February 28, 191 8 
Land & Water 
17 
does not make character. If you were to disentangle from 
the mass of what is called " Greater London " the elements 
that distinguish London from all other cities you would 
reproduce the map of the seventeenth century or thereabouts ; 
just as if you were to disentangle from the sayings and doings 
of an acquaintance the things that really distinguish him as 
an individual you could put them down on the proverbial 
half-sheet of notepaper. Most of London is mere padding ; 
and j'ou cannot see London by " seeing London " in the 
sense advertised on the cars. You have to poke about, to 
use the expressive phrase of childhood. 
But the irreducible minimum is unlike anything elsewhere. 
Scattered along the Thames, and enclosed in the boundaries 
of " the City," there are patches of what may truly be called 
" London particular." They have always appealed to artists 
and writers ; and I believe that the reason is not so much 
that they are picturesque — very often they are not — as that 
they are characteristic. Art is said to be selection, and above 
all the selection of character to the disregard of what is 
irrelevant. But not every artist has the power of selection, 
for many have painted London and written about it without 
getting anywhere near its essential character. So far as one 
can make out, the power must be ekercised unconsciously, 
for pictures and books that set out to give the essence of 
London almost always fail to do so. Apparently there is no 
guide in the appear- 
ance of things, and age 
does not seem to have 
anything to do with it, 
for many of the older 
parts of London are 
not in the least charac- 
teristic. Nor does 
familiarity help much. 
I have known a person 
bom and bred within 
the radius mistake Hol- 
bom for London ; and, 
on the other hand, I 
remember a little girl 
coming up from Corn- 
wall for the first time 
who stood in the 
middle of Regent 
Street and said dis- 
appointedly " Is this 
London ? " Without 
being told she knew 
that it was not. No, 
the sense of London 
seems to depend on 
some obscure faculty 
like that of the 
" dowser " for metals 
or water. 
Mr. Edgar Wilson, 
some of whose etch- 
ings* are reproduced 
here, undoubtedly has 
it. These etchings are 
all the more remark- 
able when one remem- 
bers his other work as 
a decorative designer. 
Not that the etchings are not well designed from a pictorial 
point of view, but that the designs are so closely dependent on 
character that they seem to have grown rather than to have 
been made. They share with the places themselves the effect 
of keeping in close touch with what is being done there. 
However old the comer of London represented it does not 
look dead. I do not know anything about Mr. Wilson's habits 
of work, whether he draws from the scene directly or from a 
series of preliminary studies ; but these etchings give very 
much more the impression ©f having been drawn from some- 
thing felt than from something observed. They have the 
character of last rather than first impressions, like those queer 
memories that persist almost against one's will and lie hidden 
through the waking hours to come out clearly in dreams. 
They belong to the underworld of impressions. There is a 
lurking character about them as there is about London itself. 
Perhaps the secret is not other than that expressed in 
Rodin's remark that the artist should draw " with his eye 
grafted on his heart." Certainly the power to find and 
represent or describe London seems to depend more upon 
affection than upon skill or knowledge. The sense of London 
that comes out in Johnson — or Boswell's version of him — 
Lamb and Dickens is not matched by any capacity to create 
• These etchings are reproduced by courtesy of the Publishers, 
The Twenty-One Gallery, York Buildings, Adelphi. 
The Old Crane, London Bridge 
the atmosphere of other places ; and I should doubt if either 
Turner or Whistler were trustworthy — granting all their 
other gifts — away from London. But conscious affection is 
not enough. Henry James undoubtedly loved London, but 
though I am a fervent admirer of his work I could never 
admit that he succeeded in creating the atmosphere of London 
— except perhaps in " Princess Casamassima." On the other 
hand he gives you vivid portraits of certain places on the 
Continent. Literary skill seems to count for nothing. The 
novels of Sir Walter Besant are not considered to be good, I 
believe, but nobody has got nearer to the atmosphere of the 
Thames east of London Bridge. As for deliberate purpwse 
without affection the work of George Gissing might serve 
as a warning. His people are alive, but you are never con- 
vinced for a moment that they live in London. 
What is true of the writers is equally true of the artists, 
and of the many who have drawn and painted London very 
few have given us anything more than streets and houses and 
weather. And among the few who have succeeded in atmo- 
sphere are several who are not good artists in other respects. 
What is needed can only be described as the sense of London ; 
something that does not depend upon knowledge or observa- 
tion, but appears to be inborn — as people are said to be bom 
Cockneys in a different meaning from that of the register. 
When, as in the case of Mr. Edgar Wilson, the sense of London 
is combined with tech- 
nical skill the results 
are important for civic 
reasons. 
As Professor Beres- 
ford Pite pointed 
out the other day, 
artists are not neces- 
sarily the best guides 
in questions of Civic 
improvement. They 
are apt to be beguiled 
by unrehearsed effects 
of the picturesque. At 
the same time they 
ought to be consulted 
in any scheme. The 
important thing seems 
to be that they should 
have a sense of char- 
acter, not only as ap- 
plied to architecture 
generally but to the 
architecture of par- 
ticular places. The 
tmth is that town 
planning is a very 
ticklish business, par- 
ticularly when it is a 
matter of improving 
an old city. Character 
must be preserved, and 
it is not always easy 
to see wherein char- 
acter resides. Neither 
age nor architectural 
dignity should protect 
a nuisance, but it is 
highly important to 
make sure that the nuisance is not really caused by later 
additions. Many of the older parts of London would serve 
all the needs of healthy modern life if the streets surrounding 
them were cleared away. They are the live patches in a mass 
of dead building material. A great deal of London is quite 
irrelevant, and could be re-planned with a positive gain in 
character. But, to use a homely simile, there is always a 
risk of pulfing out the wrong tooth. It is here that such 
pictures as Mr. Wilson's would be valuable. Being concen- 
trated studies of character, they help to suggest the lines on 
which London should be improved ; as involuntary evidence 
they have something of the weight of history. 
The last word is important. History as well as geography, 
hygiene and aesthetics must be consulted in any enlightened 
scheme of town planning. London badly needs improvement, 
but we should be very careful that we do not improve it away. 
History is enshrined in stones and trees as well as written in 
books, but it is not everybody that can read it at first hand. 
Pictures are a sort of halfway stage between the actual 
memorial and its written description ; and fortunately we 
have good pictures of London by artists of many periods, 
from Wenceslas Hollar to Mr. Edgar Wilson. On the whole 
I am inclined to think that artists arc more valuable for the 
unconscious appreciation of London that comes out in their 
work than for any conscious aesthetic advice they might give. 
l^)' Edgar Wihon. 
