February 21, 1894.] 



Garden and Forest. 



79 



may prefer to see blossoms of other kinds in their natural 

 environment. 



I need hardly explain, however, that they feel thus toward 

 Orchids because they are not grown in their natural environ- 

 ment. Monsieur De Longpre's pictures, in the article in Scrib- 

 ner's Magazine, to which I referred at the outset, may, per- 

 haps, give some people, unacquainted with Orchid-houses, 

 ideas of beauty which will not be entirely fulfilled by a sight 

 of his originals ; for, while these were hot-house specimens, 

 the grace of his imagination and his pencil has supplied them 

 an atmosphere which suggests their appearance in their nat- 

 ural habitats. Could we see our Orchid-plants in this habitat, 

 the most accustomed eye would confess that it had never really 

 seen them before. There, their ugly features are masked 

 from view by luxuriant surrounding growths, or are so far 

 removed from the eye as to be inconspicuous, or, if seen, 

 they fit so well with the general character of the local vegeta- 

 tion that they no longer seem ugly. Only the blossoms them- 

 selves attract attention, mysteriously emerging from splendid 

 tangles of tropical foliage, or appearing to spring, not from 

 thickened bases of their own so much as from excrescences of 

 the tree that supports them, or seeming to float in the air like 

 swarms of gorgeous butterflies — their own splendor clearly 

 perceived, the grayish leafless flower-stalks invisible at that 

 distance. Seen thus, they must delight, not only the person 

 who loves flowers, but, in equal degree, the person who loves 

 plants, and him who especially loves those beautiful general 

 effects which untutored, undisturbed Nature produces with 

 her plants and flowers. 



But there is still another class of persons in whom Orchids 

 arouse no great enthusiasm. And these object, not to the un- 

 fortunate effect of plants dissevered from the surroundings 

 which Nature gave them, but to the character of their flowers 

 as such. They will tell you that all Orchids are interesting 

 because of their individuality, but that even some of the 

 showiest are not beautiful, and that the most beautiful are 

 those which are least eccentric, least irregular. And this 

 illustrates a fundamental diversity among human beings as 

 regards their aesthetic leanings. 



It has been said that, as some men are born Platonists and 

 some Aristotelians, so some are born classicists in art and 

 some Gothicists ; and this means that some of us are specially 

 appealed to by symmetry, harmony, balance and repose, and 

 others by variety, irregularity, vivacity and piquancy. The 

 quarrel over the beauty of Orchid-flowers is, in truth, but the 

 old quarrel between the classicist and the romanticist showing 

 itself in a novel way, or the modern quarrel over the pre- 

 eminence of Japanese art-ideals showing itself in the realm of 

 Nature. To all of us Japanese art is interesting, charming, 

 significant and delightful in its own way ; but while to some it 

 has a charm equaled by no other artistic developments, to 

 others it speaks with an alien tongue, and seems immeasura- 

 bly inferior to the art of the occidental world when studied in 

 its best developments. The difference has, however, really 

 nothing to do with quality — it is a difference as regards funda- 

 mental ideals. The ideal of Japanese art is a perpetual asym- 

 metry, a perpetual variety, a perpetual changefulness and 

 pliancy, and, I may say, liquidity. It is, above all, an art of 

 motion, and, therefore, of suggestion. And as such it is so 

 diametrically opposed to Greek art that one can hardly under- 

 stand how the same mind can feel entire satisfaction even in 

 the best products of both developments. Of course, no real 

 comparison between works and works is possible; but this is 

 the very point : when underlying motives and ideals are so 

 alien that their products cannot be compared, it seems as 

 though all men must, by birth, be ranged upon the one side or 

 the other, having admiration to give to the opposite side, but 

 not that innate full appreciation, that feeling of entire content- 

 ment as in personal ideals fully realized by other minds, 

 which they give to their own side. Your true-born clas- 

 sicist is never stirred even by the most wonderful products 

 of Japanese art as he is stirred by fragments of the art of 

 Greece, based upon. ideals of symmetry, order, repetition, re- 

 posefulness and definite realization. 



Now, it may seem fantastic to transfer these facts into the 

 domain presided over by the naive Goddess Flora. But a man's 

 aesthetic bent, if he really has any, and not merely a mass of 

 acquired or imitative tastes, shows itself with regard to every- 

 thing he sees, from statues to bonnets, from pediments to 

 flowers. If he is a born romanticist, he will probably have a 

 genuine passion for Orchids ; if he is a born classicist, he 

 will admire them in a measure, of course, but he will not 

 have a genuine passion for them ; he will not call them the 

 aristocrats and queens among flowers ; and, if he is very in- 

 tense in his classicism, he may easily find their beauty 



of an unsatisfying, disturbing, discomforting sort. The Nar- 

 cissus, he will tell you, is his ideal of perfect beauty. Or, 

 if it seems too coldly pure, too sculpturesquely formal, he will 

 point you to the Lily or the Water-lily, or, with especial em- 

 phasis, to the Iris. Here is variety enough in both form and 

 color, surely, but existing with perfect symmetry, balance and 

 repose of effect, and, therefore, with more dignity, more true 

 aristocracy of air, than one can find in any Orchid. And, again, 

 in a different direction, he will point out the Pansy. The gen- 

 eral type of form in the Pansy is that of many Orchids ; but it 

 surpasses them just in so far as this type is expressed with less 



boldness of accentuation, in a more reserved and balanced 



and therefore more classic — way. 



So there is nothing absolute in the matter. You cannot say, 

 this is best, this is most beautiful ; you can only say, I like this 

 best, I find this most beautiful. And, according to your prefer- 

 ence in this matter of flowers, you may decide whether you 

 are a born classicist or a born romanticist. For myself, I may 

 confess that I admire Orchids immensely, but that there is 

 more true beauty, to my eyes, in an Iris-flower, even in one of 

 those little ones which blue our native meadows in June, than 

 in any Orchid I have ever seen. And if earthly flowers live 

 again in heaven, I can think of its glades as sprinkled with 

 Narcissi and Lilies and Pansies much more easily than as cano- 

 pied with streamers of Orchids. You may feel differently, for 

 you were born with one sort of aesthetic taste, and I with 

 another. It is a matter of fate, not of caprice, whether one 

 loves Orchids or does not. 

 New York, n. y. M. G. Van Rensselaer. 



[When the Chrysanthemum is called the Queen of Au- 

 tumn, or the Birch is spoken of as the Lady of the Woods, 

 no one interprets this language as any reflection upon 

 other flowers or trees. When Orchids are styled aristo- 

 cratic, high-bred or noble, such expressions call attention 

 to a certain air of distinction which these plants wear, 

 and do not imply that they are superior, in all respects, to 

 other plants. One may admire a high-bred lady without 

 being insensible to the charms of a rustic beauty. Facts 

 do not bear out the statement that " when one cares about 

 Orchids nothing else is admitted into comparison with 

 them." Many persons have a genuine admiration for 

 Orchids, and have at the same time a thorough apprecia- 

 tion of the loveliness of way-side wild flowers. It may be 

 true that there are persons " who actually hale Orchids," or 

 think they do, because they see them amid unnatural sur- 

 roundings ; but, to be strictly logical, such persons ought 

 not to admire any plants grown under glass or other arti- 

 ficial conditions. 



The theory that one whose inborn taste inclines him to 

 the forms of classic art will admire Daffodils and Pansies, 

 and will find no satisfaction in Orchids, seems too finely 

 drawn and fanciful to have any substantial value. — Ed.] 



Recent Publications. 



Greenhouse Construction. By L. R. Taft. New York : 

 Orange Judd Co. 



Four or five years ago Professor Taft built two forcing- 

 houses for the Michigan Experiment Station, principally to 

 test the relative merits of steam and hot-water for heating 

 purposes, but also to compare the different methods of con- 

 struction, of glazing and of ventilation. The bulletin which 

 reported the results of the heating tests was widely copied, 

 and brought so many letters of inquiry from all' parts of 

 the country asking for advice on various points in the de- 

 sign and construction of greenhouses, that no further proof 

 was needed of the wide-spread desire for information on 

 these subjects. It is to supply such information that this 

 little book was written. Professor Taft's personal expe- 

 rience, in addition to his careful study of the subject in the 

 leading private and commercial establishments where 

 glass-houses are used throughout the country, has enabled 

 him to prepare a manual which is admirable in its com- 

 pactness and completeness. In its twenty chapters, two 

 hundred pages and one hundred and eighteen illustrations, 

 every amateur or commercial plant-grower who uses a 

 greenhouse or hot-bed, cold-frame or plant-pit can find 

 something that will broaden his knowledge or freshen up 



