House and Garden 
ORIENTAL POPPY 
the parallel lines of the suspended kakemono give 
to the main panels their chief unrealistic suggestion. 
It is particularly interesting to observe in these the 
painter’s distinctive handling of textures; contrast¬ 
ing the juicy thickness of the magnolia petals with 
the crumpled frailty of the poppy’s silken leaf. In 
like manner, there is a suggested comparison of na¬ 
tures; the gentleness of the one being in contrast 
with the flagrance of the other—the freshness of 
spring tints with the dull intensity of summer color. 
A smaller panel of swamp magnolias serves as a 
type wherein no still life adjunct is employed. On 
a background of cool gray paper is shown a most 
charming naturalistic arrangement of flowers and 
leaves. The textures are uncommonly well por¬ 
trayed, and partly by a reduction in the strength of 
the stems a remarkable illusion of atmosphere and 
projection is produced. The greens are laid on in 
flat tints, by first intent, and are complemented by a 
tiny marginal line of scarlet, which outlines the 
panels and finds repetition in the lowest conven¬ 
tional unit. This, with the blue and dull gold of 
the subsidiary panel, gives to the work a sparkle 
and brilliancy delightful to behold but difficult to 
describe. 
Contrasting sharply with this in character, but 
suggestively similar in treatment, is a Christmas 
panel setting forth specimens of the Yule-tide greens 
—the pine, the mistletoe and the holly. The same 
defining red line is seen again, framing the interior 
panel, and a formal cross representing the holly 
motive is employed as a foil for the unconvention¬ 
ality of the boughs. 
Variety again is found in a horizontal magnolia 
panel which presents a central floral interpretation 
counterpoised by two small terminal compositions 
of still life groups; and turning to yet another, an 
example is found in which still life and flowers are 
combined in a pictorial composition without direct 
decorative motif or conventional conceit. This last 
demonstrates clearly the dormant decorative feeling 
which the others more openly betray. It is a pleas¬ 
ing mosaic of color without regard to its text—a 
charming rendition of the peculiar subtlety of this 
common flower, and moreover a finished piece of 
technique. To know that this is the joint produc¬ 
tion 'of Mr. Mindeleff and his wife adds rather 
than detracts from its inherent interest. These are 
but a few of many, for while Mr. Mindeleff' reserves 
this branch of art for his recreation periods his 
paintings have customarily arrived at a happy con¬ 
clusion, and he has since the first had to chronicle 
but few failures. 
His personality is shown in his work, but, inas¬ 
much as ethics control habit, it may not be amiss or 
idle to glance briefly at the processes of inheritance 
and environment by which the artist was evolved; 
the indirect though potent means by which the 
painter’s vision obtained its individual focus. 
A thorough American to-day, Mr. Mindeleff' was 
born in London, of Russian parents, and has in his 
veins, without doubt, some of the blood of the 
daring Cossacks from whom presumably be derives 
his love of flagrant color—a love which, however, 
never dominates his judgment. Placed early in the 
office of an architect he learned drafting, the aca¬ 
demic principles of proportion, and technical facil¬ 
ity; and later while serving for nine years on the 
staff of the Bureau of Ethnology (then under the 
H 
