Very little use is made of the contrast of shadow. But we do not propose to criticise the technique, and only mention it as worth careful study by anyone who has not learned to judge of this great modern artist by the paintings themselves.

And now, as art is a language, the question arises, What is it that Meissoniér says in this picture? To an American, very little! What would it mean, if hung in an American gallery, or in an American parlor? It is, to be sure, an almost perfect picture of a French vedette on duty; and, to those interested in military scenes, it has its value. But, in the house of a French chauvinist, it would say much to the beholder! France is personified in the well appointed horseman who is looking over the German frontier. All the might of France too is waiting in the background, ready to seize the first opportunity that may present itself to pour over the frontier and "avenge Sedan." So it is never to be forgotten that a picture which has no word for us may be full of stirring eloquence for another.

The Magazine usually furnishes, in each number, valuable criticism of art from well known living artists. The August number has an Article by Sir John E. Millais of London.

In the July number, is an Article by Mr. Mortimer Menpes, who has just returned from Japan with a collection of pictures which he painted in that country and which he has placed on exhibition in London. In the Article to which we refer, he comments on a recent report made in Japan by a Japanese commission which had been sent to Europe to investigate the condition of Western art. He says that this commission, after thorough examination, reported that art, as it now is in Japan, is the only living art in the world. Mr. Menpes seems to admit the truth of the claims they make, and takes the occasion to give some of the reasons why they are right. He says that "Art in Japan is no mere exotic cultivation of the skillful, no mere graceful luxury of the rich, but a part of the daily lives of the people." He claims that the artistic sense is shared by the peasant and the prince; as well by the carpenter and fan maker and lacquer-worker as by the stateliest daimio of the community. He tells a story of his servant boy as an illustration of what he means, and of "the native artistic instinct of Japan." "I had got a number of fanholders and was busying myself one afternoon in arranging them on the walls. My little Japanese servant boy was in the room, and as I went on with my work I caught an expression on his face from time to time, which showed that he was not overpleased with my

performance. After a while, as this dissatisfied expression seemed to deepen, I asked him what the matter was. Then he frankly confessed that he did not like the way in which I was arranging my fanholders. Why did you not tell me so at once?' I asked. You are an artist from England,' he replied, and it was not for me to speak.' However, I persuaded him to arrange the fanholders himself after his own taste, and I must say I received a remarkable demonstration lesson. The task took him about two hours, placing, arranging, adjusting; and, when he had finished, the result was beautiful. That wall was a perfect picture. Every fanholder seemed to be exactly in its right place, and it looked as if the alteration of a single one would affect and disinternate the whole scheme. I accepted the lesson with due humility, and remained more than ever convinced that the Japanese are what they have justly claimed to be, an essentially artistic people instinct with living art."

This artistic taste is strengthened by education. The Japanese even as children, are carefully taught the laws of harmony, and how to arrange furniture and flowers so as to secure the best artistic effect. They have books with diagrams to illustrate "the way of properly disposing flowers in a pot." "The outsides as well as the insides of their houses are decorated on the principles of harmony, even to the painting of signs in the street. They are most particular about placing their richly-colored sign in relation to its surroundings. In the same way, whether the subject may be a string of lanterns or whatnot, whatever is done is done harmoniously, and in no case is decoration the result of accident."

Mr. Menpes says that we ought not to judge of the best Japanese art by the specimens which we have in these Western countries. The Japanese artists are amazed that the Europeans and Americans want "such ugly things" as they are required to paint for export. He says that the Japanese look with contempt upon "the kind of curios" which they are now turning out by wholesale to meet the demand that comes from the West, and that the occidental nations, "with their love of gimcrackeries," are doing their best "to cheapen and degrade the artistic capacity of Japan."

Reference is made in the Article to a peculiarity of the wealthy collectors of pictures in Japan which is worth noting, and with an account of which we will conclude. It seems that

as a general thing, they keep their treasures stowed away in what is called a "go down"-or storehouse-and but one picture is brought up at a time to be placed on exhibition in their rooms. Mr. Menpes says: "It is very much like bringing a bottle of wine from the cellar-no one would want the whole bin at a time!"

WILLIAM L. KINGSLEY.

THE ART AMATEUR for July contains a colored study of "Ferns," one of "Poppies" in black and white, a portrait study by Ellen Welby, a decorative figure ("Hebe"), numerous designs for wood carving, china painting, and embroidery, and a page of monograms in "S." The summer student of art will find especially valuable the Articles on "The Science of LandscapeRocks, Ground, and Trees," "Landscape Painting in Water Colors," and "Sketching from Nature." Other topics practically treated are portrait posing, china painting, wood carving, decoration of table linen, summer embroidery, and lectern hangings. Home decoration receives as usual special attention, and for connoisseurs there is, besides the always vivacious "Note Book," a very interesting "talk" with Durand-Ruel on the different periods of Corot, Millet, and Rousseau, together with some account of the Bavarian artist Gaugengigl, and a notice of the Yandell Summer Exhibition.

The August number contains a very timely and attractive colored plate of Golden Rod and Cardinal Flowers. There are also china-painting designs for a plate (roses), a vase (coneflowers), and a fish plate, a pulpit hanging for Trinity, a page of monograms in "S," a fine study of Mountain Laurel by Victor Dangon, a variety of specially good designs for carved hanging shelves, and a number of Oriental decorative designs, including a full-page illustration of a vestibule in Turkish style. Articles of special practical value are those on "Landscape Painting in Oils," "Science of Landscape-Sky and Water," " Flower Painting in Water Colors," "Dog-Painting" (profusely illustrated), and "Wood Carving." There is a suggestive "talk" on the "Revival of Mural Painting," and "My Note Book" has its usual complement of spicy paragraphs. Price 35 cents. Montague Marks, Publisher, 23 Union Square, New York.

THE ART REVIEW is a bi-monthly magazine which is specially devoted to the illustration of contemporaneous American art. Each number contains an etching, a wood engraving, three

photogelatine, and four photogravure plates. The Review is published in New York, and the price is $1.50 a number, or

$7.50 a year.

The pictorial illustrations are of a higher character than anything before attempted in this country. The July-August number has a dry-point etching by Frederick W. Freer, after an oil painting by Carroll Beckwith; the title is "A Passing Glance." There is a photogravure of a "Portrait of a Lady," from an oil painting by William M. Chase; and one of the admirable wood engravings-" Spring time "-of William Hamilton Gibson. There are also a large number of photogelatine prints from the most beautiful scenes in the Adirondacks-including pictures from the Au Sable Ponds, Lake Placid, and Raquette Lakes.

But the beauty of the illustrations is by no means the only claim of the "Art Review" for commendation. The general ability of its Articles is unusually high. In the July-August number a discriminating Article on "the beauty of paint" is especially noticeable. It is a plea for technical ability-a plea for "art for art's sake." The author, Mr. Van Dyke, admits to the fullest extent that "the chief and most important purpose of art" is not the handling of paint. But he says that the higher aims of art have been so persistently reiterated, that many people seem to have taken it for granted that the work of the fingers is of no importance whatever. They can admire grace of motion in an athlete; they can see beauty in the fingering of a pianist; but they have not learned to appreciate the brush work of the artist, or the way he secures his effects. Mr. Van Dyke introduces the discussion of his subject by a description of the different ways. that pictures are examined:

Of those who patronize the gallery during the art season, the father of the family goes to see something funny, the mother to see the pathetic "ideal," Miss Fanny looks for a romantic story on canvas, and Young Hopeful is carried away with a theatrical group of athletic models or a historical tragedy containing the moral-sublime. But the art-learned connoisseur, the diligent amateur, the shoppy artist, and the carping critic-what do they go forth to see? Why, paint. At a distance a clever idea, nice composition, drawing, color, or tone may attract their notice, and straightway they walk up to within smelling distance of the canvas, to "see if that man knows how to paint." Then begins the interesting part of the feast, for never a booklover pored over a Stephens or a Baskerville with half the relish that a true lover of paint studies the manner in which an artist has handled his brush. Whether at Amsterdam or Venice among the ancients, or

at Paris or Munich among the moderns, it is the same; the quest is for paint. The old picture-viewer is twin brother to the old book-worm. They hunt in similar fields in a similar manner. The one goes down the long rows of books sniffing at Shakespeare, Bacon, and Pope, in favor of Albertus Magnus, John Pico, and Poliziano; and the other goes down the gallery, passing over Ghirlandajo, Perugino, and Bartolommeo, to stand transfixed with enthusiasm before Rubens, Velasquez, or Watteau. And, after all, is there not some reason and method in the apparent eccentricity? Some may seek for the glories of the high ideal, and some for the splendors of perfect skill. There are beauties in both, and the preference is a matter of taste.

Mr. Van Dyke then gives a clear and interesting historical review of the methods according to which the great painters have worked from the days of Michael Angelo, and of the advance that has been made in modern times in all that pertains to technique. It is ignorance of these methods which in part explains the lack of interest which so many persons feel in the paintings of the old masters. It is to be remembered that the great Florentines thought only of line and form; and the "paint part" of their work was only "a filling-in of the inclosed space with color." How different the technique of Vollon, Courbet, Rousseau, Fortuny, and the modern artists! It follows then, that for the intelligent appreciation of the work of any painter ancient or modern-it is necessary to know what to look for in the technique of each. The Article concludes with setting forth the advantages of being sufficiently acquainted with "paint" to be able to judge of the wonderful work for which the modern artists have become so distin

guished. Mr. Van Dyke says: "Poets and novelists touch up their pages with happy similes, imagery, and metaphors to brighten their theme and hold the reader, and why should not artists employ their brushes in a similar manner ? To call it 'style' in the one and trickery' in the other is very absurd, not to say unjust. The dash, the fire, the richness, of Fortuny in paint is analogous to that of Gautier in literature, and, whatever the thoughts they may have given utterance to, we would not spare the brilliant style of either." But on such a subject, a writer is in danger of being sadly misunderstood, and at the close of his Article Mr. Van Dyke says: "In consideration of the delightful misunderstanding of one's views so prevalent nowadays, it may be worth while to repeat that nothing in this paper is intended to prove the superiority of the hand over the head, or to show that skill in execution is equal to the power of invention."