112 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECTS JOURNAL. 



[April 



STYLES AND METHODS OF PAINTING SUITKD TO THE 

 DECORATION OF PUIiLIC BUILDINGS. 



By C. L. Easti.ake, II. X. 



Secretary to the Commissioners on llie Fine Arts. 



External Conditions of Works of Art. 



Tlie materials and dimensions of works of Art, and the situations and 

 lights for wliich tliey rnay be intended, are termed extirnal imuiitiotis ; as 

 di&lin{;iiished fnini the character of subjects, the aims of individual artists, 

 the tendencies of general taste, and similar influences. The former class 

 only, as afr^nling dt-fmile prounds for investigating and as suggesting 

 practical iuf«*rences. can here be considered.' 



Whatever be the external couditions, it is essential that the visible im- 

 l)ressit)a (if the work j-hould, iindtT the circumstances, be as complete as 

 possible. Tu insure this, not only tlie executive means, but the qualities 

 to be represented still require to be adapted or selected accordingly as 

 c(mdi(iuns vary. Such methods and resources constitute in each case a 

 specific and appropriate style ; the criterion of which is, that the amount 

 of excellence resulliug from it is unattainable in the same degree by any 

 otJier means. 



The (juestion respecting the relation of painting to external conditions is 

 not uuimportant in coupidering the tendencies and claims of dilferent 

 schools. In general, the great masters seem to have inquired what the 

 outward resources at their command could best elTect. Such a habit, 

 instead of confining, was rather calculated to enlarge their invention and 

 to vary its forms. The result of tlieir labours is the sulhcient ground of the 

 world's admiration ; but their docility cannot be duly appreciated without 

 a reference to the local circumstances under whicli they worked. 



An inquiry into the principles which may regidate such varieties of 

 style appears to be especially requisite when painting is employed in the 

 permanent decoration of public buildings, and may now be resumed with 

 a more direct object, as particular localities in the new Houses of Parlia- 

 ment approach their completion. In such furtlier invesiigatmn it may 

 sometimes be necessary to advert to the statements and illustrations that 

 have been before submitted. 



The conditions now proposed to be considered are — 



Dimensions^ Situation, Light, and the Means of Repreaentalion, 

 Large dimensions fin respect to the size of the entire painting), requiring 

 a correspnnding point of view ; the height at which the work may be 

 placed, requiring a distant point of view independently of dimensions ; 

 imperfect liglit ; and a method of painting posses>ing limited tectinical re- 

 sources, are all to be considered as causes of indistinctness,- requiring to 

 be counteracted by such means as the method of art adopted can command ; 

 by such means as may appear preferable on general grounds, and whicli, 

 supposing its practical difficulties overcome, may render that method tl-e 



fittest. 



The relation between the longest dimension of a picture, and the distance 

 from which the work requires to be viewed, may here require to be agaiu 

 remembered. Once and a half the extent of the longest dimension (whe- 

 ther in width or height is inimaterial)is the minimum of distance to which 

 the spectator can retire in order to see the entire surface. A circle cannot 

 be enibraced by the eye till the spectator retire to a distance equal to once 

 and a lialf its diameter. 



The law relating to the next cou<litiun is a necessary consequence of this, 

 lu some cases, tiie situation of a picture, independently of its dimensions, 

 may require that the work should be viewed at a considerable distance. 

 A painting placed opposite the eje, and measuring 14 feel high (such be- 

 ing assumed to be its longest dimension), would require, according to the 

 foregoing law, to be seen at a distance of 21 feet. But if the lower edge 

 of that painting be 2G feet fr<uii the ground, the spectator must retire to the 

 distance of at least (iO feet before the eye can * mbrace it; for a paiuting 

 equal to llie wliole height (40 feet) would require t'lat distance. 



Tills is the state of ilie case with regard to the compartments to be 

 painted in the House of Lords. They are 2G feet from the floor, and may 

 be reckoned to be about 14 feet high.*'* 



At the end opposite the throne, the compartments are in recesses, and will 

 be le.ss fully lighted. At tliis end, therefore, all the causes of indis- 

 tinctness above enumerated are lumbined, and may suggest a counter- 

 acting treatment in the paintings accordingly. 



If, oD the one hand, these considerations may f jrnish an answer to 

 those who look for finish and minuteness of detail in specimens of 

 fresco-painting that have reference to such a siluati(Ui ; it will be acknow- 

 ledged, on the other, that the general treatment which may be calculated 

 to correct the consequences of such conditions is a problem requiring 



» It has pot been thought necesssiry again to consider the question of the adaptalioii of 

 dlyle in p.iinling to that of the architeituie of tlie new H .uses of I'.4rlinri ent. It may be 

 BuffiL-ient. to rejieat that the Tudor style hi Kn^land is coeval ivith the bi-st e-xamples of 

 Italiiin art, anil that if Raphael had accepted the invitation of Henry VI 1 1, to visit this 

 eoinilfy, edilices eretted during or hefuie llie reipii uf Ihui nionarcli ini,ihl have betn 

 Hdorned with the great artist's wwrks. Second Iteport, p. (IO. Compare Fust Keport, 

 i>. lit. 



~ It 19 necessary to separate the causes from the renierlies of indistiiutnesa. A distant 

 point of view, whether the cnnsecpieme of thesiieofihe ivoik or ot its situation, is in 

 itself a cause of indistinctness ; tlie size of the objects represented, if cakulaied to coun- 

 teract this, is amon^ iherenriedies, but. it will appear, may sometimes be overlooked. 



8 The hei^rlit of the compHrtments to the point of the (Gothic) arch is IG feet j but the 

 picture, properly so called, uiay he considered to terminate two lect kwer. 



some experience to solve. Fortunately, a reference is possible to the 

 example of great artists under similar circumstances. 

 Dimensions. 



Tlie instances are not frequent in which the size of the objects repre- 

 sented on a large surface is too small for the distance which the size of 

 the entire painting requires. Ifaphael's tirst work in the Vatican, called 

 'Tlie Oispute of the Sacrament,' would be such an instance if the room 

 in which it is painted were large enough for the spectator to retire to the 

 requisite distance. This is not possible ; the w hole of the painting cannot 

 be embraced by the eye at once. The experiment can, however, easily be 

 made with the engraving; the small size of tiie figures, as compared with 

 that of the entire work, is then apparent. This imperfection, as is well 

 known, was rectified by the artist in his subsequent works in the 

 Vatican. 



Situntion.* 



The next condition — situation, without reference to dimensions, presents 

 greater dilliculty. Michael Angelo, after having painted the second com- 

 partment in the ceiling of the Si?tinc Chapel — about GO feet high — appears 

 to have found (as is, in fact, the case) that the size of the figures was in* 

 adequate to the distance at which they were to be seen. Comlivi relates 

 that the artist was on the puint of abandoning the work because of some 

 supposed defect in tlie lime ; but the real cause of his temporary dissalis- 

 factiou is apparent iu tlie subsequent change in his stjle; tlie figures in 

 the compartments last executed being more ihau thrice ihe size of those in 

 the first paintings.^ Thus, w halever nuiy be the dimensions of the picture 

 (and in ceilings the compartmeuts are commonly smaller than the distance 

 would require), the size of the figures must always have reference to the 

 place of the spectator." 



In this instance, therefore, although the space was scanned by an expe- 

 rienced e}e,lhe means emplo}ed to counteract the eflect of (he existing 

 conditions were miscalculated. The example shows tlie necessity of sim- 

 plicity, magnitude, and distinctness for works requiring to be seen at a 

 distance, and is also valuable as afiordiu^ encouragement to our artists, 

 should they think that their first efforts are in any respects not altogether 

 adapted to the place for which they were iuteuded. 



Li^rht. 

 It will appear from the practice of another great painter, that imperfect 

 light required, in like manner, magnitude and simplicity of parts ; while, 

 at the same time, large masses of deep shade were avoided. The frescoes 

 of Correggio, in the tribune of the church of S. Giovanni in Parma, werq 

 remarkable for these qualities. An idea may be formed of their general 

 style by the portion which remains (now in the library at Parma, repre- 

 senting the * Coronation of the Virgin'}. Pungileuui remarks' that the 

 figures generally were considerably larger than life, not so much in this 

 instance on account of their distance from ihe spectator as because ihey 

 were seen by a subdu<'d, reflected light. The result was probably satis- 

 factory ; fov objects require to be magnified, even when seen near, to coun- 

 teract the iudi&tiuctness arising from want of light. 



Means of Representation, 

 A fourth case is that in v\hich the indistinctness to be guarded against 

 arises from the means of represeuiation. Fresco, with its limited scale of 

 colour, cannot produce such varied elfects as oil-painting ; but a much 

 stronger instance of defective means and of the excellencies which the ne- 

 cessity of counteracting them may induce, is to be found in the Cartoons of 

 Haphael. The ullimale works lor which the Cartoons served were copies 

 wrought in tapestry — a mode of representation which, iu the early part of 

 the sixteenth century. Wits far from exhibiting even the compar^live force 

 of colour, and light and shade which it afterwards attained. ^ With a view 

 to such faint transcripts, however, tlie great artist worked ; he knew that 

 his <lrawiugs would be transferred to them, and that in the tapestries 

 alone, possibly, his designs niighl live." Distinctness was nevertheless at- 

 tained, without any sacrifice of such of the proper attributes of paiuting as 

 was compatible with the means employed; «nd without any violation of 

 probability. U'heu we consider the great qualities which were combined 



4 In pictures of processions or unconoected incidents, the treatment here referred to 

 cannot bi* considered a detect. 



5 The figures in the third compartment coriespor.d in size with those in the first 

 (either for the -ake of uniformity or because the scatfolfliiig immediaielyunder the ceiling 

 prevented tlie artist fiom making his oliscrvations earlier;; the great change beifins in 

 the fourth. It is scarcely necessary to observe that targe toregrunnd figures are quite 

 compiitible with subjects requiring numeious actors. Michael Angelo's treatment of the 

 subject of ILiutan is an cxiunple. 'ihe 11 gu res in the subjvct ot Noah (the first ceiling 

 conipartinent; mi^'ht, even with tiie present composition, have been as large as those In 

 the CreHlion of Kve. The circumstance of the ceiling subjects last execuieri requiring 

 fewer dxures is therefore not to he cnsidered the only cause of the change in the nriist'i 

 style. See Conriivi, Vila di ftlichelagnolo Buonarotti, Firenze, 174ii, p. 27. The first 

 edition of this work was published in i<.ome, l&f)8, in Michael Angeto's iifetime. 



6 J'be subjects in the small gdld-coli-urel meduUionsia the leiling of the Si->iine chapel 

 must have been, even at first, almost invisible from below. They are, however, to be re- 

 garded as mere decurntions. 



7 Afetnoiie Isioriche Ui Antonio AUegri, P.irma, 1817, vol. i.,p. 134. 



8 The admiration of Italian contemporaries is excusable. Iioni the novelty of the manu- 

 facture at thai period. The praises of Paris de Grassis, Vasjiri, and others may be com- 

 pared Willi the just er remarks of < Minn, Cart.. nensia, London, \S'6'2, p. 3-* j aud Cattermole, 

 The Book o the Cartoons. Lonilon, IMll, p. :'I. 



s Such designs were treiited as mere working drawings ; they were cut into slips f«r 

 the execution of the tiiueslries. and were then thrown aside till again wanted for the 

 same purpose. It was in this niutdated state that the cartoons at Hani) ttm Cuiiitwere 

 first brought from Klundes. Sie Quiitiemere de Quircy nt-d bonjihena, I--lorin, &c., dl 

 Kaffaello Sanzio, Milan, lH2U, p. 'M>i ; and Trull, Raphael Vindicated, Loudon, 1840, p. 9 



