|
|
|
Chapter 6 - Critics Preempt the Exhibition
Partington
Has Ample Faith in Black and White
by Chronicle writer J. H. E Partington
The “Chronicle” exhibit of original newspaper drawings this day opened
to the public at 424 Pine street marks an era in the history of art in
San Francisco and is likely to have a profound impression on the public
and the artists of the city. One thing is quite clear that the artists
or, to speak more accurately, the painter in oil and water colors, has
got to accept the fact that his exclusive claim to the title of artist
is now triumphantly disputed by a band of newspaper art workers, growing
every day in power and popularity and quite capable of proving their
right to the name.
It will not do any longer to deny that men who have such mastery of
line, of drawing, of values, of composition and of dramatic power in
telling a story as Keller or Jefferys of the New York Herald, as
Trowbridge and W. O. Wilson of the New York World, as Miss Underwood of
the New York Press, as Gruger of the Philadelphia Ledger, as Fiala of
the Brooklyn Eagle and a score of others represented in this exhibition
are infinitely ahead of the average painters of the country in artistic
gifts and capacity. The matter will settle itself in the mind of any
fair-judging painter or connoisseur who will ask himself the question: –
Could the American Nation, with any true regard for its artistic
interests, judiciously exchange the black-and-white work produced only
last year by E. A. Ashley, C. D. Gibson, Robert Blum, A. B. Frost, E. W.
Kemple, Frederic Remington and A. B. Wenzell for the whole product of
the oil and water color painters’ arts produced during the last five
years in all the cities of the Republic, including the pictures of
Sargent and Chase? We know that the art lovers of America would cry out
“No” with a sound that could be heard from New York to San Francisco. We
painters, I say, have got to climb down to actual facts, to admit that
black-and-white are is here to stay, and that it is now exercising an
immensely greater artistic influence upon the people than all the annual
exhibitions of the painters’ arts in every State of the Union.
I am intensely curious to know what the general effect of this
exhibition will be on the public. Two or three things are inevitable.
The average citizen will have a much higher estimate in future of the
newspaper artist than he has had hitherto. When he sees the superb
drawings of the many able men represented in the exhibition he will
probably exclaim, “And are these lovely pictures really the originals of
the illustrations one sees in the daily papers? How does the tremendous
difference come about?”
He knows nothing of the difficulties of etching, “biting,” “routing,”
and knows nothing as to paper, printer’s ink, of Stereotyping and so
will have hard work to recognize in the line of art of the originals the
manifold imperfections of the newspaper “cut.” And when he gets to know
that the high qualities of the drawing can be reproduced, he will be apt
to insist that newspaper proprietors shall supply him with pictures such
as these and he will get his wish in the long run.
The average citizen will shortly demand more pictures and less writing
in his daily journal. When he sees with what force fidelity and brevity
a story can be told in an illustration, he will come to demand that it
be told in that way.
An Oakland banker said to me recently, “I am too busy to read
newspapers. Those illustrations give me nearly all I need to know.”
Joaquin Miller, in a lecture delivered to our students, averred that in
a very few years the newspapers and magazine artists would be the poets,
dramatists, and novelists of the Nation, and that the writer should be
simply employed to help fill a few inevitable holes. A journalism
student of mine suggests also that it is at least half so easy to be in
a picture as in a paragraph.
The great effect of the exhibition on the average citizen will be that
he will buy these pictures. We shall have collections of newspaper and
magazine art in private homes of which the owners will be justly proud.
Why Not? The excellent quality of the art of these drawings will ensure
their sale at good prices, and so we shall add to the treasures, the
sweetness and the light of the city and make San Francisco a much better
place to live in.
* * * * *
William
Keith Picks Out Some Striking Pictures
by Chronicle writer William Keith It
had never struck me that an exhibition of black and white could be so
interesting, but then Raphael and all those old fellows worked in black
and white. I tell you that Trowbridge’s faces, for instance, represent
the faces of the men around the cockpit.
The sickroom scene by Hyde, also in the New York World exhibit, is an
unusually good thing. J. C. Freeman has a very good portrait of a man.
Marchand’s things are catchy, but not so firm and masterful as
Trowbridge’s.
The rescue of a drowning lad by Foraker is a good thing artistically
created.
In portraiture I like Howes portrait of McKinley. This is a New York
Tribune picture, and it’s pretty good in that line. Ashley of New
Bedford, Mass., has some pleasing marines and landscapes. They are
hidden away and are too small to be conspicuous, but they are well worth
owning. The one of Buzzard’s Bay is specially good. Even Cleveland’s
enemies may like that, for it’s a good thing.
In the New York Herald’s exhibit I like best the imaginative wash
drawing by Ashe, called “Twas all a Dream.” It is well done, indeed.
The thing that strikes me in this Eastern work is the boldness and
firmness of the lines as well as the artistic treatment of subjects,
often commonplace, and now and then sensational. They are drawings made
for a day, but they are so good that the deserve to live.
The exhibition cannot be less than interesting and instructive to
everybody. To a painter it’s interesting to see differences of texture
plainly indicated with nothing but black and white. There’s tint in
these things too, and plenty of feeling and dash. The figures are
natural and often very graceful.
In spite of all these good things from New York, the local artists have
no reason to be ashamed. There’s a drawing of Mr. And Mrs. Fitzsimmons
by Lyon that I like very much. Some of Newberry’s cartoons are
exceedingly well drawn, and there’s a pen portrait of “Little Pete” by
Blen Campbell which is above the ordinary. Campbell has some other
things that I fancy.
The show is so surprisingly good that it should attract all picture
lovers.
* * * * *
Pictures
That Caught Amedee Joullin’s Fancy
by Chronicle writer Amedee Joullin As
a whole, I am amazed to see how very favorably, indeed, the San
Francisco drawings compare with the Eastern exhibits. The local black
and white men have nothing to be ashamed of.
To my mind the last piece of individual work in the exhibition is a
little thing by Marchand of the New York World. It is of a group of four
figures examining a chart in a ship’s cabin. It is artistic, the figures
are nicely indicated and the two male figures are particularly good.
Nothing is overdone in it. The female figure is a bit stiff, but, as a
whole, it is excellent.
The sketch of school children, coming from school by Trowbridge is
strongly reminiscent of Gibson. I like the tint of it and the feeling. I
prefer it to the crowds for which Trowbridge is famous. Some of the
figures in these are stiff, and I do not like them as well as the
children. Still, all of his work is good.
In Kemp’s drawing for the “poor dinner” there is a great deal of
character. It is quite out of the ordinary and very artistically
treated. Ryder’s queer work with a double pen makes one feel dizzy, but
it is unique.
“The Eviction” by Marchand is also very good, but not as well handled
as the scene on shipboard. Marchand is specially noted for his
composition.
Sandford of the St. Louis Republic has some good things, especially his
leap year scene in [an] opera-house, which is strong and suggestive of
Gibson.
“Shan” of the Washington Evening Star has two good things,
illustrations for “Heard and Seen.” They are very several excellent
things. I like especially his illustration for “The Mutable Many.” There
is character in it. He has some very good cartoons, too, especially one
of Bryan drawing a bomb about to explode, and one of Ralney and Phelan
wading out of a pond.
Davenport’s impressions of Chinese at the Midwinter Fair are very good,
but sketchy. Newberry’s scene from a play is very nicely treated and is
attractive.
The exhibition is one that should appeal to art lovers. It is
instructive, indeed, and shows the immense improvement made in later
years. I notice a lack of good buildings among the drawings and of
notable portraits, but I suppose the editors considered scenes and genre
work more attractive. Some of the pictures are hurriedly done and were
for a present purpose, but even these show artistic handling and
treatment besides good workmanship.
Introduction
1. The Chronicle's
Exhibition of Pictorial Art in Journalism, by staff
2. A History of Art in
America, by Chronicle writer John Bonner
3. The Process of
Reproducing Images, by Chronicle writer John Bonner
4. America's Greatest
Newspapers, by Chronicle writer John Bonner
5. History of
Illustration among America's Major Newspapers, by Chronicle
writer John Bonner
6. Critics Preempt the
Exhibition
|
