478 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XXVIII. No. 719 



absolutely useless to the scientist. So the 

 scientist with little artistic talent, and the 

 artist with no scientific training, clash to- 

 gether again and again, leading to a loss 

 of precious time, and a severe straining 

 of patience on both sides. This thunder- 

 cloud hangs over both until, by con- 

 stant rubbing together, each takes on 

 some of the other's particular efScieney. 

 Under the conditions existing to-day, this 

 is a slow and laborious process, and fre- 

 quently attended with exhibitions of the 

 most fretful behavior on the part of both 

 principals. The scientist gets angry with 

 the artist, and vice- versa, each con- 

 soling himself with the firm conviction 

 that the other is a microcephalic egotist. 

 And this is not so strange as at first ap- 

 pears when we look at the methods by 

 which each has attained his smattering of 

 the other's specialty. The scientist, in 

 the course of his career, because of the de- 

 mands laid upon him by the publishing 

 of his work, is, from time to time, brought 

 into brief and, as a rule, imperfect con- 

 tact with the processes by which a draw- 

 ing or painting is reproduced in printed 

 literature. He hears about light and 

 shade, color and tone values, contour 

 and perspective, half-tone and auto-type, 

 etc., until he has learned them by heart, 

 and only with a ghost of an idea 

 what they all mean. Hence, he can not 

 be a judge of what particular process of 

 illustration best adapts itself to the sub- 

 ject described, and when a skilled artist 

 points out the respective merits of differ- 

 ent processes of delineation and reproduc- 

 tion, he finds that his words fall on, at 

 best, only partially comprehending ears. 

 Yet the artist may be just as far in arrears 

 in his scientific obligations. It is a long, 

 hard struggle for him to suppress his 

 realism to the interest of the scientific pur- 

 pose of an illustration. Time and time 

 again he spends fond hours with some par- 



ticular thing he sees in the preparation, 

 only to have it ruthlessly cut out by the 

 investigator as a positively unnecessary 

 and confusing feature in the drawing. 

 And it is no uncommon occurrence to see 

 an artist presenting himself for service 

 in scientific circles, boasting of nothing 

 more than a bowing acquaintance with the 

 microscope. He looks into it with a 

 squint, sends the oil-immersion lens down 

 through the cover-glass, and carries the 

 instrument about by its delicate adjusting- 

 mechanism. 



Coming to the question of what should 

 be done to improve the relations existing 

 between scientist and artist, the terse ad- 

 vice of Max Brodel sums up the whole 

 problem — "Teach the scientist more art 

 and the artist more science." And how 

 is this to be done ? I can see but one log- 

 ical way, and that is by modifying and 

 establishing courses where both scientist 

 and artist may be trained in a proper 

 and thorough manner concerning what 

 each should know of the other's oc- 

 cupation. From the best available sources 

 of information I am told that such a 

 school is nowhere in existence to-day. 

 Here is an opportunity for this uni- 

 versity to take up an initiative which it 

 would never need to regret. For, with the 

 proper management, I am sure that such a 

 course of instruction would be nearly, if 

 not quite, self-supporting, and the good 

 results to be obtained from it would earn 

 the hearty thanks of every branch of scien- 

 tific work coming within the pale of its 

 influence. This is not the time or place to 

 discuss the equipment or conduction of 

 such a course of study. Suffice it to 

 say that neither would demand heavy 

 financial expenditure. While the mature 

 scientist and mature artist would have, 

 naturally, recourse to the training here 

 offered, the greatest bulk of its attendance 

 would be from the ranks of the beginners 



