity, with Catholic mysticism, with Romanticism, with all the
-things that deal with the cells of the soul, with agonies and dreams.
-And I think a broad distinction between the finest pagan and the finest
-Christian point of view may be found in such an approximate phrase as
-this, that paganism deals always with a light shining on things,
-Christianity with a light shining through them. That is why the whole
-Renaissance colouring is opaque, the whole Pre-Raphaelite colouring
-transparent. The very sky of Rubens is more solid than the rocks of
-Giotto: it is like a noble cliff of immemorial blue marble. The artists
-of the devout age seemed to regret that they could not make the light
-show through everything, as it shows through the little wood in the
-wonderful <i>Nativity</i> of Botticelli. And that is why, again,
-Christianity, which has been attacked so strangely as dull and austere,
-invented the thing which is more intoxicating than all the wines of the
-world, stained-glass windows.</p>
-
-<p>Now Watts, with all his marvellous spirituality, or rather because of
-his peculiar type of marvellous spirituality, has the Platonic, the
-philosophic, rather than the Catholic order of mysticism. And it can
-scarcely be a coincidence that here again we feel it to be something
-that could almost be deduced from the colours if they were splashed at
-random about a canvas. The colours are mystical, but they are not
-transparent; that is, not transparent in the very curious but
-unmistakable sense in which the colours of Botticelli or Rossetti are
-transparent. What they are can only be described as iridescent. A
-curious lustre or glitter, conveyed chiefly by a singular and individual
-brushwork, lies over all his great pictures.</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_26" id="ill_26"></a>
-<a href="images/i_060fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_060fp.jpg" width="260" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>DAWN.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_61" id="page_61">{61}</a></span></p>
-
-<p>It is the dawn of things: it is the glow of the primal sense of wonder;
-it is the sun of the childhood of the world; it is the light that never
-was on sea or land; but still it is a light shining on things, not
-shining through them. It is a light which exhibits and does honour to
-this world, not a light that breaks in upon this world to bring it
-terror or comfort, like the light that suddenly peers round the corner
-of some dark Gothic chapel with its green or golden or blood-red eyes.
-The Gothic artists, as I say, would have liked men’s bodies to become
-like burning glass (as the figures in their windows do), that the light
-might pass through them. There is no fear of light passing through
-Watts’ <i>Cain</i>.</p>
-
-<p>These analogies must inevitably appear fantastic to those who do not
-accept the general hypothesis of a possible kinship between pictorial
-and moral harmonies in the psychology of men; but to those who do accept
-this not very extravagant hypothesis, it may, I think, be repeated by
-way of summary, that the purely technical question of Watts’ colour
-scheme does provide us, at least suggestively, with these two parallels.
-Watts, so far as his moral and mental attitude can be expressed by any
-phrases of such brevity, has two main peculiarities: first, a large
-infantile poetry which delights in things fresh, raw, and gigantic;
-second, a certain Greek restraint and agnostic severity, which throws a
-strong light on this world as it is. The colours he uses have also two
-main peculiarities: first, a fresh, raw, and, as it were, gigantic
-character; secondly, an opaque reflected light, unlike the mediæval
-lighting, a strong light thrown on this world as it is.</p>
-
-<p>Similar lines of comparison, so far as they appear to possess any value,
-could, of course, be very easily pointed out in connexion with the
-character of<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_62" id="page_62">{62}</a></span> Watts’ draughtsmanship. That his lines are simple and
-powerful, that both in strength and weakness they are candid and
-austere, that they are not Celtic, not Catholic, and not romantic lines
-of draughtsmanship, would, I think, appear sufficiently clear to anyone
-who has any instinct for this mode of judgment at all. In the matter of
-line and composition, of course, the same general contention applies as
-in the case of colour. The curve of the bent figure of <i>Hope</i>,
-considered simply as a curve, half repeating as it does the upper curve
-of the globe, suggests a feeling, a sense of fear, of simplicity, of
-something which lies near to the nature of the idea itself, the idea
-which inspires the title of the picture. The splendid rushing whirlpool
-of curves which constitutes, as it were, the ellipse of the two figures
-in <i>Diana and Endymion</i> is a positive inspiration. It is, simply as a
-form for a picture, a mere scheme of lines, the very soul of Greece. It
-is simple; it is full and free; it follows great laws of harmony, but it
-follows them swiftly and at will; it is headlong, and yet at rest, like
-the solid arch of a waterfall. It is a rushing and passionate meeting of
-two superb human figures; and it is almost a mathematical harmony.
-Technically, at least, and as a matter of outlines, it is probably the
-artist’s masterpiece.</p>
-
-<p>Before we quit this second department of the temperament of Watts, as
-expressed in his line, mention must be made of what is beyond all
-question the most interesting and most supremely personal of all the
-elements in the painter’s designs and draughtsmanship. That is, of
-course, his magnificent discovery of the artistic effect of the human
-back. The back is the most awful and mysterious thing in the universe:
-it is impossible to speak about it. It is the part of man that he knows
-nothing of; like an</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_27" id="ill_27"></a>
-<a href="images/i_062fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_062fp.jpg" width="277" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>EVE REPENTANT.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_63" id="page_63">{63}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">outlying province forgotten by an emperor. It is a common saying that
-anything may happen behind our backs: transcendentally considered the
-thing has an eerie truth about it. Eden may be behind our backs, or
-Fairyland. But this mystery of the human back has again its other side
-in the strange impression produced on those behind: to walk behind
-anyone along a lane is a thing that, properly speaking, touches the
-oldest nerve of awe. Watts has realized this as no one in art or letters
-has realized it in the whole history of the world: it has made him
-great. There is one possible exception to his monopoly of this
-magnificent craze. Two thousand years before, in the dark scriptures of
-a nomad people, it had been said that their prophet saw the immense
-Creator of all things, but only saw Him from behind. I do not know
-whether even Watts would dare to paint that. But it reads like one of
-his pictures, like the most terrific of all his pictures, which he has
-kept veiled.</p>
-
-<p>I need not instance the admirable and innumerable cases of this fine and
-individual effect. <i>Eve Repentant</i> (that fine picture), in which the
-agony of a gigantic womanhood is conveyed as it could not be conveyed by
-any power of visage, in the powerful contortion of the muscular and yet
-beautiful back, is the first that occurs to the mind. The sad and
-sardonic picture painted in later years, <i>For He had Great
-Possessions</i>&mdash;showing the young man of the Gospel loaded with his
-intolerable pomp of garments and his head sunken out of sight&mdash;is of
-course another. Others are slighter instances, like <i>Good Luck to your
-Fishing</i>. He has again carried the principle, in one instance, to an
-extreme seldom adopted, I should fancy, either by artist or man. He has
-painted a very graceful portrait of his wife, in which that lady’s face
-is entirely<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_64" id="page_64">{64}</a></span> omitted, the head being abruptly turned away. But it is
-indeed idle to multiply these instances of the painter’s hobby (if one
-may use the phrase) of the worship of the human back, when all such
-instances have been dwarfed and overshadowed by the one famous and
-tremendous instance that everyone knows. <i>Love and Death</i> is truly a
-great achievement: if it stood alone it would have made a man great. And
-it fits in with a peculiar importance with the general view I am
-suggesting of the Watts technique. For the whole picture really hangs,
-both technically and morally, upon one single line, a line that could be
-drawn across a blank canvas, the spine-line of the central figure of
-Death with its great falling garment. The whole composition, the whole
-conception, and, I was going to say, the whole moral of the picture,
-could be deduced from that single line. The moral of the picture (if
-moral were the right phrase for these things) is, it is scarcely
-necessary to point out, the monument of about as noble a silence and
-suppression as the human mind ever bent itself to in its pride. It is
-the great masterpiece of agnosticism. In that picture agnosticism&mdash;not
-the cheap and querulous incredulity which abuses the phrase, but loyal
-and consistent agnosticism, which is as willing to believe good as evil
-and to harbour faith as doubt&mdash;has here its great and pathetic place and
-symbol in the house of the arts. It is the artistic embodiment of
-reverent ignorance at its highest, fully as much as the Divine Comedy is
-the artistic embodiment of Christianity.</p>
-
-<p>Technically, in a large number of cases, it is probably true that Watts’
-portraits, or some of them at least, are his most successful
-achievements. But here also we find our general conclusion: for if his
-portraits are his best pictures, it is certainly not because they</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_28" id="ill_28"></a>
-<a href="images/i_064fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_064fp.jpg" width="289" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>LOVE AND DEATH.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_65" id="page_65">{65}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">are merely portraits; if they are in some cases better than his symbolic
-designs, it is certainly not because they are less symbolic. In his
-gallery of great men, indeed, we find Watts almost more himself than
-anywhere else. Most men are allegorical when they are painting
-allegories, but Watts is allegorical when he is painting an old
-alderman. A change passes over that excellent being, a change of a kind
-to which aldermen are insufficiently inured. He begins to resolve into
-the primal elements, to become dust and the shadow, to become the red
-clay of Adam and the wind of God. His eyes become, in spite of his
-earnest wish, the fixed stars in the sky of the spirit; his complexion
-begins to show, not the unmeaning red of portraits and miniatures, but
-that secret and living red which is within us, and which is the river of
-man. The astounding manner in which Watts has, in some cases, treated
-his sitters is one of the most remarkable things about his character. He
-is not (it is almost absurd to have to mention such a thing about the
-almost austere old democrat) a man likely to flatter a sitter in any
-worldly or conventional sense. Nor is he, for the matter of that, a man
-likely to push compliments far from any motive: he is a strict, and I
-should infer a candid, man. The type of virtues he chiefly admires and
-practises are the reverse of those which would encourage a courtier or
-even a universalist. But he scarcely ever paints a man without making
-him about five times as magnificent as he really looks. The real men
-appear, if they present themselves afterwards, like mean and
-unsympathetic sketches from the Watts original.</p>
-
-<p>The fact is that this indescribable primalism, which we have noted as
-coming out in the designs, in the titles, and in Watts’ very
-oil-colours, is present<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_66" id="page_66">{66}</a></span> in this matter in a most extraordinary way.
-Watts does not copy men at all: he makes them over again. He dips his
-hand in the clay of chaos and begins to model a man named William Morris
-or a man named Richard Burton: he is assisted, no doubt, in some degree
-by a quaint old text-book called Reality, with its stiff but suggestive
-woodcuts and its shrewd and simple old hints. But the most that can be
-said for the portraiture is that Watts asks a hint to come and stop with
-him, puts the hint in a chair in his studio and stares at him. The thing
-that comes out at last upon the canvas is not generally a very precise
-picture of the sitter, though, of course, it is almost always a very
-accurate picture of the universe.</p>
-
-<p>And yet while this, on the one side, is true enough, the portraits are
-portraits, and very fine portraits. But they are dominated by an element
-which is the antithesis of the whole tendency of modern art, that
-tendency which for want of a better word we have to call by the absurd
-name of optimism. It is not, of course, in reality a question of
-optimism in the least, but of an illimitable worship and wonder directed
-towards the fact of existence. There is a great deal of difference
-between the optimism which says that things are perfect and the optimism
-which merely says (with a more primeval modesty) that they are very
-good. One optimism says that a one-legged man has two legs because it
-would be so dreadful if he had not. The other optimism says that the
-fact that the one-legged was born of a woman, has a soul, has been in
-love, and has stood alive under the stars, is a fact so enormous and
-thrilling that, in comparison, it does not matter whether he has one leg
-or five. One optimism says that this is the best of all possible worlds.
-The other says that it is certainly not the best of all possible worlds,
-but</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_29" id="ill_29"></a>
-<a href="images/i_066fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_066fp.jpg" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>WILLIAM MORRIS.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_67" id="page_67">{67}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">it is the best of all possible things that a world should be possible.
-Watts, as has been more than once more or less definitely suggested, is
-dominated throughout by this prehistoric wonder. A man to him,
-especially a great man, is a thing to be painted as Fra Angelico painted
-angels, on his knees. He has indeed, like many brilliant men in the age
-that produced Carlyle and Ruskin, an overwhelming tendency to
-hero-worship. That worship had not, of course, in the case of these men
-any trace of that later and more denaturalized hero-worship, the
-tendency to worship madmen&mdash;to dream of vast crimes as one dreams of a
-love-affair, and to take the malformation of the soul to be the only
-originality. To the Carlylean (and Watts has been to some by no means
-inconsiderable extent a Carlylean), to the Carlylean the hero, the great
-man, was a man more human than humanity itself. In worshipping him you
-were worshipping humanity in a sacrament: and Watts seems to express in
-almost every line of his brush this ardent and reverent view of the
-great man. He overdoes it. Tennyson, fine as he was both physically and
-mentally, was not quite so much of a demi-god as Watts’ splendid
-pictures would seem to suggest. Many other sitters have been subjected,
-past all recognition, to this kind of devout and ethereal caricature.
-But the essential of the whole matter was that the attitude of Watts was
-one which might almost be called worship. It was not, of course, that he
-always painted men as handsome in the conventional sense, or even as
-handsome as they were. William Morris impressed most people as a very
-handsome man: in Watts’ marvellous portrait, so much is made of the
-sanguine face, the bold stare, the almost volcanic suddenness of the
-emergence of the head from the dark green background,<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_68" id="page_68">{68}</a></span> that the effect
-of ordinary good looks, on which many of Morris’s intimates would
-probably have prided themselves, is in some degree lost. Carlyle, again,
-when he saw the painter’s fine rendering of him, said with
-characteristic surliness that he “looked like a mad labourer.”
-Conventionally speaking, it is of course, therefore, to be admitted that
-the sitters did not always come off well. But the exaggeration or the
-distortion, if exaggeration or distortion there were, was always
-effected in obedience to some almost awestruck notion of the greatness
-or goodness of the great or good sitter. The point is not whether Watts
-sometimes has painted men as ugly as they were painted by the primary
-religious painters; the point is, as I have said, that he painted as
-they did, on his knees. Now no one thinks that Mr. Sargent paints the
-Misses Wertheimer on his knees. His grimness and decision of drawing and
-colouring are not due to a sacred optimism. But those of Watts are due
-to this: are due to an intense conviction that there is within the
-sitter a great reality which has to give up its secret before he leaves
-the seat or the model’s throne. Hence come the red violent face and
-minatory eyes of William Morris: the painter sought to express, and he
-did most successfully express, the main traits and meaning of
-Morris&mdash;the appearance of a certain plain masculine passion in the realm
-of decorative art. Morris was a man who wanted good wall-papers, not as
-a man wants a coin of the Emperor Constantine, which was the cloistered
-or abnormal way in which men had commonly devised such things: he wanted
-good wall-papers as a man wants beer. He clamoured for art: he brawled
-for it. He asserted the perfectly virile and ordinary character of the
-appetite for beauty. And he possessed and developed a power of moral
-violence on pure</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_30" id="ill_30"></a>
-<a href="images/i_068fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_068fp.jpg" width="480" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>DANTE GABRIEL ROSSETTI.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_69" id="page_69">{69}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">matters of taste which startled the flabby world of connoisseurship and
-opened a new era. He grew furious with furniture and denounced the union
-of wrong colours as men denounce an adultery. All this is expressed far
-more finely than in these clumsy sentences in that living and leonine
-head in the National Portrait Gallery. It is exactly the same with
-Carlyle. Watts’ Carlyle is immeasurably more subtle and true than the
-Carlyle of Millais, which simply represents him as a shaggy, handsome,
-magnificent old man. The uglier Carlyle of Watts has more of the truth
-about him, the strange combination of a score of sane and healthy
-visions and views, with something that was not sane, which bloodshot and
-embittered them all, the great tragedy of the union of a strong
-countryside mind and body with a disease of the vitals and something
-like a disease of the spirit. In fact, Watts painted Carlyle “like a mad
-labourer” because Carlyle was a mad labourer.</p>
-
-<p>This general characteristic might of course be easily traced in all the
-portraits one by one. If space permitted, indeed, such a process might
-be profitable; for while we take careful note of all the human
-triviality of faces, the one thing that we all tend to forget is that
-divine and common thing which Watts celebrates. It is the misfortune of
-the nonreligious ages that they tend to cultivate a sense of
-individuality, not only at the expense of religion, but at the expense
-of humanity itself. For the modern portrait-painter not only does not
-see the image of God in his sitters, he does not even see the image of
-man. His object is not to insist on the glorious and solemn heritage
-which is common to Sir William Harcourt and Mr. Albert Chevalier, to
-Count Tolstoy and Mr. Wanklyn, that is the glorious and solemn heritage
-of a nose and two eyes and a mouth. The<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_70" id="page_70">{70}</a></span> effort of the dashing modern is
-rather to make each of these features individual almost to the point of
-being incredible: it is his desire to paint the mouth whose grimace is
-inimitable, the eyes that could be only in one head, and the nose that
-never was on sea or land. There is value in this purely personal
-treatment, but something in it so constantly lost: the quality of the
-common humanity. The new art gallery is too like a museum of freaks, it
-is too wild and wonderful, like a realistic novel. Watts errs
-undoubtedly on the other side. He makes all his portraits too classical.
-It may seem like a paradox to say that he makes them too human; but
-humanity is a <i>classis</i> and therefore classical. He recurs too much to
-the correct type which includes all men. He has, for instance, a worship
-of great men so complete that it makes him tend in the direction of
-painting them all alike. There may be too much of Browning in his
-Tennyson, too much of Tennyson in his Browning. There is certainly a
-touch of Manning in his John Stuart Mill, and a touch of the Minotaur in
-many of his portraits of Imperial politicians. While he celebrates the
-individual with a peculiar insight, it is nevertheless always referred
-to a general human type. We feel when we look at even the most
-extraordinary of Watts’ portraits, as, for instance, the portrait of
-Lord Stratford de Redcliffe, that before Lord Stratford de Redcliffe was
-born, and apart from that fact, there was such a thing as a human being.
-When we look at a brilliant modern canvas like that of Mr. Sargent’s
-portrait of Wertheimer, we do not feel that any human being analogous to
-him had of necessity existed. We feel that Mr. Wertheimer might have
-been created before the stars. Watts has a tendency to resume his
-characters into his background as if they were half returning</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_31" id="ill_31"></a>
-<a href="images/i_070fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_070fp.jpg" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>THOMAS CARLYLE.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_71" id="page_71">{71}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">to the forces of nature. In his more successful portraits the actual
-physical characteristics of the sitter appear to be something of the
-nature of artistic creations; they are decorative and belong to a whole.
-We feel that he has filled in the fiery orange of Swinburne’s hair as
-one might fill in a gold or copper panel. We know that he was
-historically correct in making the hair orange, but we cannot get rid of
-a haunting feeling that if his scheme had been a little different he
-would have made it green. This indescribable sentiment is particularly
-strong in the case of the portrait of Rossetti. Rossetti is dressed in a
-dark green coat which perfectly expresses his sumptuous Pre-Raphaelite
-affectation. But we do not feel that Rossetti has adopted the dark green
-coat to suit his dark red beard. We rather feel that if anyone had
-seized Rossetti and forcibly buttoned him up in the dark green coat he
-would have grown the red beard by sheer force of will.</p>
-
-<p>Before we quit the subject of portraiture a word ought to be said about
-two exceedingly noble portraits, those of Matthew Arnold and Cardinal
-Manning. The former is interesting because, as an able critic said
-somewhere (I wish I could remember who he was or where he wrote), this
-is the one instance of Watts approaching tentatively a man whom he in
-all reasonable probability did not understand. In this particular case
-the picture is a hundred times better for that. The portrait-painter of
-Matthew Arnold obviously ought not to understand him, since he did not
-understand himself. And the bewilderment which the artist felt for those
-few hours reproduced in a perfect, almost in an immortal, picture the
-bewilderment which the sitter felt from the cradle to the grave. The
-bewilderment of Matthew Arnold was more noble and faithful than most
-men’s certainty,<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_72" id="page_72">{72}</a></span> and Watts has not failed to give that nobility a place
-even greater perhaps than that which he would have given to it had he
-been working on that fixed theory of admiration in which he dealt with
-Tennyson or Morris. The sad sea-blue eyes of Matthew Arnold seemed to
-get near to the fundamental sadness of blue. It is a certain eternal
-bleakness in the colour which may for all I know have given rise to the
-legend of blue devils. There are times at any rate when the bluest
-heavens appear only blue with those devils. The portrait of Cardinal
-Manning is worth a further and special notice, because it is an
-illustration of the fact to which I have before alluded: the fact that
-while Watts in one sense always gets the best out of his sitters, he
-does not by any means always get the handsomest out of them. Manning was
-a singularly fine-looking man, even in his emaciation. A friend of mine,
-who was particularly artistic both by instinct and habits, gazed for a
-long time at a photograph of the terrible old man clad in those
-Cardinal’s robes and regalia in which he exercised more than a
-Cardinal’s power, and said reflectively, “He would have made his fortune
-as a model.” A great many of the photographs of Manning, indeed almost
-any casual glimpses of him, present him as more beautiful than he
-appears in Watts’ portrait. To the ordinary onlooker there was behind
-the wreck of flesh and the splendid skeleton the remains of a very
-handsome English gentleman; relics of one who might have hunted foxes
-and married an American heiress. Watts has no eyes for anything except
-that sublime vow which he would himself repudiate, that awful Church
-which he would himself disown. He exaggerates the devotionalism of
-Manning. He is more ascetic than the ascetics; more Catholic than
-Catholicism. Just so, he would be, if he were painting the
-Sheik-el-Islam, more Moslem<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_73" id="page_73">{73}</a></span> than the Mohammedans. He has no eyes but
-for ideas.</p>
-
-<p>Watts’ allegories and Watts’ portraits exhaust the subject of his art.
-It is true that he has on rare occasions attempted pictures merely
-reproducing the externals of the ordinary earth. It is characteristic of
-him that he should have once, for no apparent reason in particular,
-painted a picture of two carthorses and a man. It is still more
-characteristic of him that this one picture of a trivial group in the
-street should be so huge as to dwarf many of his largest and most
-transcendental canvases; that the incidental harmless drayman should be
-more gigantic than the Prince of this World or Adam or the Angel of
-Death. He condescends to a detail and makes the detail more vast than a
-cosmic allegory. One picture, called “The First Oyster,” he is reported
-to have painted in response to a challenge which accused him or his art
-of lacking altogether the element of humour. The charge is interesting,
-because it suggests a comparison with the similar charge commonly
-brought against Gladstone. In both charges there is an element of truth,
-though not complete truth. Watts proved no doubt that he was not wholly
-without humour by this admirable picture. Gladstone proved that he was
-not wholly without humour by his reply to Mr. Chaplin, by his singing of
-“Doo-dah,” and by his support of a grant to the Duke of Coburg. But both
-men were singularly little possessed by the mood or the idea of humour.
-To them had been in peculiar fullness revealed the one great truth which
-our modern thought does not know and which it may possibly perish
-through not knowing. They knew that to enjoy life means to take it
-seriously. There is an eternal kinship between solemnity and high
-spirits, and almost the very name of it is Gladstone. Its other<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_74" id="page_74">{74}</a></span> name is
-Watts. They knew that not only life, but every detail of life, is most a
-pleasure when it is studied with the gloomiest intensity. They knew that
-the men who collect beetles are jollier than the men who kill them, and
-that the men who worshipped beetles (in ancient Egypt) were probably the
-jolliest of all. The startling cheerfulness of the old age of Gladstone,
-the startling cheerfulness of the old age of Watts, are both entirely
-redolent of this exuberant seriousness, this uproarious gravity. They
-were as happy as the birds, because, like the birds, they were untainted
-by the disease of laughter. They are as awful and philosophical as
-children at play: indeed they remind us of a truth true for all of us,
-though capable of misunderstanding, that the great aim of a man’s life
-is to get into his second childhood.</p>
-
-<p>Of his work we have concluded our general survey. It has been hard in
-conducting such a survey to avoid the air of straying from the subject.
-But the greatest hardness of the subject is that we cannot stray from
-the subject. This man has attempted, whether he has succeeded or no, to
-paint such pictures of such things that no one shall be able to get
-outside them; that everyone should be lost in them for ever like
-wanderers in a mighty park. Whether we strike a match or win the
-Victoria Cross, we are still giants sprawling in Chaos. Whether we hide
-in a monastery or thunder on a platform, we are still standing in the
-Court of Death. If any experience at all is genuine, it affects the
-philosophy of these pictures; if any halfpenny stamp supports them, they
-are the better pictures; if any dead cat in a dust-bin contradicts them,
-they are the worse pictures. This is the great pathos and the great
-dignity of philosophy and theology. Men talk of philosophy and theology
-as if they were something specialistic and arid and</p>
-
-<div class="figcenter">
-<br /><a name="ill_32" id="ill_32"></a>
-<a href="images/i_074fp.jpg">
-<img src="images/i_074fp.jpg" width="506" height="600" alt="[Image unavailable.]" /></a>
-<div class="caption"><p>GOOD LUCK TO YOUR FISHING.</p></div>
-</div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="page_75" id="page_75">{75}</a></span></p>
-
-<p class="nind">academic. But philosophy and theology are not only the only democratic
-things, they are democratic to the point of being vulgar, to the point,
-I was going to say, of being rowdy. They alone admit all matters; they
-alone lie open to all attacks. All other sciences may, while studying
-their own, laugh at the rag-tag and bobtail of other sciences. An
-astronomer may sneer at animalculæ, which are very like stars; an
-entomologist may scorn the stars, which are very like animalculæ.
-Physiologists may think it dirty to grub about in the grass; botanists
-may think it dirtier to grub about in an animal’s inside. But there is
-nothing that is not relevant to these more ancient studies. There is no
-detail, from buttons to kangaroos, that does not enter into the gay
-confusion of philosophy. There is no fact of life, from the death of a
-donkey to the General Post Office, which has not its place to dance and
-sing in, in the glorious Carnival of theology.</p>
-
-<p>Therefore I make no apology if I have asked the reader, in the course of
-these remarks, to think about things in general. It is not I, but George
-Frederick Watts, who asks the reader to think about things in general.
-If he has not done this, he has failed. If he has not started in us such
-trains of reflection as I am now concluding and many more and many
-better, he has failed. And this brings me to my last word. Now and again
-Watts has failed. I am afraid that it may possibly be inferred from the
-magniloquent language which I have frequently, and with a full
-consciousness of my act, applied to this great man, that I think the
-whole of his work technically triumphant. Clearly it is not. For I
-believe that often he has scarcely known what he was doing; I believe
-that he has been in the dark when the lines came wrong; that he has been
-still deeper in the dark and things came right. As I have already
-pointed out,<span class="pagenum"><a name="page_76" id="page_76">{76}</a></span> the vague lines which his mere physical instinct would
-make him draw, have in them the curves of the Cosmos. His automatic
-manual action was, I think, certainly a revelation to others, certainly
-a revelation to himself. Standing before a dark canvas upon some quiet
-evening, he has made lines and something has happened. In such an hour
-the strange and splendid phrase of the Psalm he has literally fulfilled.
-He has gone on because of the word of meekness and truth and of
-righteousness. And his right hand has taught him terrible things.</p>
-
-<hr class="full" />
-<div style='display:block;margin-top:4em'>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK G. F. WATTS ***</div>
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0;'>This file should be named 64074-h.htm or 64074-h.zip</div>
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0;'>This and all associated files of various formats will be found in https://www.gutenberg.org/6/4/0/7/64074/</div>
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-Updated editions will replace the previous one&mdash;the old editions will
-be renamed.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
-law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
-so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
-States without permission and without paying copyright
-royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
-of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
-Gutenberg&trade; electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG&trade;
-concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
-and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive
-specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this
-eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook
-for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports,
-performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given
-away&mdash;you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks
-not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the
-trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.
-</div>
-
-<div style='margin:0.83em 0; font-size:1.1em; text-align:center'>START: FULL LICENSE<br />
-<span style='font-size:smaller;'>THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE<br />
-PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK</span>
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-To protect the Project Gutenberg&trade; mission of promoting the free
-distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
-(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase &ldquo;Project
-Gutenberg&rdquo;), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
-Project Gutenberg&trade; License available with this file or online at
-www.gutenberg.org/license.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;font-size:1.1em;margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg&trade; electronic works
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg&trade;
-electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
-and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
-(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
-the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
-destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg&trade; electronic works in your
-possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
-Project Gutenberg&trade; electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
-by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
-or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.B. &ldquo;Project Gutenberg&rdquo; is a registered trademark. It may only be
-used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
-agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
-things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg&trade; electronic works
-even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
-paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
-Gutenberg&trade; electronic works if you follow the terms of this
-agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg&trade;
-electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (&ldquo;the
-Foundation&rdquo; or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
-of Project Gutenberg&trade; electronic works. Nearly all the individual
-works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
-States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
-United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
-claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
-displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
-all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
-that you will support the Project Gutenberg&trade; mission of promoting
-free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg&trade;
-works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
-Project Gutenberg&trade; name associated with the work. You can easily
-comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
-same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg&trade; License when
-you share it without charge with others.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
-what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
-in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
-check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
-agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
-distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
-other Project Gutenberg&trade; work. The Foundation makes no
-representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
-country outside the United States.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
-immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg&trade; License must appear
-prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg&trade; work (any work
-on which the phrase &ldquo;Project Gutenberg&rdquo; appears, or with which the
-phrase &ldquo;Project Gutenberg&rdquo; is associated) is accessed, displayed,
-performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
-</div>
-
-<blockquote>
- <div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
- This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
- other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
- whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
- of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
- at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you
- are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
- of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
- </div>
-</blockquote>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg&trade; electronic work is
-derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
-contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
-copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
-the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
-redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase &ldquo;Project
-Gutenberg&rdquo; associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
-either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
-obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg&trade;
-trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg&trade; electronic work is posted
-with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
-must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
-additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
-will be linked to the Project Gutenberg&trade; License for all works
-posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
-beginning of this work.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg&trade;
-License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
-work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg&trade;.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
-electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
-prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
-active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
-Gutenberg&trade; License.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
-compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
-any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
-to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg&trade; work in a format
-other than &ldquo;Plain Vanilla ASCII&rdquo; or other format used in the official
-version posted on the official Project Gutenberg&trade; web site
-(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
-to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
-of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original &ldquo;Plain
-Vanilla ASCII&rdquo; or other form. Any alternate format must include the
-full Project Gutenberg&trade; License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
-performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg&trade; works
-unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
-access to or distributing Project Gutenberg&trade; electronic works
-provided that
-</div>
-
-<ul style='display: block;list-style-type: disc;margin-top: 1em;margin-bottom: 1em;margin-left: 0;margin-right: 0;padding-left: 40px;'>
- <li style='display: list-item;'>
- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
- the use of Project Gutenberg&trade; works calculated using the method
- you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
- to the owner of the Project Gutenberg&trade; trademark, but he has
- agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
- Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
- within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
- legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
- payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
- Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
- Section 4, &ldquo;Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
- Literary Archive Foundation.&rdquo;
- </li>
-
- <li style='display: list-item;'>
- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
- you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
- does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg&trade;
- License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
- copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
- all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg&trade;
- works.
- </li>
-
- <li style='display: list-item;'>
- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
- any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
- electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
- receipt of the work.
- </li>
-
- <li style='display: list-item;'>
- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
- distribution of Project Gutenberg&trade; works.
- </li>
-</ul>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
-Gutenberg&trade; electronic work or group of works on different terms than
-are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
-from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The
-Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg&trade;
-trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
-effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
-works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
-Gutenberg&trade; collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg&trade;
-electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
-contain &ldquo;Defects,&rdquo; such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
-or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
-intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
-other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
-cannot be read by your equipment.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the &ldquo;Right
-of Replacement or Refund&rdquo; described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
-Gutenberg&trade; trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
-Gutenberg&trade; electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
-liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
-fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
-LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
-PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
-TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
-LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
-INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
-DAMAGE.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
-defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
-receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
-written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
-received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
-with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
-with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
-lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
-or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
-opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
-the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
-without further opportunities to fix the problem.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
-in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you &lsquo;AS-IS&rsquo;, WITH NO
-OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
-LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
-warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
-damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
-violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
-agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
-limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
-unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
-remaining provisions.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
-trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
-providing copies of Project Gutenberg&trade; electronic works in
-accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
-production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg&trade;
-electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
-including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
-the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
-or any Project Gutenberg&trade; work, (b) alteration, modification, or
-additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg&trade; work, and (c) any
-Defect you cause.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;font-size:1.1em;margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg&trade;
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-Project Gutenberg&trade; is synonymous with the free distribution of
-electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
-computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
-exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
-from people in all walks of life.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
-assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg&trade;&rsquo;s
-goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg&trade; collection will
-remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
-and permanent future for Project Gutenberg&trade; and future
-generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
-Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;font-size:1.1em;margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
-501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
-state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
-Revenue Service. The Foundation&rsquo;s EIN or federal tax identification
-number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
-U.S. federal laws and your state&rsquo;s laws.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-The Foundation&rsquo;s principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the
-mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its
-volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous
-locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt
-Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to
-date contact information can be found at the Foundation&rsquo;s web site and
-official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-For additional contact information:
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin-top:1em;margin-bottom:1em; margin-left:2em;'>
-Dr. Gregory B. Newby<br />
-Chief Executive and Director<br />
-gbnewby@pglaf.org
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;font-size:1.1em;margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-Project Gutenberg&trade; depends upon and cannot survive without wide
-spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
-increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
-freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
-array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
-($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
-status with the IRS.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
-charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
-States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
-considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
-with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
-where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
-DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
-visit <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org/donate">www.gutenberg.org/donate</a>.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
-have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
-against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
-approach us with offers to donate.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
-any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
-outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
-methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
-ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
-donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;font-size:1.1em;margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg&trade; electronic works.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
-Gutenberg&trade; concept of a library of electronic works that could be
-freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
-distributed Project Gutenberg&trade; eBooks with only a loose network of
-volunteer support.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-Project Gutenberg&trade; eBooks are often created from several printed
-editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
-the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
-necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
-edition.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search
-facility: <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block;margin:1em 0'>
-This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg&trade;,
-including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
-subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
-</div>
-
-</body>
-</html>
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/colophon.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/colophon.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index fa07034..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/colophon.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/cover.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ab4de29..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/cover.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_008fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_008fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b9e7db8..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_008fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_010fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_010fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ceea67e..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_010fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_014fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_014fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d22a0c6..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_014fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_016fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_016fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a5b3aed..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_016fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_018fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_018fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1822a82..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_018fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_020fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_020fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 95ab251..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_020fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_022fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_022fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 200fe6a..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_022fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_026fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_026fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index e02fcbf..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_026fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_028fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_028fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0bcff41..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_028fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_032fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_032fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ce59cc5..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_032fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_034fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_034fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d47ac20..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_034fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_036fp_1.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_036fp_1.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1aa0735..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_036fp_1.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_036fp_2.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_036fp_2.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 30fbfc7..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_036fp_2.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_038fp_1.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_038fp_1.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d1728d2..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_038fp_1.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_038fp_2.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_038fp_2.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2967cb7..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_038fp_2.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_040fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_040fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5faf938..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_040fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_042fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_042fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 32b5649..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_042fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_044fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_044fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 8d7c67c..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_044fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_046fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_046fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b637c9b..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_046fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_048fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_048fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f861db2..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_048fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_052fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_052fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1200861..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_052fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_054fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_054fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b022a21..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_054fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_056fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_056fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 67b2135..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_056fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_058fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_058fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 7e14810..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_058fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_060fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_060fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0a4f38b..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_060fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_062fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_062fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 674e820..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_062fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_064fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_064fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2bba340..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_064fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_066fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_066fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index fef3899..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_066fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_068fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_068fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index bc20d6d..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_068fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_070fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_070fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 6313d89..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_070fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_074fp.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_074fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 00808ee..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_074fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ
diff --git a/old/64074-h/images/i_frontispiece.jpg b/old/64074-h/images/i_frontispiece.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index e37ce5e..0000000
--- a/old/64074-h/images/i_frontispiece.jpg
+++ /dev/null
Binary files differ