The Elements of Drawing & the Elements of Perspective

Introduction

THE exhibition of Ruskin’s drawings in New Bond Street, this spring of 1907, has given us what must be our last opportunity of seeing his original work in any complete form. The collection there shown before its dispersal to the ends of the earth, would, if it could have been kept on view in some permanent Ruskin gallery, be the best accompaniment of the two handbooks coupled in this volume. But that is not to be; and the only resource left to the writer who, fresh from its record, would turn it to account in their fuller illustration, is to point to the many reproductions of some of the finest of those drawings, to be had in the various editions of his works, down to the final Library Edition which is now being published.

At that exhibition, the practice and the materials, the familiar David-Roberts grey paper, the Harding pencil effects, the washes and colours, cold or glowing, that marked Ruskin the artist and master of drawing, were so arranged as to recall him almost in the very act. The portraits too,—that of himself by Richmond at the end of the room, and that by himself, the beautiful and sensitive pencil drawing of Miss Rose La Touche, in particular,—added remarkably to the biographical actuality of these remains. Indeed their effect, illustrating and tracing as they did his growing command of his art, from stage to stage of his development, was that of his whole history told in pictures. They showed how he began to imitate, stroke for stroke, line for line, Cruikshank’s etchings for Grimm’s Tales, of which he expressly speaks in his “Elements of Drawing,” and how he drew in 1835 under Prout’s influence, or how his hand strengthened in 1845 and 1846, when he was looking for Turner effects in Switzerland, or making those noble mountain-studies which were reproduced in the volumes of “ Modern Painters.” Indeed there is passage after passage in the first of the two coupled handbooks republished in this volume, which might be given its direct application in those drawings ; while they most luminously contributed as no written memoirs could do, to our knowledge of Ruskin in his long student’s days ; for when, it may be said, was he not a student? The pages vii IK Qi

Vill Introduction here in which he directs, after a certain security of the hand has been attained, the copying of a plate from the Liber Studiorum, had their signal accompaniment in such studies as that of rock and leafage, made at Crossmount, Perthshire, in 1847; or that strange fantasy of exalted towered peaks, with a bridge below and a rift of troubled light surprising the sombre water, which was_ labelled simply, “98; Drawing in Imitation of Turner.” Nos. 114, 117 and 120 again gave us three of his infinitely patient botanical studies—studies of a Rush, which he had used as one of his subjects at the Oxford Drawing School. And with these, the colour studies of a single larch bud or of ivy, served to bring back this incomparable drawing-master in his actual handling of his brush, and by some illusion perhaps to recall to those who had once studied under him the very tones of his voice, the very trick of his hand.

Mr. W. G. Collingwood, pupil and friend and biographer of the master, has also written a book on “ The Art-teaching of Ruskin,” which will be found of very considerable service by those who care to become, in any larger sense, his pupils too. There is the less need to state here upon any elaborate plan, the theory and practice of Ruskin the artist, as he has expressed them elsewhere. Of the numberless passages in his larger works which continue or modify the teaching of this volume, I must be content to quote two or three that have been called to mind in reading it. Take this, applying to his climacteric art of arts, architecture, the idea of Proportion, essential, but unpredicable, which may be set beside what he says on composition in Letter III :—

“Now, of Proportion so much has been written, that I believe the only facts which are of practical use have been overwhelmed and kept out of sight by vain accumulations of particular instances and estimates. Proportions are as infinite (and that in all kinds of things, as severally in colours, lines, shades, lights, and forms) as possible airs in music : and it is just as rational an attempt to teach a young architect how to proportion truly and well by calculating for him the proportions of fine works, as it would be to teach him to compose melodies by calculating the mathematical relations of the notes in Beethoven’s ‘Adelaide’ or Mozart’s ‘Requiem.’ The man who has eye and intellect will invent beautiful proportions, and cannot help it; but he can no more tell zs how to do it than Wordsworth could tell us how to write a sonnet, or than Scott could have told us how to plan a romance. .. .”

Introduction ix

Not the least service that these two books do for us is to send us only half satisfied or asking for more and more knowledge to the pages of ‘‘Modern Painters” and other works where Ruskin uses lavish practical illustrations. This again: “Take the commonest, closest, most familiar thing, and strive to draw it verily as you see it. Be sure of this last fact, for otherwise you will find yourself continually drawing, not what you see, but what you £zow. The best practice to begin with is, sitting about three yards from a bookcase (not your own, so that you may Azow none of the titles of the books), to try to draw the books accurately, with the titles on the backs, and patterns on the bindings, as you see them. You are not to stir from your place to seek what they are, but to draw them simply as they appear, giving the perfect look of neat lettering ; which, nevertheless, must be (as you will find it on most of the books) absolutely illegible. Next, try to draw a piece of patterned muslin or lace (of which you do not know the pattern), a little way off, and rather in the shade ; and be sure you get all the grace and /ook of the pattern without going a step nearer to see what it is. Then try to draw a bank of grass, with all its blades; or a bush, with all its leaves; and you will soon begin to understand under what a universal law of obscurity we live, and perceive that all dzstzuct drawing must be daa drawing, and that nothing can be right, till it is unintelligible.”

Is this a hard saying? It seems paradoxical, but it is by his recognition of the illusions and the veracities and the innocences of the eye, as it ministers to our faculty and perceptions in art, that Ruskin clears for us our working vision. Two more passages, developed on lines helpful to readers of the ‘‘ Elements,” must yet be included : one on the drawing of a fir-tree, the other on the drawing of water—

“One of the most marked distinctions between one artist and another, in the point of skill, will be found in their relative delicacy of perception of rounded surface ; the full power of expressing the perspective, foreshortening, and various undulation of such surface is, perhaps, the last and most difficult attainment of the hand and eye. For instance: there is, perhaps, no tree which has baffled the landscape painter more than the common black spruce fir. It is rare that we see any representation of it other than caricature. It is conceived as if it grew in one plane, or as a section o1 a tree, with a set of boughs symmetrically dependent on opposite sides. It is thought formal, unmanageable, and ugly. It would be so, if it grew as it is drawn. But the x Introduction

Power of the tree is not in that chandelier-like section. It is in the dark, flat, solid tables of leafage, which it holds out on its strong arms, curved slightly over them like shields, and spreading towards the extremity like a hand. It is vain to endeavour to paint the sharp, grassy, intricate leafage, until this ruling form has been secured ; and in the boughs that approach the spectator, the foreshortening of it is like that of a wide hill country, ridge just rising over ridge in successive distances ; and the finger-like extremities, foreshortened to absolute bluntness, require a delicacy in the rendering of them like that of the drawing of the hand of the Magdalene upon the vase in Mr. Rogers’s Titian. Get but the back of that foliage, and you have the tree; but I cannot name the artist who has thoroughly felt it.” Compare this fine relation of the Power of the Tree, with what is said of its Unity, in his section (in Letter III) on Radiation. The other passage supplements the wonderful pages on Water and its illusions and depiction in Letter II :—

“There is, perhaps, nothing which tells more in the drawing of water than decisive and swift execution ; for, in a rapid touch the hand naturally falls into the very curve of projection which is the absolute truth; while in slow finish, all precision of curve and character is certain to be lost except under the hand of an unusually powerful master. . . .

“T believe it is a result of the experience of all artists, that it is the easiest thing in the world to give a certain degree of depth and transparency to water; but that it is next thing to impossible, to give a full impression of surface. If no reflection be given—a ripple being supposed—the water looks like lead : if reflection be given, it in nine cases out of ten, looks morézdly clear and deep. . . . Now, this difficulty arises from the very same circumstance which occasions the frequent failure in effect of the best drawn foregrounds, the change, namely of focus necessary in the eye in order to receive rays of light coming from different distances. Go to the edge of a pond, in a perfectly calm day, at some place where there is duck-weed floating on the surface,—not thick, but a leaf here and there. Now, you may either see in the water the reflection of the sky, or you may see the duck-weed ; but you cannot, by any effort, see both together. ... Hence it appears, that whenever we see plain reflections of comparatively distant objects, in near water, we cannot possibly see the surface, and vice versa. ... Hence, the ordinary effect of water is only to be rendered by giving the reflections of the margin clear and distinct (so clear they usually are in

Bibliography xl nature, that is impossible to tell where the water begins) ; but the moment we touch the reflection of distant objects, as of high trees or clouds, that instant we must become vague and uncertain in drawing, and, though vivid in colour and light as the object itself, quite indistinct in form and feature.”

It is not necessary to be a professional draughtsman, or a water painter, to gain by this characteristic lesson in seeing and drawing water. Ruskin was a “seer,” in every cast of the word : and I do not know that one realises it in any pages of his more than in these two least considered drawing primers of his, which deal with the elements and principles of his art. That they do not give us his latest teaching, it is well finally to remember. He changed his opinion about the value of stippling, for instance ; and they should be read conjointly with his “ Laws of Fésole” (which was never completed) and other later books, if we would use them aright.

A STUDENT OF RUSKIN.

March 1907.

The following is a list of Ruskin’s published works :—

Ruskin’s first printed writings were contributions to the “‘ Magazine of Natural History,’’ 1834-6, and Poems in ‘‘ Friendship’s (ffering,” 1835, Oxford prize poem, ‘‘ Salsette and Elephanta,” 1839.

‘*Modern Painters,” Vol. I. 1843; 2nd. ed., 1844; 3rd ed., 1846—later ones followed ; Vol. II., 1846; Vol. III., 1856; Vol. IV., 1856; Vol. V., 1860. Selections from ‘‘ Modern Painters” include ‘‘ Frondes Agrestes,”’ 1875 ; ‘In Montibus Sanctis,” 1884 ; ‘¢Coeli Enarrant,” 1885 (see also p. xiii).

“Seven Lamps of Architecture,” 1849; second edition, 1855. ‘©The Scythian Guest,” 1849 (from ‘‘Friendship’s Offering”) ; “Poems,” 1850 (from ‘‘Friendship’s Offering,’ ‘‘ Amaranth,” “London Monthly Miscellany,” ‘‘ Keepsake,” Heath’s ‘‘ Book of Beauty,” with others not previously printed). ‘‘Stones of Venice,” Vol. I., 1851; second edition, 1858; Vol. II., 1853; second edition, 1867; Vol. III., 1853; second edition, 1867. “The King of the Golden River,” 1851; ‘‘ Notes on the Construction of Sheepfolds,” 1851 ; ‘‘ Examples of the Architecture of Venice,” 1851; ‘‘ Pre-Raphaelitism,” 1851; ‘‘The National Gallery,” 1852; ‘‘ Giotto and his works in Padua,” 3 parts, 1853, 1854, 1860; ‘‘ Lectures on Architecture and Painting,” 1854, 1855 ; “©The Opening of the Crystal Palace,” 1854; Pamphlet for the preservation of Ancient Buildings and Landmarks, 1854; ‘‘ Notes on the Royal Academy,” No. I., 1855 (three editions); No, II.,

A2 x Introduction

Power of the tree is not in that chandelier-like section. It is in the dark, flat, solid tables of leafage, which it holds out on its strong arms, curved slightly over them like shields, and spreading towards the extremity like a hand. Itis vain to endeavour to paint the sharp, grassy, intricate leafage, until this ruling form has been secured ; and in the boughs that approach the spectator, the foreshortening of it is lke that of a wide hill country, ridge just rising over ridge in successive distances ; and the finger-like extremities, foreshortened to absolute bluntness, require a delicacy in the rendering of them like that of the drawing of the hand of the Magdalene upon the vase in Mr. Rogers’s Titian. Get but the back of that foliage, and you have the tree; but I cannot name the artist who has thoroughly felt it.” Compare this fine relation of the Power of the Tree, with what is said of its Unity, in his section (in Letter III) on Radiation. The other passage supplements the wonderful pages on Water and its illusions and depiction in Letter II :—

“There is, perhaps, nothing which tells more in the drawing of water than decisive and swift execution ; for, in a rapid touch the hand naturally falls into the very curve of projection which is the absolute truth; while in slow finish, all precision of curve and character is certain to be lost except under the hand of an unusually powerful master... .

“T believe it is a result of the experience of all artists, that it is the easiest thing in the world to give a certain degree of depth and transparency to water; but that it is next thing to impossible, to give a full impression of surface. If no reflection be given—a ripple being supposed—the water looks like lead: if reflection be given, it in nine cases out of ten, looks mordzdly clear and deep. . . . Now, this difficulty arises from the very same circumstance which occasions the frequent failure in effect of the best drawn foregrounds, the change, namely of focus necessary in the eye in order to receive rays of light coming from different distances. Go to the edge of a pond, in a perfectly calm day, at some place where there is duck-weed floating on the surface,—not thick, but a leaf here and there. Now, you may either see in the water the reflection of the sky, or you may see the duck-weed ; but you cannot, by any effort, see both together. ... Hence it appears, that whenever we see plain reflections of comparatively distant objects, in near water, we cannot possibly see the surface, and vice versa. ... Hence, the ordinary effect of water is only to be rendered by giving the reflections of the margin clear and distinct (so clear they usually are in

Bibliography x1 nature, that is impossible to tell where the water begins) ; but the moment we touch the reflection of distant objects, as of high trees or clouds, that instant we must become vague and uncertain in drawing, and, though vivid in colour and light as the object itself, quite indistinct in form and feature.”

It is not necessary to be a professional draughtsman, or a water painter, to gain by this characteristic lesson in seeing and drawing water. Ruskin was a “seer,” in every cast of the word : and I do not know that one realises it in any pages of his more than in these two least considered drawing primers of his, which deal with the elements and principles of his art. That they do not give us his latest teaching, it is well finally to remember. He changed his opinion about the value of stippling, for instance ; and they should be read conjointly with his “ Laws of Fésole” (which was never completed) and other later books, if we would use them aright.

A STUDENT OF RUSKIN.

March 1907.

The following is a list of Ruskin’s published works :—

Ruskin’s first printed writings were contributions to the ‘“‘ Magazine of Natural History,”’ 1834-6, and Poems in ‘‘ Friendship’s ()ffering,” 1835, Oxford prize poem, ‘‘ Salsette and Elephanta,” 1839.

‘Modern Painters,” Vol. I. 1843; 2nd. ed., 1844; 3rd ed., 1846—later ones followed ; Vol. II., 1846; Vol. III., 1856; Vol. IV., 1856; Vol. V., 1860. Selections from ‘‘ Modern Painters” include ‘‘ Frondes Agrestes,” 1875 ; ‘In Montibus Sanctis,” 1884 ; ‘*Cceli Enarrant,” 1885 (see also p. xiii).

“Seven Lamps of Architecture,” 1849; second edition, 1855. “The Scythian Guest,” 1849 (from ‘‘Friendship’s Offering”’) ; “*Poems,” 1850 (from ‘‘Friendship’s Offering,” ‘‘ Amaranth,” London Monthly Miscellany,” ‘‘ Keepsake,” Heath’s ‘‘ Book of Beauty,” with others not previously printed). ‘‘Stones of Venice,” Vol. I., 18515 second edition, 1858; Vol. II., 1853; second edition; 1867; Vol. III., 1853; second edition, 1867. “The King of the Golden River,” 1851; ‘‘ Notes on the Construction of Sheepfolds,” 1851 ; ‘‘ Examples of the Architecture of Venice,” 1851; ‘‘ Pre-Raphaelitism,” 1851; ‘The National Gallery,” 1852; ‘‘ Giotto and his works in Padua,” 3 parts, 1853, 1854, 1860; ‘‘ Lectures on Architecture and Painting,” 1854, 1855 ; ‘“*The Opening of the Crystal Palace,” 1854; Pamphlet for the preservation of Ancient Buildings and Landmarks, 1854; ‘‘ Notes on the Royal Academy,” No. I., 1855 (three editions); No. II.,

A 2

Xl Bibliography

1856 (six editions); No. III. (four editions), 1857 (two editions) ; Nos. IV., V. and VI., 1858, 1859, 1875; ‘“‘The Harbours of England,” 1856, 1857, 1859; ‘‘ Notes on the Turner Gallery at Marlborough House,” 1856-7 (several editions in 1857); ‘‘Catalogue of the Turner Sketches in the National Gallery,” 1857 (two editions) ; ‘*Catalogue of Turner’s Drawings,” 1857-8 ; “The Elements of Drawing,” 1857 (two editions) ; ‘* The Political Economy of Art,” 1857, published in 1880 as ‘‘A Joy for Ever”; ‘‘Inaugural Addresses at the Cambridge School of Art,”’ 1858; ‘‘The Geology of Chamouni,” 1858; ‘‘The Oxford Museum,” 1859; ‘‘The Unity of Art,” 1859; “ The Two Paths,” 1859; ‘‘Elements of Perspective,” 1859; ‘‘ Tree Twigs,” 1861 ; “‘Catalogue of Turner Drawings presented to the Fitzwilliam Museum,” 1861; ‘‘ Unto this Last,” 1862 (from the ‘‘ Cornhill Magazine”); ‘‘ Forms of the Stratified Alps of Savoy,” 1863 ; ‘‘ The Queen’s Gardens,” 1864; ‘‘ Sesame and Lilies,” 1865 (two editions) ; “¢ The Ethics of the Dust,” 1866; ‘‘ The Crown of Wild Olive,” 1866 (two editions); ‘‘ War,” 1866; ‘‘Time and Tide,” 1867 ; “‘ Leoni, a legend of Italy,” 1868 (from ‘‘ Friendship’s Offering ”) ; ** Notes on the Employment of the Destitute and Criminal Classes,” 1868; ‘‘References to Paintings in illustration of Flamboyant Architecture,” 1869; ‘‘The Mystery of Life and its Arts” (afternoon lectures), 1869; ‘‘The Queen of the Air,” 1869 (two editions); ‘‘The Future of England,” 1870; ‘‘Samuel Prout,” 1870 (from “The Art Journal”); ‘‘ Verona and its Rivers,” 1870; ‘‘Lectures on Art,” 1870; ‘‘ Drawings and Photographs iliustrative of the Architecture of Verona,’ 1870; ‘‘ Fors Clavigera,” 1871-84; ‘‘Munera Pulveris,” 1872; ‘* Aratra Pentelici,” 1872; “‘Instructions in Elementary Drawing,” 1872; ‘‘ The Relation between Michael Angelo and Tintoret,” 1872; ‘‘The Eagle’s Nest,” 1872; ‘‘Monuments of the Cavalli Family,” 1872 ; “The Nature and Authority of Miracle” (from the ‘‘Contemporary Review”), 1873; ‘‘Val D’Arno,” 1874 ; ‘‘ Mornings in Florence” (in parts), 1875-7; ‘‘Proserpina” (in parts), 1875- 86; Vol.

I., 1879; ‘‘Deucalion” (in parts), 1875-83; Vol. L., 1879; Vol. II. (two parts only), 1880, 1883 ; ‘‘ Ariadne Florentina,” 1876 ; ‘‘ Letters to the ‘Times’ on Pre-Raphaelite Pictures in the Exhibition of 1854,” 1876; ‘* Yewdale and its Streamlets,” 1877 ; «St. Mark’s Rest” (3 parts), 1877-9, 1884; ‘‘ Guide to Pictures in the Academy of Arts, Venice,” 1877; ‘‘ Notes on the Turner Exhibition,” 1878 ; ‘‘‘lhe Laws of Fésole” (four parts, 1877-8), 1879 ; ‘Notes on the Prout and Hunt Exhibition,” 1879-80 ; “* Circular respecting the Memorial Studies at St. Mark’s,’’ 1879-80 ; “* Letters to the Clergy” (Lord’s Prayer and the Church), 1879, 1880; ‘* Arrows of the Chace,’’ 2 vols., 1880; ‘‘ Elements of English Prosody,” 1880; ‘‘The Bible of Amiens,” 1884 (first published in parts) ; ‘* Love’s Meinie” (Lectures delivered at Oxford, 1873-81), 1881; ‘Catalogue of Drawings and Sketches by Turner in the National Gallery,” 1881; ‘Catalogue of Silicious Minerals ere

Bibliography Xill at St. David’s School, Reigate,” 1883; ‘‘The Art of England,” 1884 (originally published as separate lectures) ; ‘‘ The Storm Cloud of the Nineteenth Century,” 1884; ‘Catalogue of Specimens of Silica in the British Museum,” 1884; ‘‘ Catalogue of Minerals given to Kirkcudbright Museum,” 1884; ‘‘The Pleasures of Engiand” (Lectures delivered), 1884-5; ‘*On the Old Road,” contributions to Periodical Literature, 2 vols., 1885; ‘‘ Preeterita,” 3 vols., 1885-9; ‘‘ Dilecta,” 1886-87; ‘‘ Hortus Inclusus,” 1887 ; **Kuskiniana,” 1890-92; ‘‘Poems” (Complete edition), 1891 ; -** Poetry of Architecture,” 1892 (from the ‘ Architectural Magazine’”’).

“*Stray Letters toa London Bibliophile,” 1892; ‘‘ Letters upon Subjects of General Interest to various Correspondents,” 1892 ; “* Letters to William Ward,” 1893; ‘‘ Letters addressed to a College Friend,” 1894; Separate Collections of Letters, edited by T. J. Wise, were published 1894, 1895, 1896, and 1897; ‘‘ Letters to Charles Eliot Norton,” edited by C. E. Norton, 1897 ; ‘‘ Lectures on Landscape,” 1897 ; ‘‘ Letters to Mary and Helen Gladstone,” 1903.

Works, in eleven volumes, 1871-83; Complete revised edition of ‘Modern Painters,” with Bibliography, Notes, etc. (6 vols. ), 1888; ‘‘ The Life and Letters and Complete Works,” Library Edition, edited by E. T. Cook and A. Wedderburn, 1903, etc., in about 38 volumes.

For Life, see also W. G. Collingwood: ‘‘John Ruskin, a Biographical Outline,” 1889; ‘‘ Life and Work of John Ruskin,” 1893 ; ‘‘ Life of John Ruskin,” 1900; Frederic Harrison: ‘‘ English Men of Letters,” 1902.

-PREFACE

[TO ORIGINAL EDITION OF 1857]

It may perhaps be thought, that in prefacing a manual of drawing, I ought to expatiate on the reasons why drawing should be learned ; but those reasons appear to me so many and so weighty, that I cannot quickly state or enforce them. With the reader’s permission, as this volume is too large already, I will waive all discussion respecting the importance of the subject, and touch only on those points which may appear questionable in the method of its treatment.

In the first place, the book is not calculated for the use of children under the age of twelve or fourteen. I do not think it advisable to engage a child in any but the most voluntary practice of art. Ifit has talent for drawing, it will be continually scrawling on what paper it can get ; and should be allowed to scrawl at its own free will, due praise being given for every appearance of care, or truth, in its efforts. It should be allowed to amuse itself with cheap colours almost as soon as it has sense enough to wish for them. If it merely daubs the paper with shapeless stains, the colour-box may be taken away till it knows better : but as soon as it begins painting red coats on soldiers, striped flags to ships, &c., it should have colours at command; and, without restraining its choice of subject in that imaginative and historical art, of a military tendency, which children delight in, (generally quite as valuable, by the way, as any historical art delighted in by their elders,) it should be gently led by the parents to try to draw, in such childish fashion as may be, the things it can see and likes,—birds, or butterflies, or flowers, or fruit. In later years, the indulgence of using the colour should only be granted as a reward, after it has shown care and progress in its drawings with pencil. A limited number of good and amusing prints should always be within a boy’s reach: in these days of cheap illustration he can hardly possess a volume of nursery tales without good woodcuts in it, and should be encouraged to copy what he likes best of this kind ; but should be firmly restricted to a few prints and to a few books. If a child has many toys, it will get tired of them and break them ; if a boy has many prints he will merely dawdle and scrawl over them ; it is by the limitation of the

xv

XV1 Preface number of his possessions that his pleasure in them is perfected, and his attention concentrated. The parents need give themselves no trouble in instructing him, as far as drawing is concerned, beyond insisting upon economical and neat habits with his colours and paper, showing him the best way of holding pencil and rule, and, so far as they take notice of his work, pointing out where a line is too short or too long, or too crooked, when compared with the copy ; accuracy being the first and last thing they look for. If the child shows talent for inventing or grouping figures, the parents should neither check, nor praise it. They may laugh with it frankly, or show pleasure in what it has done, just as they show pleasure in seeing it well, or cheerful ; but they must not praise it for being clever, any more than they would praise it for being stout. They should praise it only for what costs it selfdenial, namely attention and hard work; otherwise they will make it work for vanity’s sake, and always badly. The best books to put into its hands are those illustrated by George Cruikshank or by Richter. (See Appendix.) At about the age of twelve or fourteen, it 1s quite time enough to set youth or girl to serious work; and then this book will, I think, be useful to them ; and I have good hope it may be so, likewise, to persons of more advanced age wishing to know something of the first principles of art.

Yet observe, that the method of study recommended is not brought forward as absolutely the best, but only as the best which I can at present devise for an isolated student. It is very likely that farther experience in teaching may enable me to modify it with advantage in several important respects ; but I am sure the main principles of it are sound, and most of the exercises as useful as they can be rendered without a master’s superintendence. The method differs, however, so niaterially from that generally adopted by drawing-masters, that a word or two of explanation may be needed to justify what might otherwise be thought wilful eccentricity.

The manuals at present published on the subject of drawing are all directed, as far as I know, to one or other of two objects. Either they propose to give the student a power of dexterous sketching with pencil or water-colour, so as to emulate (at considerable distance) the slighter work of our second-rate artists; or they propose to give him such accurate command of mathematical forms as may afterwards enable him to design rapidly and cheaply for manufactures. When drawing is taught as an accomplishment, the first is the aim usually proposed ; while the second is the object kept chiefly

Preface XVil in view at Marlborough House, and in the branch Government Schools of Design. _ Of the fitness of the modes of study adopted in those schools, to the end specially intended, judgment is hardly yet possible ; only, it seems to me, that we are all too much in the habit of confusing art as afpléed to manufacture, with -manufacture itself. For instance, the skill by which an inventive workman designs and moulds a beautiful cup, is skill of true art; but the skill by which that cup is copied and afterwards multiplied a thousandfold, is skill of manufacture: and the faculties which enable one workman to design and elaborate his original piece, are not to be developed by the same system of instruction as those which enable another to produce a maximum number of approximate copies of it in a giventime. Farther: it is surely inexpedient that any reference to purposes of manufacture should interfere with the education of the artist himself. Try first to manufacture a Raphael; then let Raphael direct your manufacture. He will design you a plate, or cup, or a house, or a palace, whenever you want it, and design them in the most convenient and rational way ; but do not let your anxiety to reach the platter and the cup interfere with your education of the Raphael. Obtain first the best work you can, and the ablest hands, irrespective of any consideration of economy or facility of production. Then leave your trained artist to determine how far art can be popularised, or manufacture ennobled. Now, I believe that (irrespective of differences in individual temper and character) the excellence of an artist, as such, depends wholly on refinement of perception, and that it is this, mainly, which a master or a school can teach; so that while powers of invention distinguish man from man, powers of perception distinguish school from school. All great schools enforce delicacy of drawing and subtlety of sight : and the only rule which I have, as yet, found to be without exception respecting art, is that all great art is delicate. Therefore, the chief aim and bent of the following system is to obtain, first, a perfectly patient, and, to the utmost of the pupil’s power, a delicate method of work, such as may ensure his seeing truly. For I am nearly convinced, that when once we see keenly enough there is very little difficulty in drawing what we see; but, even supposing that this difficulty be still great, 1 believe that the sight is a more important thing than the drawing ; and I would rather teach drawing that my pupils may learn to love Nature, than teach the looking at Nature that they may learn to draw. It is