Pictor in fabula

Xenophon says, that when Socrates had occasion to discourse with artists, his conversation was of great advantage to them. For example, happening to go to Parrhasius the painter, he discoursed with him of his art to this purpose: “What is painting, Parrhasius? Is it not an imitation of visible objects, for do you not express or represent by colours the concave and the eminent, the obscure and the enlightened, the hard and soft, the rough and smooth, the new and old, and in fine all sorts of objects, and all the various appearances of nature? But when you propose to imitate beautiful forms, since for instance it is not easy to find any one person, all whose members are absolutely faultless, do you not select from many human bodies those parts which are best proportioned and most beautiful in each; and by combining them make whole figures that are beautiful throughout? Do you not represent likewise what is most engaging, most lovely, and most desirable in the person, I mean, the disposition of the soul – for do not the very looks confess either malice or good will? In the prosperity of our friends, our looks are gay and full of joy, but in their adversity we look cloudy and dejected. Besides, doth not a noble and liberal spirit, or a mean and ignoble one, a prudent and well governed mind, or a petulant and dissolute one, discover itself in the countenance, air, and gesture of men, and all these differences can be expressed by imitation?” “They can”, replies Parrhasius. “Which, the, do you think”, says Socrates, “do men behold with greatest pleasure and satisfaction, the representation by which good, beautiful, and lovely manners are expressed, or those which exhibit the base, deformed, corrupt, and hateful?” “There is no comparison between them”, said the artist[[3:Xenophon, Memorabilia, iii. 10.]].

Three things are observable in those remarks of Socrates : first, that painting is capable of giving a true image or likeness of every visible object ; secondly, that in the imitation of visible objects, a wise selection from general nature be used which has a reference to what is admirable, fit, and proper only; and lastly, this divine man, according to his usual custom, does not forget to intimate that the true dignity of art consists in being advantageous to morality and the interests of mankind, by exhibiting the deformity of vice, and the beauties of virtue.

Painting is not, as has been said, a silent poem, and poetry a speaking picture ; but, much more truly, painting is poetry realised, and that full, complete, and perfect poetry is indeed nothing more than an animated account or relation of the mere conception of a picture. What were the few touches about the brows and hair of Homer’s Jove, when compared with that wonder of the world, the statue of Phidias at Olympia? What ideas must have been entertained of this statue, when the inquiry was, wether Jove came down to show himself to Phidias, or whether Phidias had been carried up to see Jove?

Imitations (to use the words of one of the most profound and wisest of men) differ from each other in three things; either because in general they imitate with different means; or different objects; or differently, and not in the same manner. Since they who imitate copy living characters, there is a necessity to exhibit us, either better; as we are; or worse. The painter Polygnotus made his pictures handsomer; and Pauson more deformed; but Dionysius copied nature as he found it. Homer made men better; Cleophon like; whereas Hegemon and Nicocharis made them worse. It may be worth observing, that in the mere imitation of individual ordinary nature, nothing is required but the skill and accuracy of the eye and hand only; whereas in the imitation with that selection which endeavours to make things better, the exertions of the imagination and judgment (the two highest powers of the mind) are absolutely necessary in order to obtain that consistent, perfect, and extraordinary totality which constitutes the perfection of the art, and upon which only the artist can ground his title to genius, and be considered as the maker, inventor or creator of his works; for, as Aristotle observes, some pages after the passage above quoted, “It appears plainly that the poet’s business is not to speak the things that have happened; but such as might have been, and are possible, according to likehood and necessity. For the historian and poet differ, not because they write in verse or in prose; but they differ in this, that the former in reality speaks the things that have been; the latter, those which might be. Poetry, therefore, doubtless affords greater scope than history for subimity and the display of wisdom.

There is a strange passage in one of Lord Bacon’s essays respecting this principle of selection from aggregate nature, which is very unworthy his fine and penetrating genius. The passage is as follows: In beauty, that of favor is more than that of color; and that of decent and gracious motion more than that of favor. That is the best part of beauty which a picture cannot express; no, nor the first sight of the life. There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the proportion. A man cannot tell whether Apelles or Albert Durer were the more trifler; whereof the one would make a personage by geometrical proportions; the other, by taking the best parts out of divers faces, to make one excellent. Such personages, I think, would please nobody but the painter that made them. Not but I think a painter may make a better face than ever was, but he must do it by a kind of felicity, as a musician that maketh an excellent air in music, and not by rule. A man shall see faces, that if you examine them part by part, you shall find never a good; and yet altogether do well.

On this passage I shall just observe, that though it be true that this excellent beauty may (as he observes) have some strangeness in the proportion, yet it does not follow but that this disproportion or strangeness might be happily avoided by a judicious artist, whilst that which is beautiful was alone imitated. As to the faces good only in the whole result, and not in the parts, it is the proportionate arrangement only that pleases, and not the disagreeable particulars. Nature is here, as the Italians feelingly express it, but ben sbozzata, well sketched out : adequate finishing is wanting. The business of art is harmoniously to unite the beautiful parts of the former with this beautiful proportionate arrangement of the latter; and if Lord Bacon had understood the subject better, he would have found that it was by this conduct only (which he had unwarily condemned in Apelles) that any true beauty could be produced, which should be no less admirable in its several component parts than in the proportionate and harmonious arrangement of the whole together. As to the possibility of producing any excellence by those happy dashes which resemble the musical felicity, they may perhaps, according to the old story of the painted horse, be allowed to effect something in the imitation of froth and bubble, but that is all. However, the ignorance of our admirable Bacon in matters of this kind was very excusable at a time when, from the mistaken notions of religion, all elevated and artist-like exertions were proscribed in his country, where the wretched business of face-painting bounded the national prospect.