NATURE 



[June 25, 1891 



I think that the general conditions of art training as 

 they exist at present absolutely bar any sufficient know- 

 ledge of the laws and conditions of natural phenomena 

 on the part of art students. 



The best art of the time has always been on a level with 

 the best science of the time, and if it had not happened 

 that the first schools and the first Universities clustered 

 round medical schools and schools of anatomy, I do not 

 think that so much attention would be given to-day to 

 anatomical science to the exclusion of all other branches. 



You see, then, it comes to this. It is conceded by the 

 art world that in a certain direction the phenomena of 

 Nature require to be studied, otherwise that tremendously 

 exuberant literature on Anatomy for Artists would not 

 have been written, and more than half of the time of 

 students of art would be spent in studying something else 

 rather than those things which they do study. 



It is on that ground that I would venture to say that in 

 other institutions, as in this one, the study of physical 

 science should be added to the other branches already 

 recognized by the art world. 



I am not an artist. I am not an art critic. I am almost 

 unacquainted with the language usually employed by 

 those who write on art subjects. I shall not deal with 

 opinions, the algebraical sum of which in relation to the 

 qualities of any one picture I have often noticed is zero ; 

 but what I shall try to do is to stick as closely as I can 

 tf the region of fact, and endeavour to show you, by two 

 or three individual instances, how a student who wishes 

 to become a great artist — as some of you no doubt do — 

 will find his or her ambition more likely to be realized 

 if the study of physical science be combined with that of 

 " Art as she is taught " to-day. 



In looking at the Academy Catalogue this year one 

 finds the motto, " La mission de I'art n'est pas de copier 

 la nature, mais de I'exprimer," and this is a true motto. 

 JJut let us analyze it a little. To " express " suggests a 

 language ; a language suggests a grammar, if it is to be 

 perfect, satisfying. But what can this grammar be, in the 

 case we are considering, but the laws underlying the phe- 

 nomena the "expression" of which, in his own language, 

 constitutes the life-work of the artist. Should he be con- 

 tent to show himself a bumpkin ? Are solecisms to be 

 pardoned in his expressions because, so far, scientific 

 training and thought are so limited .^ Is he justified in 

 relying upon the ignorance of mankind, and, if so, is the 

 highest art always to remain divorced from the highest 

 knowledge ? 



Now it so happens that the branch of physical science 

 which is above all things the thing to-be studied by artists, 

 isthebranchof itwhich is already familiar to you— namely, 

 optics. There could be no art without light ; no artists 

 without light ; and the whole work of an artist, from the 

 beginning to the end of his life, is to deal with light. Now 

 we live in a world of white light. We might live in a 

 blue world, or a green world, and then the condition of 

 things would be different ; but we can, in our laboratory, 

 make our world red or green for the moment ; but some- 

 times, indeed, when we do not seek to make this experi- 

 ment, we find the world changed for us by the means 

 which we employ for producing artificial lights, such as 

 candles, gas, or the electric light ; since in these, Colours 

 are not blended in the same way as in a sunbeam. 



We thus come to the question of the radiation of light, 

 and the way in which this light, whatever its quality, is re- 

 flected by natural objects ; it is by this reflection that we 

 see them. Everything that an artist paints which is white, 

 is painted white by him for the simple reason that it re- 

 flects sunlight complete. It is perfectly clear that any 

 reflecting surface can only reflect the light which it re- 

 ceives, although all surfaces do not reflect all of it — we 

 have red walls and green trees ; the direction of the light 

 is not changed, except in the way of reflection, and vou 

 are already acquainted wiih the imperative law of optics 

 NO. I 1 30, VOL. 44] 



—that when light falls upon a body and is reflected, the 

 angle of refliection is equal to the angle of incidence. 



To us this drastic law is of the very highest interest. 

 We can apply it to art in a great many ways, but I will 

 only take two very simple ones. Oftentimes it is our 

 fortune to be in the country by the side of a river, or at 

 the seaside. In both cases we see things reflected in 

 water, and at first sight it would seem that here the 

 artist ought to find perfectly free scope; but the worst 

 of it is that, though he has free scope, sometimes his 

 picture becomes very unpleasant to people who are ac- 

 quainted with the law I have stated. I find here some 

 diagrams, prepared by the kindness of some of our 

 friends, which will show you the intimate connection 

 between art and science in this direction. In the pictures 

 which you will see in the Royal Academy and the New 

 Gallery, I fancy you will see some which, if you care to 

 study them from this point of view, will be found not to 

 agree with the law. 



In the diagrams we have a surface of water and ob- 

 servers at the top and bottom of a cliff. We have on the 

 other side of this surface of water a tree. Now, what 

 anyone would do who disdains to " copy" Nature, and 

 who paints without thinking, is this : he would paint what 

 he saw on the bank, and then turn it upside down and 

 paint it again. But you see that will not do, because the 

 conditions are as you see them here. The higher spec- 

 tator, No. 1, the angles of incidence and reflection being 

 equal, although he can see the upper part of the tree and 

 part of thetrunkj.will not be able to see it all completely re- 

 flected in the water. You see that the lower part of the tree 

 cannot be seen in the reflection, because any light reflected 

 by it first to the water and then to the eye is really cut off 

 from the eye of the spectator by the bank ; if you greatly 

 vary your distance from the other side of the water, you will 

 find the reflection as represented in the other diagram. 

 Now, to anyone who has studied optics, if such a matter 

 as this is represented wrongly in a picture, it becomes an 

 intolerable nuisance, and when you go away you feel 

 sorry that the artist did not do justice to what he wished 

 to represent. A good example of truth to Nature in 

 this respect is to be seen at the German Exhibition-7-No. 

 205 — in one of the landscapes, which I saw last night ; it 

 is a beautiful instance of careful study, and is abso- 

 lutely true in this respect. The artist has shown how a 

 mountain side, with high lights upon it, reflected on the 

 surface of a lake, appears very different in the reflection, 

 in consequence of an intervening elevation near the edge 

 of the water. When you have thought out the difference 

 of the appearances on the lake and on the hillside, you 

 will appreciate the truth and skill of the artist enormously. 



Another serious fault arising from the neglect of this 

 same law is to be found in very many pictures in which 

 we get the reflection of the sun or moon in water. 



Obviously, if the water is disturbed, the reflection upon 

 the water must depend upon the direction of the disturb- 

 ance. I need not say more than that to you. You 

 will quite understand what I mean ; but if you look at 

 the pictures in the Royal Academy this year — Nos. 677, 

 107 1, and 1 1 55 — you can see how very admirably this 

 reflection can be rendered ; and if you look at 165 and 

 think the conditions out, you will wonder how the artist 

 should trouble to paint something that is absolutely 

 opposed to the physical law. 



You know that, in those instances where you get a 

 natural reflection, if the light source be beyond the object 

 which reflects the light, the nearer it is in a line with it 

 the more light will be reflected. You see that that rule 

 relates to almost every landscape or seascape that is 

 painted, for the reason that our air is filled with particles 

 which reflect light. If it were not so, our atmosphere 

 would be absolutely black. 



It therefore follows that the light of the sky must in- 

 crease in intensity as the sun or moon is approached — 



