ART AT MUNICH.
TO TUE EDITOR OF THE SPECTATOR.
Louden,. 21st December 1842.
Sia—Whatever was my opinion of the vices of the German School, it is but fair to remember, I never intruded them but collaterally in answer to a most brutal attack on the English School, under the sanction of Dr. HUGGER. Surely, the beat mode of defence in war is to carry fire and sword into the enemy's quarters, especially too if that enemy began with fire and sword in our quarters without the slightest provocation on our part.
I beg to differ entirely with the young artist alluded to by your critic, who has studied at Munich; for the school of the Academy here affords, as 1 have always said, enough as a basis for the future progress of any youth of genius. In that school he can master the figure—from the Cartoons he can master composition—from the Elgin marbles the true combination of nature and the poetical. From the TITIANS, VERONESES, GEORGIONES, and REMBRANDTS, in England, he can master colour, impost°, execution, light and shadow and tone ; and from the superb English models of men and women, (the finest forms in the world,) be can put his acquirements in practice. The Continental cities may dandle their artists more, and leave nothing for the youth to wish or desire; but 1 am no friend to t'lis suffozetion of students with the luxuties of study —a little difficulty in attainment is no bad school, if genius exist. The danger at Munich is this, viz. that the mode of imitating nature is so extremely vicious, that no advantage can counterbalance the danger of losing pure views of life. The tenet of the school is, that a man should do as much as possiblefrom memory : this was FEZELI'S leading doctrine, and we all know how it ended. There can be no objection to a youth's seeing Munich, but only after he has studied at Rome. 1 predict a vicious conclusion to all those n ho have studied at Munich ; and let my prediction only be acknowledged by the result.
B. B.. HATDON.
[Mr. HATDOlell letter, in point of argument, leaves the question where it was; and his assertions would only provoke further controversy, for which we have no space.—E°.]
Previous page
