But it is not enough in invention that the artist should restrain and keep under all the inferior parts of his subject; he must sometimes deviate from vulgar and strict historical truth in pursuing the grandeur of his design.
How much the great style exacts from its professors to conceive and represent their subjects in a poetical manner, not confined to mere matter of fact, may be seen in the cartoons of Raffaelle.In all the pictures in which the painter has represented the apostles, he has drawn them with great nobleness; he has given them as much dignity as the human figure is capable of receiving yet we are expressly told in Scripture they had no such respectable appearance; and of St.Paul in particular, we are told by himself, that his bodily presence was mean.Alexander is said to have been of a low stature:a painter ought not so to represent him.Agesilauswas low, lame, and of a mean appearance.None of these defects ought to appear in a piece of which he is the hero.In conformity to custom, I call this part of the art history painting; it ought to be called poetical, as in reality it is.
All this is not falsifying any fact; it is taking an allowed poetical licence.A painter of portraits retains the individual likeness; a painter of history shows the man by showing his actions.A painter must compensate the natural deficiencies of his art.He has but one sentence to utter, but one moment to exhibit.He cannot, like the poet or historian, expatiate, and impress the mind with great veneration for the character of the hero or saint he represents, though he lets us know at the same time that the saint was deformed, or the hero lame.The painter has no other means of giving an idea of the dignity of the mind, but by that external appearance which grandeur of thought does generally, though not always, impress on the countenance, and by that correspondence of figure to sentiment and situation which all men wish, but cannot command.The painter, who may in this one particular attain with ease what others desire in vain, ought to give all that he possibly can, since there are so many circumstances of true greatness that he cannot give at all.He cannot make his hero talk like a great man; he must make him look like one.For which reason he ought to be well studied in the analysis of those circumstances which constitute dignity of appearance in real life.
As in invention, so likewise in, expression, care must be taken not to run into particularities, Those expressions alone should be given to the figures which their respective situations generally produce.Nor is this enough; each person should also have that expression which men of his rank generally exhibit.The joy or the grief of a character of dignity is not to be expressed in the same manner as a similar passion in a vulgar face.Upon this principle Bernini, perhaps, may be subject to censure.This sculptor, in many respects admirable, has given a very mean expression to his statue of David, who is represented as just going to throw the stone from the sling; and in order to give it the expression of energy he has made him biting his under-lip.This expression is far from being general, and still farther from being dignified.He might have seen it inan instance or two, and he mistook accident for universality.
With respect to colouring, though it may appear at first a part of painting merely mechanical, yet it still has its rules, and those grounded upon that presiding principle which regulates both the great and the little in the study of a painter.By this, the first effect of the picture is produced; and as this is performed the spectator, as he walks the gallery, will stop, or pass along.To give a general air of grandeur at first view, all trifling or artful play of little lights or an attention to a variety of tints is to be avoided; a quietness and simplicity must reign over the whole work; to which a breadth of uniform and simple colour will very much contribute.Grandeur of effect is produced by two different ways, which seem entirely opposed to each other.One is, by reducing the colours to little more than chiaroscuro, which was often the practice of the Bolognian schools; and the other, by making the colours very distinct and forcible, such as we see in those of Rome and Florence; but still, the presiding principle of both those manners is simplicity.Certainly, nothing can be more simple than monotony, and the distinct blue, red, and yellow colours which are seen in the draperies of the Roman and Florentine schools, though they have not that kind of harmony which is produced by a variety of broken and transparent colours, have that effect of grandeur that was intended.Perhaps these distinct colours strike the mind more forcibly, from there not being any great union between them; as martial music, which is intended to rouse the noble passions, has its effect from the sudden and strongly marked transitions from one note to another, which that style of music requires; whilst in that which is intended to move the softer passions the notes imperceptibly melt into one another.
In the same manner as the historical painter never enters into the detail of colours, so neither does he debase his conceptions with minute attention to the discriminations of drapery.It is the inferior style that marks the variety of stuffs.With him, the clothing is neither woollen, nor linen, nor silk, satin, or velvet: it is drapery; it is nothing more.The art of disposing the foldings of the drapery make a very considerable part of the painter's study.To make it merely natural is a mechanical operation, to which neither genius or taste are required; whereas, it requires the nicestjudgment to dispose the drapery, so that the folds have an easy communication, and gracefully follow each other, with such natural negligence as to look like the effect of chance, and at the same time show the figure under it to the utmost advantage.
