Sir J. Reynolds' Discourses to the Royal Academy will show that the Venetian finesse in art can never be united with the majesty of colouring necessary to historical beauty; and in a letter to the Rev. Mr. Gilpin, author of a work on picturesque scenery, he says thus:[1] "It may be worth consideration whether the epithet picturesque is not applicable to the excellences of the inferior schools rather than to the higher. The works of Michael Angelo, Raphael, etc., appear to me to have nothing of it; whereas Rubens and the Venetian painters may almost be said to have nothing else. Perhaps picturesque is somewhat synonymous to the word taste, which we should think improperly applied to Homer or Milton, but very well to Prior or Pope. I suspect that the application of these words is to excellences of an inferior order, and which are incompatible with the grand style. You are certainly right in saying that variety of tints and forms is picturesque; but it must be remembered, on the other hand, that the reverse of this (uniformity of colour and a long continuation of lines[2]) produces grandeur." So says Sir Joshua, and so say I; for I have now proved that the parts of the art which I neglected to display, in
- ↑ Three Essays on Picturesque Beauty, by William Gilpin, 1792. The words quoted will be found on p. 35.
- ↑ Both of these are characteristic of Blake's formed style.
