ths val

particular idea is unimportant, not because it is not ble of the whole species, but because it is predicable of out of that species. It is not its individuality, but its generality which renders it unimportant. So, hey are then, truths are important just in proportion as stic. they are characteristic, and are valuable, primarily, - separate the species from all other created things arily, as they separate the individuals of that species one another thus "silken" or "woollen" are unimideas with respect to drapery, because they neither e the species from other things, nor even the individuals species from one another, since, though not common to ole of it, they are common to indefinite numbers of it; e particular folds into which any piece of drapery may to fall, being different in many particulars from those ich any other piece of drapery will fall, are expressive ly of the characters of the species, flexibility, (non-elasetc.,) but of individuality and definite character in the mediately observed, and are consequently most impornd necessary ideas. So in a man, to be short-legged or osed or anything else of accidental quality, does not dish him from other short-legged or long-nosed animals; important truths respecting a man are, first, the marked oment of that distinctive organization which separates man from other animals, and secondly, that group of es which distinguish the individual from all other men, make him Paul or Judas, Newton or Shakspeare.

rwise

be

Such are the real sources of importance in species truths as far as they are considered with reference autiful. merely to their being general, or particular; but re cther sources of importance which give farther weight ordinary opinion of the greater value of those which are , and which render this opinion right in practice; I he intrinsic beauty of the truths themselves, a quality it is not here the place to investigate, but which must noticed, as invariably adding value to truths of species than to those of individuality. The qualities and propvhich characterize man or any other animal as a species, perfection of his or its form of mind, almost all in

dividual differences arising from imperfections; hence a truth of species is the more valuable to ait, because it must always be a beauty, while a truth of individuals is commonly, in some sort or way, a defect.

§ 8. And many

Again, a truth which may be of great interest, truths, valuable if when an object is viewed by itself, may be objecobjectionable in tionable when it is viewed in relation to other ob

separate, may be

connection with others.

jects. Thus if we were painting a piece of drapery as our whole subject, it would be proper to give in it every source of entertainment, which particular truths could supply, to give it varied color and delicate texture; but if we paint this same piece of drapery, as part of the dress of a Madonna, all these ideas of richness or texture become thoroughly contemptible, and unfit to occupy the mind at the same moment with the idea of the Virgin. The conception of drapery is then to be suggested by the simplest and slightest means possible, and all notions of texture and detail are to be rejected with utter reprobation; but this, observe, is not because they are particular or general or anything else, with respect to the drapery itself, but because they draw the attention to the dress instead of the saint, and disturb and degrade the imagination and the feelings; hence we ought to give the conception of the drapery in the most unobtrusive way possible, by rendering those essential qualities distinctly, which are necessary to the very existence of drapery, and not one more.

With these last two sources of the importance of truths, we have nothing to do at present, as they are dependent upon ideas of beauty and relation : I merely allude to them now, to show that all that is alleged by Sir J. Reynolds and other scientific writers respecting the kind of truths proper to be represented by the painter or sculptor is perfectly just and right; while yet the principle on which they base their selection (that general truths are more important than particular ones) is altogether false. Canova's Perseus in the Vatican is entirely spoiled by an unlucky tassel in the folds of the mantle (which the next admirer of Canova who passes would do well to knock off ;) but it is spoiled not because this is a particular truth, but because it is a contemptible, unnecessary, and ugly truth. The button which fastens the vest of the Sistine Daniel is as much a partic

given by t

beautiful.

Finally

Recapitn's

raine at all

and valuele

the propos

proportion

affirmed.

ath as this, but it is a necessary one, and the idea or it is by the simplest possible means; hence it is right and

ul.

ally, then, it is to be remembered that all truths as far pitulation. as their being particular or general affects their t all, are valuable in proportion as they are particular, ueless in proportion as they are general; or to express oposition in simpler terms, every truth is valuable in ion as it is characteristic of the thing of which it is

violated.

42 But the

which th

CHAPTER IV.

OF THE RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF TRUTHS-SECONDLY, THAT
RARE TRUTHS ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN FREQUENT

ONES.

It will be necessary next for us to determine how far frequency or rarity can affect the importance of truths, and whether the artist is to be considered ture's principles should be repre- the most truthful who paints what is common or what is unusual in nature.

$1 No accidental violation of na

sented.

Now the whole determination of this question depends upon whether the unusual fact be a violation of nature's general principles, or the application of some of those principles in a peculiar and striking way. Nature sometimes, though very rarely, violates her own principles; it is her principle to make everything beautiful, but now and then, for an instant, she permits what, compared with the rest of her works, might be called ugly; it is true that even these rare blemishes are permitted, as I have above said, for a good purpose, (Part I. Sec. I. Chap. 5,) they are valuable in nature, and used as she uses them, are equally valuable (as instantaneous discords) in art; but the artist who should seek after these exclusively, and paint nothing else, though he might be able to point to something in nature as the original of every one of his uglinesses, would yet be, in the strict sense of the word, false, false to nature, and disobedient to her laws. For instance, it is the practice of nature to give character to the outlines of her clouds, by perpetual angles and right lines. Perhaps once in a month, by diligent watching, we might be able to see a cloud altogether rounded and made up of curves; but the artist who paints nothing but curved clouds must yet be considered thoroughly and inexcusably false.

But the case is widely different, when instead of a principle

ples h

been strikin exemplified. to their a touches a

the cases

s have kingly ed.

ed, we have one extraordinarily carried out or manifested under unusual circumstances. Though nature is those constantly beautiful, she does not exhibit her highest powers of beauty constantly, for then they would satiate us and pall upon our senses. It is necessary r appreciation that they should be rarely shown. Her finest s are things which must be watched for; her most perfect passages of beauty are the most evanescent. ively She is constantly doing something beautiful for

ch are

us, but it is something which she has not done and will not do again; some exhibition of her general in particular circumstances which, if we do not catch at stant it is passing, will not be repeated for us. Now they ese evanescent passages of perfected beauty, these perpetvaried examples of utmost power, which the artist ought for and arrest. No supposition can be more absurd than ffects or truths frequently exhibited are more characterf nature than those which are equally necessary by her hough rarer in occurrence. Both the frequent and the re parts of the same great system; to give either excluis imperfect truth, and to repeat the same effect or repetition thought in two pictures is wasted life. What ble. should we think of a poet who should keep all his peating the same thought in different words? and why we be more lenient to the parrot-painter who has learned sson from the page of nature, and keeps stammering it th eternal repetition without turning the leaf? Is it less ogy to describe a thing over and over again with lines, t is with words? The teaching of nature is as varied and e as it is constant; and the duty of the painter is to for every one of her lessons, and to give (for human life dmit of nothing more) those in which she has manieach of her principles in the most peculiar and striking The deeper his research and the rarer the phenomena s noted, the more valuable will his works be; to repeat If, even in a single instance, is treachery to nature, for a and human lives would not be enough to give one instance perfect manifestation of each of her powers; and as for ning or classifying them, as well might a preacher expect