American pictures and their painters

Front matter

ORINDA MUNSON BRYANT

AMERICAN PICTURES AND THEIR PAINTERS

BY THE SAME AUTHOR

Introduction

'T^HE welcome accorded What Pictures ^ To S^t IN America and the desire to know more of our own artists that the book has aroused are the real incentives for bringing out American Pictures and Their Painters.

Our people never were more keenly alive to the value of our native art; all over the country public galleries, dealers and private owners are giving more and more prominence to their American paintings and on all sides there is an awakened interest in American art. To be ignorant of our leading artists is not to be fully abreast of the times. Then, too, no correct valuation of our native work can be gained without reckoning with the general public, for the public is the final court of appeal. American Pictures and Their Painters is designed to provide a working basis for the appreciation of American art. To accomplish this I have attempted especially to trace the careers of the leaders in their respective

INTRODUCTION

eras — artists who even now are modern old masters. It is high time that we as a nation should realize that many of our American painters are not only standing shoulder to shoulder with the geniuses of Europe and Asia, but are to-day the world's leaders in art. Naturally it is too early as yet to judge the younger artists correctly, consequently only a limited number are here represented; those are included who indicate the trend of thought in art to-day. If only our people will take an intelligent interest in the work of our modern American artists, we shall have fewer sins of omission in recognizing real worth and shall gain much credit in discovering and encouraging latent talent.

I take this occasion to extend my thanks to the museums, galleries and dealers and to several of the artists themselves who have assisted me with data, pictures and advice, and especially do I acknowledge the kind courtesy of the Detroit Publishing Company, who have made it possible for me to use the photographs of many paintings of which they own the copyright.

LORINDA MUNSON BrYANT.

New York City.

Contents

CHAPTER PAGE

I. West, Copley, Peal, Trumbull . . 21

II. Stuart, Sully 30

Chapter I West— Copley— Peale— Trumbull

AMERICA, the inheritor of the ages! That certainly sounds promising, but, we may ask, has the inheritance proved wholly a blessing? The cry has been going up for a hundred years and more that in our art we are only imitators of the past. This cry has not been without some truth ; but why, we ask, expect from American painters in so short a time what it has taken older countries centuries to accomplish?

The wonderful scenery of the new country and the picturesque Indian no doubt impressed the artists among the Pilgrim Fathers, if there were any, but both the scenery and the Indian must have lost much of their picture-making quality in the struggle for existence of those early days. Then, too, had the trained artist painted genre pictures of the Indian in his unique costume and unusual surroundings and sent them back to the old home, I suspect the European art world would have tapped its forehead with much the same significance that the inn keeper did at the tales of the returned hunter who first discovered Yellowstone Park.

Again, is it not possible that our art inheritance was one of the real obstacles to be overcome before our native American artist could respond to the wonderful surroundings of natural scenery and native inhabitants ? The very bigness of the country and the unusualness of all that pertained to life ill fitted the traditions of the eighteenth century art work of Europe.

Not until 1738, when Benjamin West opened his eyes in the new world, did American painting have its birth. Immediately there comes to mind a mental picture of the little Benjamin sitting by the cradle painting a picture of his baby sister with a brush made from pussy's tail. The stories of the early achievements of the boy are as much, a part of his identity as that he was born in America, so it matters little whether he was an infant prodigy or not.

Even if he were not a great artist, we are rather proud of the business ability that made him a necessary adviser to King George III, and resulted in his being the real instigator in

Fig. 3 — Portrait of John Bourse. Copley. Courtesy of the Worcester (Mass.) Art Museum.

ANO THEIR PAINTERS 23

founding the Royal Academy, London, England m 1767.

The usual jealousies were undermining the art societies of London when the king took matters in his own hands — under the direction of West, however — and secretly planned his own art academy. He added the last straw to the expiring societies by answering personally the request of the president that West's "Regulus" be sent to one of the exhibitions. ^'No/' said the king, "'it must go to my exhibition— the Royal Academy." The king invited West to be the first president but West felt that the honour belonged to an Englishman, and persuaded Reynolds, who had nothing to do with the preliminaries, to accept the honour.

West at the death of Sir Joshua in 1792 became the second president. The king at this time wished to confer the honour of knighthood upon him, a precedent established with Reynolds, but West, possibly hoping for a ^^baronetcy and a pension,'' gracefully refused and with a note of pride, said, '1 think I have earned greater eminence with my pencil than knighthood could confer on me." Although he retained the royal favour of King George III, he never again was given the opportunity of refusing knighthood nor was he offered a higher honour. West is the only president of the

Royal Academy, in its life of one hundred and fifty years, who did not become a "sir" upon accepting the presidency. Throughout the reign of King George III West continued in favour with the court, but upon the accession of King George IV the court patronage ceased.

West spent his boyhood days in Philadelphia, where the Indian in his untrammelled life appealed to his artistic nature, and gave him just the material for picture-making, which material he used when he painted ''The Death of General Wolfe.'' His audacity in stepping out of the beaten path of art tenets and clothing his characters in the costumes of the people, the country, and the time brought him enthusiastic applause from the people in spite of the disapproval at first of so eminent an artist as Sir Joshua Reynolds. Sir Joshua, after careful examination, said, 'West has conquered; he has treated his subject as it ought to be treated; I retract my objections. I foresee that this picture will not only become one of the most popular but will occasion a revolution in art." West went to Italy when quite young; after a short sojourn in that country he started for home, stopping in England for a business call. The call extended over the rest of his life, and gave him a final resting place in the crypt of St. Paul's Cathedral, London (1820).

Besides a series of large canvases on English history made by request of the king, West began a series of religious pictures. One of the most noted of these is ''Death on the Pale Plorse" (Fig. i), in the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts, Philadelphia. It is painted in the grand style he assumed in his large compositions, possibly thinking to follow in the footsteps of Michael Angelo. He has taken his theme from Rev. 6:8, "And I looked, and behold a pale horse : and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth." In looking at the painting we find that West has literally followed the words of St. John. While the few simple words of the evangelist leave a clear picture of horror in our minds, this painted picture of West's is so full of confusing details that the significance of the scene is lost in the chaos of figures. What a masterpiece this would have been if Michael Angelo had conceived it !

In some of his smaller canvases, however. West has given a touch of reality akin to his own personal charm and Quaker directness.

This is specially true of ''St. Peter Denying Christ" (Fig. 2), Hampton Court, England. The apostle's earnest, deprecating manner, combining both devotion and cowardUness, has a human element that speaks to the heart. West's artistic ambition was greater than his skill with brush and paint. The reddish-brown colour comes from painting on red grained canvas — a legacy from the Italian Eclectics, and unfortunately emphasises the impetuous efforts of one ill at ease with his tools.

While Benjamin West was practically an English painter, except by accident of birth, his friend and contemporary, John Singleton Copley (173 7- 1 815), was a true American. Copley probably had his early training from his stepfather, though his son, Lord Lindhurst, states that his father, Copley, "was entirely self-taught and never saw a decent picture, with the exception of his own until he was nearly thirty.'* Among the pictures Copley painted, probably before he left America, was the ''Portrait of John Bours" (Eig. 3), now in the Worcester (Mass.) Art Museum. This young clergyman of Newport (1737-1815) and Copley were nearly the same age and, from the intimate character of the picture, there can be little doubt that a warm friendship bound them together. Seldom did Copley give so sympathetic an understanding of the personal element as in the likeness of this gentleman. That it is a likeness, who can doubt? The splendid physique and air of good fellowship mark the man as a strong, helpful friend.

While Copley was still living in Boston — probably in 1766 — ^he sent a painting, ''Boy with a Flying Squirrel," to his countryman, West, in London, England. The painting arrived unsigned and without the accompanying letter, but West, recognising the American habitat of both the pine wood of the stretcher and the flying squirrel, suspected it was from his friend Copley. He enthusiastically pronounced the colouring to be worthy of Titian. Through West's influence the picture was hung in the exhibition of the Society of Incorporated artists — though anonymous works were usually prohibited — and at once Copley's reputation was established in England.

It was nearly ten years later before Copley visited the great galleries of Europe and finally settled in London. Here, under the influence of Reynolds and Gainsborough, he gained technical skill in his art, but his portraits of the royal family and English nobility have not brought him the lasting fame of the pictures he painted before leaving America. ''The long series of portraits of our colonial dignitaries, divines, judges and merchants" and tKe strong, self-reliant women of that day mark him as a veritable "American Van Dyck/' Those portraits give us a better understanding of the type of manhood and womanhood that laid the foundation of our Republic than any historians have given us in words.

It is to Charles Wilson Peak's (1741-1827) credit that after studying under West four years in London, he came home to practise his art. He had the good fortune to have Washington sit for him fourteen times. His portraits were the first ever painted of our first president, and what a pity that they lack that element of sympathetic good-fellowship that an artist with a delicate understanding reveals of his sitters. His "Portrait of Washington" (Fig. 4), Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City, is no doubt a good likeness, but with no soul. It seems strange that Peale could not have given a warm, personal picture of Washington. It is said that he made a miniature of General Washington while in camp "in a room so small and poorly lighted that Peale, who stood by the window, was forced to ask the distinguished model to sit on the bed."

When John Trumbull (1756-1843) was paid $32,000 for four pictures of American historical events, to fill compartments in the Rotunda of the Capitol at Washington, he probably received more than they would bring to-day, if their value depended upon their artistic merit. As a recorder of American history Trumbull deserves some consideration, but as an artist little can be said in his favour. His active service in the Revolutionary War brought him in contact with the leading men of the times, so that he never lacked for sitters of renown.

To have the honour of making a 'Tortrait of Alexander Hamilton" (Fig. 5), Metropolitan Museum of Art, was sufficient of itself to claim recognition for the artist. Hamilton's distinguished bearing was just the quality that appealed to Trumbull, who believed in the dignity of art; then Hamilton's habitually cheerful, bright face overcame, in a measure, the hard, formal brush of the artist, and his delicate skin and rosy cheeks compelled Trumbull to use agreeable colours.

Chapter II Stuart— Sully

"^"O truly American household has been ^ complete for more than a hundred years without a copy of Gilbert Stuart's ( 1755-1828) "Athenaeum Portrait of Washington" (Fig. 6), Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. Though other cities claim Stuart originals of Washington, the artist himself says, in a note at the foot of a letter from the President, preserved by his daughter : "In looking over my papers to find one that had a signature of George Washington, I found this, asking me when he would sit for his portrait, which is now owned by Samuel Williams (the Marquis of Lansdowne) of London. I have thought it proper that it should be his, especially as he owns the only original painting I ever made of Washington, except one I own myself. I painted a third, but rubbed it out. Signed, Gt. Stuart.''

Of course Stuart made many replicas of the Athenaeum head, but Washington sat only three times to the great artist. The portrait

Fig. 7 — Portrait of General Dearborn. Stuart. Courtesy of the Art Institute, Chicago.

Stuart owned was sold by the artist's widow to the Washington Association and, in 1831, was presented to the Boston Athenaeum, hence the name; it is simply loaned to the Museum.

The Washington portrait for Samuel Williams, referred to in Stuart's letter, was sent to England and is known as the Lansdowne Washington. It is a full-length figure, though Washington sat for the head only.

The peculiar expression around Washington's mouth is probably due to his false teeth, or rather bars. In a letter to his dentist of October 12, 1798, he writes: '1 find that it is the bar alone, both above and below, that gives the lips the pouting and swelling appearance — of consequence, if this can be remedied all will be well. . . . George Washington." This : letter was written a year before the president's death and after Stuart painted his portraits. Stuart himself said, in reference to the Athenaeum head : ''When I painted him, he had just had a set of false teeth inserted, which accounts for the constrained expression so noticeable about the mouth and lower part of the face." He probably meant the bars.

In writing of Gilbert Stuart we are dealing with a man who was as strong in artistic originality as the great painters of Europe. As a portrait painter he had no superior. His philosophic mind and keen insight into the motives of men revealed to him traits of character in his sitter that enabled him to paint not only a man's reputation but his real self.

No portrait is a finer example of Stuart's best work than that of "General Dearborn" (Fig. 7) in the Art Institute, Chicago. George C. Mason, describing the painting of General Dearborn, in his biography of Gilbert Stuart, says: ''The mouth, painted as only an artist of the highest order could paint it, v^ith a faint smile lurking around the corners, gives the idea that the figure is about to speak in reply to some remark that has been made." Stuart painted on mahogany panels prepared under his special direction. The surface of the panel was made to look like canvas by passing the plane over the whole face, then across the surface at right angles. The arrangement of his palette was simplicity itself, yet his wonderful skill in laying in colours has left his pictures nearly as fresh to-day as a century ago. Benjamin West would say to his pupils : "It is no use to steal Stuart's colours ; if you want to paint as he does, you must steal his eyes."

The "Portrait of Miss Clementina Beach" (Fig. 8), Fort Worth, Texas, is unique in being that of a lady who was a pupil of Stuart.

Fig. 8— Portrait of Miss Beach. Stuart. r\)iirt('sy of the Public Library, Fort Worth, Texas.

Fig. 9— Portrait of Mrs. Perez Morton. Stuart. Courtesy of the Worcester (Mass.) Art Museum.

Miss Beach was one of those splendid women who helped mould the young women of our Republic. She was born in Bristol, England, and came to America about 1800, when scarcely twenty-five years old. In conjunction with Mrs. Saunders, she opened a school for young women in Dorchester, Mass. She was also ambitious to know something of portrait painting, so between the years 1810 and 181 5 she sat to Gilbert Stuart for this portrait, and afterwards copied the picture, making it a standard for her own work.

That Stuart understood the mental attitude of one seeking high ideals is readily seen in the clear eyes looking at us so searchingly. He has made us feel that here is a woman with a real message, and that she has the magnetism that holds listeners, and the honest purpose that wins allegiance to the truth.

That this 'Tortrait of Mrs. Perez Morton" (Fig. 9), Worcester (Mass.) Art Museum, and the Athenaeum Washington were never finished is not surprising, for one of the criticisms often made of Stuart was his careless painting of accessories, to which the artist would reply, '*I copy the works of God, and leave the clothes to the tailor and mantuamakers."

Stuart painted two portraits, possibly three, of Mrs. Morton, but she sat for only the first one. The finished portrait possibly is still in possession of the Clinch family, East Boston — Mrs. Clinch was a granddaughter of Mrs. Morton. The latter in appreciation wrote the following lines to the artist :

"Stuart, thy portrait speaks with skill divine :

Go on — and may reward thy cares attend, The friend of genius must remain thy friend;

Genius is Sorrow's child, to Want allied, Consol'd by Glory and sustained by Pride; Unknown — unfelt — unshelter'd — uncaress'd — In walks of life where worldly passions rest."

Stuart was quick to respond :

"Who would not glory in the wreath of praise. Which M — n offers in her polished lays? I feel their cheering influence at my heart, And more complacent I review my art; Yet, ah, with Poesy, that gift divine, Compar'd, how poor, how impotent is mine !

No more my adverse fortune I lament: Enough for me that she extends the meed, Whose approbation is applause indeed."

Mrs. Morton was called the American Sappho.

When Stuart painted the "Portrait of Henry Nichols" (Fig. 10), Carnegie Institute, Pittsburgh, he put on record the Hkeness of one of the pioneers of the eastern shores of Maryland— the Nichols family came to America at the time of Lord Baltimore. Henry Nichols was a man of refinement, and hospitality was a marked feature of his Maryland mansion. Mason writes of this portrait: ''It is related of him (Nichols) that he determined to have his portrait painted by Stuart, and to this end, attended by his bodyguard, he drove from Baltimore to Boston in his own carriage, giving three weeks to the journey. Stuart rewarded his enthusiasm by painting a remarkably fine head of him."

Gilbert Stuart's talent for painting began to show itself early in his teens. Like most children with a special talent, he was capable but v^ayward in school, self-willed, high-spirited, at the head and front of all mischief, and a general favourite with his companions. He worked his way to success through many vicissitudes of fortune — lack of money and personal inconsistencies bringing the usual drawbacks. The words of his obituary by his friend Washington Allston (the artist) are as true of Stuart to-day as when written in 1828. ''In the world of art Mr. Stuart has left a void that will not soon be filled. And well may his country say : 'A great man has passed from among us/ But Gilbert Stuart has bequeathed her what is paramount to power — since no power can command it — the rich inheritance of his fame."

Thomas Sully (1783-1872) was born in England, but as most of his time was spent in America, he is classed among our artists. Not always were his portraits, especially of women, satisfactory, but occasionally there were genuine sparks of inspiration in his brush, when he would produce a masterpiece of portraiture. One of his really good portraits is of ''Frances Anne Kemble" (Fig. 11), better known as Fanny Kemble, Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts, Philadelphia.

A -beautiful and a brilliant woman was Fanny Kemble, with a heart warm and tender for the misfortunes of others. When twenty years old (1829) she began her public career at Covent Garden, London, in "Romeo and Juliet," under her father's management, to reclaim the fortune of her family. She took the part of Juliet; her father was Romeo and her mother the nurse. From the first she was a complete success and in three years reclaimed the family exchequer. She came to America with her father in 1832 and was enthusiastically received ; from then until her death, in 1893, she spent much time in this country. Her marriage to a Georgia planter, Pierce Butler, in 1834, was not a success and after fifteen years she was divorced and resumed her maiden name. Her writings are well known, and her grandson, Owen Wister, is one of our distinguished authors to-day.

Sully has certainly pictured the woman of genius in the glorious eyes, wide-set and shining with love and sympathy. How modern in composition it is; everything is subordinated to the head, yet the contour of neck and shoulders and the firm hand and arm gives strength to the well-poised head. Sully was practically self-taught. From his ninth year, when his parents came from England, until grown to manhood he lived in South Carolina, away from art centres. The influence of his talents was soon felt, however, when his likenesses of southern beauties and men of affairs became known.

Chapter III Hudson River School

COLE — CHURCH — DOUGHTY — LEUTZE — HUNT — BIERSTADT — HILL — MORAN

T^HOMAS COLE (1801-1848) was practically the beginning of the Hudson River School. His early career as an artist was typical of the struggles and handicaps that so often beset art students with more talent than money. One of eight children in a small house in Philadelphia, where refinement and a love for music were dominant traits, he worked on his wood-engraving within sound of his sisters' sweet voices. A young law student, who had his home in the Cole family, writes of Thomas: ''He has his little workbench put up in our room, under the window sill, — we sat with our backs to each other; at intervals he whistled and sang, then laid aside the tool — took up his flute, which was his constant companion, and played some air.''

A longing for the country was stirring in the 38 heart of the young artist until, fired by tales of a travelling artist, he slung his green bag over his shoulder one October day and was off for the land of nowhere. Indian summer was at hand. And as he trudged up the Hudson River valley the gaily decked maples and brilliant-hued sumachs, gladdening the deep green still lingering in the grass and undergrowth, beckoned him on. When he reached the village of Catskill, bordering the foothills of the mountains, his real joy began. His own brush tells the story of what he saw "In the Catskills" (Fig. 12), Metropolitan Museum of Art. He opened the way and many other young artists followed in his footsteps.

It was the sale of his early pictures of the Catskills and the good will of Trumbull and other artists that made possible a trip to England and access to the studios of Lawrence and Turner. The latter said of him: ''There is a young man from America, named Cole, who ought to do fine things. He is as much of a poet as a painter."

Thomas Cole's most famous work, at least his best-known work, is "The Voyage of Life," in four scenes. Steel engravings, made of the series early in the last century, that have found their way into many homes throughout America, are growing more valuable each year.

Frederick E. Church (1826-1900) became a student of Thomas Cole in his studio in the upper woods above the river. It was from this spot that Church explored the fastnesses of the mountains of the Catskill and the hidden coves and the ever-varying shores of the Hudson. Here he caught that spirit, lurking in nature unmolested, which drew him irresistibly to her more astounding feats, first in South America and Jamaica and then to Labrador to complete his famous "Icebergs." Probably his ''Niagara Falls" (Fig. 13), Corcoran Art Gallery, Washington, brought him the most permanent fame. He painted this picture before he had been to the old world and most pertinent was the statement made at its appearance that, "Indeed this work formed an era in the history of native landscape art, from the revelation it proved to Europeans." He certainly bewilders the mind with that stupendous volume of water pouring into the abyss below.

It is not surprising that the picture attracted favourable attention in Paris at the International Exhibition in 1867, where it received a medal of the second class. At that time comparatively few people in Europe had any definite idea of our country or knew anything about its natural wonders. To state that such a vast quantity of water was pouring itself year after year over a fall of one hundred and sixty-four feet was almost unthinkable by the old world travellers, familiar with the falls of Switzerland. What did it mean — that wide stretch of water reaching to the very horizon? Where were the mountains to stay its course? And where did the depths below lead to that were swallowing up the mighty waters ? How calmly Church has marshalled his forces, until at the inevitable moment the great phenomenon is consummated!

Thomas Doughty (1793-1856) was another leader in American landscape painting. A native of Philadelphia, he was early apprenticed to a leather manufacturer and even became a manufacturer himself. But when twenty-eight years old he decided to become a painter. His picture in the Metropolitan Museum of Art of a view "On the Hudson" (Fig. 14) is a fine example of the '^silvery tone" he gave to his canvases to convince the American public of the beauty of our landscape. Doughty worked in London and in Paris but he remained true to his native inheritance and painted his pictures of home scenes with so much sincerity and truth that they brought him great popularity and are still highly prized.

When Emanuel Leutze (181 6- 1868), who holds a unique place in American art, painted

"Washington Crossing the Delaware" (Pig. 15), Metropolitan Museum of Art, he made a picture that every school child associates with that important crisis in our early history. Of course the boat is too frail to cope with the tremendous rush of the ice and snow in the Delaware River under the spring thaw, but we must remember that Leutze made his studies of the breaking up of river-ice in his garden overlooking the Rhine at Diisseldorf. The flag, too, is an anachronism as it was not adopted until six months later, June 14, 1777. Nevertheless, the spirit of patriotic enthusiasm overbalances all defects in the picture as a work of art. Though a native German, Leutze was reared in America and this early training gave him an understanding of our national struggles that resulted in his preserving to us on canvas the most noted events in the American Revolution.

Quite early in his art career Leutze recrossed the Atlantic to study in the Diisseldorf Academy. Later he returned to America full of the enthusiasm of the new movement — the overcoming of the artificial in producing something of the life of the present. Leutze was certainly a man of colossal mind with ideals of grand proportions, though his art was rather crude in colour and technique.

■Niagara Falls. Church. Courtesy of the Corcoran Art Gallery, Washington.

Fig. 15 — Washington ( 'lossing the Delaware, Leutze. Courtesy of the Metiopolitan Museum of Art.

Fig. 16— The Bathers. Hunt. Courtesy of the W orcester (Mass.) Art Museum.

No early American artist studied art under more favourable circumstances (too favourable) than William Morris Hunt (1824-1879). Unfortunately inherited political, social, financial, and intellectual gifts did not make him a master painter, though they did give him high ideals, and those ideals were his salvation.

At sixteen Hunt v^as sent to Harvard, but it was the college life, not the studies, that attracted him. This soon brought disgrace, in suspension and ill health from over-indulgence, until consumption was imminent. His alarmed mother hurried with him to Europe and finally the family settled in Rome, where he soon began to improve in health and his artistic nature to expand. His first thought was to be a sculptor, and to this end he entered a sculptor's studio in Rome and later spent a short time under Barye in Paris. The idea of returning to Harvard was abandoned in favour of an art career — a ^career subject to many changes as time went on.