On the Old Road Volume Ii Part 2

Would you also include, in the National Gallery, what may be called the handicraft of a nation--works for domestic use or ornament? For instance, we know that there were some salt-cellars designed for one of the Popes; would you have those if they came to us?--Everything, pots and pans, and salt-cellars, and knives.

You would have everything that had an interesting art element in it?--Yes.

_Dean of St. Paul's._ In short, a modern Pompeian Gallery?--Yes; I know how much greater extent that involves, but I think that you should include all the iron work, and china, and pottery, and so on. I think that all works in metal, all works in clay, all works in carved wood, should be included. Of course, that involves much. It involves all the coins--it involves an immense extent.

134. Supposing it were impossible to concenter in one great museum the whole of these things, where should you prefer to draw the line? Would you draw the line between what I may call the ancient Pagan world and the modern Christian world, and so leave, to what may be called the ancient world, all the ancient sculpture, and any fragments of ancient painting which there might be--all the vases, all the ancient bronzes, and, in short, everything which comes down to a certain period? Do you think that that would be the best division, or should you prefer any division which takes special arts, and keeps those arts together?--I should like the Pagan and Christian division. I think it very essential that wherever the sculpture of a nation was, there its iron work should be--that wherever its iron work was, there its pottery should be, and so on.

And you would keep the mediaeval works together, in whatever form those mediaeval works existed?--Yes; I should not at all feel injured by having to take a cab-drive from one century to another century.

Or from the ancient to the modern world?--No.

_Mr. Richmond._ If it were found convenient to keep separate the Pagan and the Christian art, with which would you a.s.sociate the mediaeval?--By "Christian and Pagan Art" I mean, before Christ and after Christ.

Then the mediaeval would come with the paintings?--Yes; and also the Mahomedan, and all the Pagan art which was after Christ, I should a.s.sociate as part, and a most essential part, because it seems to me that the history of Christianity is complicated perpetually with that which Christianity was effecting. Therefore, it is a matter of date, not of Christianity. Everything before Christ I should be glad to see separated, or you may take any other date that you like.

But the inspiration of the two schools--the Pagan and the Christian--seems so different, that there would be no great violence done to the true theory of a National Gallery in dividing these two, would there, if each were made complete in itself?--That is to say, taking the spirit of the world after Christianity was in it, and the spirit of the world before Christianity was in it.

_Dean of St. Paul's._ The birth of Christ, you say, is the commencement of Christian art?--Yes.

Then Christian influence began, and, of course, that would leave a small debatable ground, particularly among the ivories for instance, which we must settle according to circ.u.mstances?--Wide of any debatable ground, all the art of a nation which had never heard of Christianity, the Hindoo art and so on, would, I suppose, if of the Christian era, go into the Christian gallery.

I was speaking rather of the transition period, which, of course, there must be?--Yes.

_Mr. c.o.c.kerell._ There must be a distinction between the terms "museum"

and "gallery." What are the distinctions which you would draw in the present case?--I should think "museum" was the right name of the whole building. A "gallery" is, I think, merely a room in a museum adapted for the exhibition of works in a series, whose effect depends upon their collateral showing forth.

135. There are certainly persons who would derive their chief advantage from the historical and chronological arrangement which you propose, but there are others who look alone for the beautiful, and who say, "I have nothing to do with your pedantry. I desire to have the beautiful before me. Show me those complete and perfect works which are received and known as the works of Phidias and the great Greek masters as far as we possess them, and the works of the great Italian painters. I have not time, nor does my genius permit that I should trouble myself with those details." There is a large cla.s.s who are guided by those feelings?--And I hope who always will be guided by them; but I should consult their feelings enough in the setting before them of the most beautiful works of art. All that I should beg of them to yield to me would be that they should look at t.i.tian only, or at Raphael only, and not wish to have t.i.tian and Raphael side by side; and I think I should be able to teach them, as a matter of beauty, that they did enjoy t.i.tian and Raphael alone better than mingled. Then I would provide them beautiful galleries full of the most-n.o.ble sculpture. Whenever we come as a country and a nation to provide beautiful sculpture, it seems to me that the greatest pains should be taken to set it off beautifully. You should have beautiful sculpture in the middle of the room, with dark walls round it to throw out its profile, and you should have all the arrangements made there so as to harmonize with it, and to set forth every line of it. So the painting gallery, I think, might be made a glorious thing, if the pictures were level, and the architecture above produced unity of impression from the beauty and glow of color and the purity of form.

_Mr. Richmond._ And you would not exclude a Crevelli because it was quaint, or an early master of any school--you would have the infancy, the youth, and the age, of each school, would you not?--Certainly.

_Dean of St. Paul's._ Of the German as well as the Italian?--Yes.

_Mr. Richmond._ Spanish, and all the schools?--Certainly.

136. _Mr. c.o.c.kerell._ You are quite aware of the great liberality of the Government, as we learn from the papers, in a recent instance, namely, the purchase of a great Paul Veronese?--I am rejoiced to hear it. If it is confirmed, nothing will have given me such pleasure for a long time.

I think it is the most precious Paul Veronese in the world, as far as the completion of the picture goes, and quite a priceless picture.

Can you conceive a Government, or a people, who would countenance so expensive a purchase, condescending to take up with the occupation of the upper story of some public building, or with an expedient which should not be entirely worthy of such a n.o.ble Gallery of Pictures?--I do not think that they ought to do so; but I do not know how far they will be consistent. I certainly think they ought not to put up with any such expedient. I am not prepared to say what limits there are to consistency or inconsistency.

_Mr. Richmond._ I understand you to have given in evidence that you think a National Collection should be ill.u.s.trative of the whole art in all its branches?--Certainly.

Not a cabinet of paintings, not a collection of sculptured works, but ill.u.s.trative of the whole art?--Yes.

137. Have you any further remark to offer to the Commissioners?--I wish to say one word respecting the question of the restoration of statuary.

It seems to me a very simple question. Much harm is being at present done in Europe by restoration, more harm than was ever done, as far as I know, by revolutions or by wars. The French are now doing great harm to their cathedrals, under the idea that they are doing good, destroying more than all the good they are doing. And all this proceeds from the one great mistake of supposing that sculpture can be restored when it is injured. I am very much interested by the question which one of the Commissioners asked me in that respect; and I would suggest whether it does not seem easy to avoid all questions of that kind. If the statue is injured, leave it so, but provide a perfect copy of the statue in its restored form; offer, if you like, prizes to sculptors for conjectural restorations, and choose the most beautiful, but do not touch the original work.

138. _Professor Faraday._ You said some time ago that in your own attempts to instruct the public there had not been time yet to see whether the course taken had produced improvement or not. You see no signs at all which lead you to suppose that it will not produce the improvement which you desire?--Far from it--I understood the Dean of St.

Paul's to ask me whether any general effect had been produced upon the minds of the public. I have only been teaching a cla.s.s of about forty workmen for a couple of years, after their work--they not always attending--and that forty being composed of people pa.s.sing away and coming again; and I do not know what they are now doing; I only see a gradual succession of men in my own cla.s.s. I rather take them in an elementary cla.s.s, and pa.s.s them to a master in a higher cla.s.s. But I have the greatest delight in the progress which these men have made, so far as I have seen it; and I have not the least doubt that great things will be done with respect to them.

_Chairman._ Will you state precisely what position you hold?--I am master of the Elementary and Landscape School of Drawing at the Working Men's College in Great Ormond Street. My efforts are directed not to making a carpenter an artist, but to making him happier as a carpenter.

NOTE.--The following a.n.a.lysis of the above evidence was given in the Index to the Report (p. 184).--ED.

114-5-6. Sculpture and painting should be combined under same roof, not in same room.--Sculpture disciplines the eye to appreciate painting.--But, if in same room, disturbs the mind.--Tribune at Florence arranged too much for show--Sculpture not to be regarded as _decorative_ of a room.--National Gallery should include works of all kinds of art _of all ages_, arranged chronologically (_cf._ 132). Mediaeval sculpture should go with painting, if it is found impossible to combine art of all ages.

117-8. Pictures should be protected by gla.s.s in every case. It makes them more beautiful, independently of the preservation,--Gla.s.s is not merely expedient, but essential.--Pictures are permanently injured by dirt.

119-20-21. First-rate large pictures should have a room to themselves, and a gallery round them.--Pictures must be hung on a line with the eye.--In one, or at most two, lines.--In the Salon Carre at the Louvre the effect is magnificent, but details of pictures cannot be seen.

122. Galleries should be decorated not splendidly, but pleasantly.

123. Great importance of chronological arrangement. Art the truest history (_cf._ 125 and 132).

124. Best works of inferior artists to be secured.

125. All the works of a painter, however incongruous their subjects, to be exhibited in juxtaposition.

126. Love of detail in pictures among workmen.--Great refinement of their perceptions.

127. Accessibility of new National Gallery.

128. There should be two galleries--one containing gems, placed in as _safe_ a position as possible; the other containing works good, but inferior to the highest, and located solely with a view to accessibility.

129. Impossible to protect _sculpture_ from London atmosphere.

130. Inferior gallery would be useful as an instructor.--In this respect superior to the great gallery.

131-32. _Copies_ of paintings much to be deprecated.

133. Good collection of casts a valuable addition to a national gallery.--Also architectural fragments and ill.u.s.trations.--And everything which involves art.

134. If it is impossible to combine works of art of all ages, the Pagan and Christian division is the best.--"Christian" art including _all_ art subsequent to the birth of Christ.

135. Great importance of arranging and setting off sculpture.

136. Recent purchase by Government of the great Paul Veronese.

137. "Restoring" abroad.

138. Witness is Master of the Elementary and Landscape School of Drawing at the Working Men's College in Great Ormond Street.--Progress made by students highly satisfactory.

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 1: This evidence, given by Mr. Ruskin as stated above, is reprinted from the Report of the National Gallery Site Commission.

London: Harrison and Sons. 1857. Pp. 92-7. Questions 2392-2504. The Commission consisted of Lord Broughton (chairman), Dean Milman, Professor Faraday, Mr. c.o.c.kerell, R.A., and Mr. George Richmond, all of whom were present on the occasion of Mr. Ruskin giving his evidence.--ED.]