Читать книгу The Treatment of Drapery in Art - George Woolliscroft Rhead - Страница 3
ОглавлениеINTRODUCTORY
Scope and limit of the work
is to be understood that this little work makes no pretence of dealing with the history of costume, which subject has been exhaustively treated in the pages of Viollet-le-duc, Racinet, Planché, and others—works which may almost be called monumental; still less does it encroach upon the domain of the fashion plate. It is neither more nor less than an inquiry into the principles of the folds of drapery pure and simple, the formation of the individual folds, the lines which drapery takes upon the human figure, and the general behaviour of drapery under different conditions. It is, further, a consideration of the character and treatment of drapery as exhibited in the works of the great artists.
The subject is a sufficiently wide one. No contrast can possibly be stronger than the severe square folds of Dürer and the even, continuous, pipey folds of Greek sculpture; it is not only a difference of material and purpose, but denotes a different cast of mind. Character of drapery varies with almost every individual artist who treats it; and rightly so, since individuality will assert itself in drapery as well as, and almost to the same extent as, in the human figure.
Sir Joshua Reynolds in his fourth discourse says: "The art of disposing the foldings of the drapery makes a very considerable part of the painter's study. To make it merely natural is a mechanical operation for which neither genius nor taste is required; whereas, it requires the nicest judgment to dispose the drapery, so that the folds shall have an easy communication, and gracefully follow each other, with such natural negligence as to look like the effect of chance, and at the same time show the figure under it to the utmost advantage."
Opinion of Carlo Maratta
Sir J. Reynolds further says: "Carlo Maratta was of opinion that the disposition of drapery was a more difficult Art than even that of drawing the human figure; that a student might be more easily taught the latter than the former, as the rules of drapery could not be so well ascertained as those for delineating a correct form." This opinion expressed by Carlo Maratta is, however, something of a fallacy. Drapery can undoubtedly be reduced to a system; given certain conditions we can depend upon drapery behaving in a particular way. The old artists proceeded upon a regular system, and often developed their work from the very slightest hint from the model; but it should be remembered that the artists of the great periods were perfectly trained in both the principles and practice of their Art; they knew their business thoroughly, and were not dependent upon the imitative system which obtains in the present day; they made for certain results, and undoubtedly got what they aimed for.
Importance of drapery in Art
The uses of drapery
It would be difficult to overstate the value and importance of drapery in Art, as without it all historical painting, "all splendour of colour and variety of texture, would be impossible."[1] It also serves to amplify the figure[2] and to unite and complete a composition which would otherwise be thin. It materially assists in expressing the idea of motion. "It adds to the character of figures and gives additional interest to sentiment and situation."[3] The subject is such an extended one that it practically covers the whole story of Art. Few works of Art dealing with the human figure have been produced which do not introduce some form of covering for the body, and in the face of such an immensely varied mass of material we cannot hope to do much more than touch the fringe of the matter, and to give a plain practical statement of leading facts connected with a subject which has hitherto received scant recognition.
Fig. 1.—Liberality and Modest. By Guido.
Absence of works devoted to the subject
It is somewhat curious that this important subject should have received so little attention from writers upon Art. Sir Joshua Reynolds, while admitting the importance of it, devotes in his "Discourses" perhaps less than a page to the direct consideration of it. So far as the present writer is aware, it has not, up to the present, been made the exclusive subject of any published work.
Fig. 2.—The Apollo Belvedere.
Neglect of drapery in Schools of Art
The same neglect is observable in our training schools with reference to this subject. The studies of drapery executed by students in the different Schools of Art, in competition for the various rewards offered by the educational authorities, are monuments of patience and imitative skill. Accidental creases and unimportant folds, which no doubt impart an air of realism to the work, but which more often mar the general effect and disturb the leading idea of arrangement, are reproduced with scrupulous exactness, but the general arrangement of the fold is poor, and wanting in that sense of fitness which the drapery of any figure should have. Such a figure as, for example, the Discobolus will be draped in such a manner as to entirely ignore its general spirit and intention, and the effect is in consequence absurd. For this, no doubt, the teacher is mainly responsible, but this fact makes us wonder all the more that such an important part of the painter's Art is not systematically taught. No doubt the subject of drapery is touched upon in the examination upon "figure design," but it should, unquestionably, be made the subject of a special examination.
Unsatisfactory as things are, however, we may congratulate ourselves on some sort of improvement having been made during the last three decades. Twenty-five years ago the Baroness Burdett-Coutts offered a substantial prize (£10) for the best study of drapery executed by the students of the National Art Training School, but as there appeared only one competitor the offer was withdrawn.
| [1] | Moody. "Lectures and Lessons on Art." |
| [2] | The two figures Liberality and Modesty, by Guido, are a very good instance of what is meant by the amplification of the figure. The drapery serves to fill up the intervening spaces between the arms and the body, and pleasantly breaks the lines of the figures, and also suggests movement. The "Apollo Belvedere" is another instance in point. Hogarth, in his "Analysis of Beauty," says: "The drapery that extends from the shoulders and folds over his extended arm hath its treble office, as first it assists in keeping the general appearance within the bounds of a pyramid; secondly, it fills up the vacant angle under the arm, and takes off the straightness of the lines the arms necessarily make with the body in such an action; and, lastly, spreading as it doth, in pleasing folds, it helps to satisfy the eye with a noble quantity in the composition altogether, without depriving the beholder of any part of the beauties of the nude." |
| [3] | Flaxman. "Lectures on Sculpture." |
