and blind orion hungry for the morn.

orion, the subject of this landscape, was the classical nimrod; and is called by homer, ‘a hunter of shadows, himself a shade.’ he was the son of neptune; and having lost an eve in some affray between the gods and men, was told that if he would go to meet the rising sun he would recover his sight. he is represented setting out on his journey, with men on his shoulders to guide him, a bow in his hand, and diana in the clouds greeting him. he stalks along, a giant upon earth, and reels and falters in his gait, as if just awakened out of sleep, or uncertain of his way; — you see his blindness, though his back is turned. mists rise around him, and veil the sides of the green forests; earth is dank and fresh with dews, the ‘gray dawn and the pleiades before him dance,’ and in the distance are seen the blue hills and sullen ocean. nothing was ever more finely conceived or done. it breathes the spirit of the morning; its moisture, its repose, its obscurity, waiting the miracle of light to kindle it into smiles; the whole is, like the principal figure in it, ‘a forerunner of the dawn.’ the same atmosphere tinges and imbues every object, the same dull light ‘shadowy sets off’ the face of nature: one feeling of vastness, of strangeness, and of primeval forms pervades the painter’s canvas, and we are thrown back upon the first integrity of things. this great and learned man might be said to see nature through the glass of time; he alone has a right to be considered as the painter of classical antiquity. sir joshua has done him justice in this respect. he could give to the scenery of his heroic fables that unimpaired look of original nature, full, solid, large, luxuriant, teeming with life and power; or deck it with all the pomp of art, with tempyles and towers, and mythologic groves. his pictures ‘denote a foregone conclusion.’ he applies nature to his purposes, works out her images according to the standard of his thoughts, embodies high fictions; and the first conception being given, all the rest seems to grow out of and be assimilated to it, by the unfailing process of a studious imagination. like his own orion, he overlooks the surrounding scene, appears to ‘take up the isles as a very little thing, and to lay the earth in a balance.’ with a laborious and mighty grasp, he puts nature into the mould of the ideal and antique; and was among painters (more than any one else) what milton was among poets. there is in both something of the same pedantry, the same stiffness, the same elevation, the same grandeur, the same mixture of art and nature, the same richness of borrowed materials, the same unity of character. neither the poet nor the painter lowered the subjects they treated, but filled up the outline in the fancy, and added strength and reality to it; and thus not only satisfied, but surpassed the expectations of the spectator and the reader. this is held for the triumph and the perfection of works of art. to give us nature, such as we see it, is well and deserving of praise; to give us nature, such as we have never seen, but have often wished to see it, is better, and deserving of higher praise. he who can show the world in its first naked glory, with the hues of fancy spread over it, or in its high and palmy state, with the gravity of history stamped on the proud monuments of vanished empire — who, by his ‘so potent art,’ can recall time past, transport us to distant places, and join the regions of imagination (a new conquest) to those of reality — who shows us not only what nature is, but what she has been, and is capable of — he who does this, and does it with simplicity, with truth, and grandeur, is lord of nature and her powers; and his mind is universal, and his art the master-art!

there is nothing in this ‘more than natural,’ if criticism could be persuaded to think so. the historic painter does not neglect or contravene nature, but follows her more closely up into her fantastic heights or hidden recesses. he demonstrates what she would be in conceivable circumstances and under implied conditions. he ‘gives to airy nothing a local habitation,’ not ‘a name.’ at his touch, words start up into images, thoughts become things. he clothes a dream, a phantom, with form and colour, and the wholesome attributes of reality. his art is a second nature; not a different one. there are those, indeed, who think that not to copy nature is the rule for attaining perfection. because they cannot paint the objects which they have they have, they fancy themselves qualified to paint the ideas which they have not seen. but it is possible to fail in this latter and more difficult style of imitation, as well as in the former humbler one. the detection, it is true, is not so easy, because the objects are not so nigh at hand to compare, and therefore there is more room both for false pretension and for self-deceit. they take an epic motto or subject, and conclude that the spirit is implied as a thing of course. they paint inferior portraits, maudlin lifeless faces, without ordinary expression, or one look, feature, or particle of nature in them, and think that this is to rise to the truth of history. they vulgarise and degrade whatever is interesting or sacred to the mind, and suppose that they thus add to the dignity of their profession. they represent a face that seems as if no thought or feeling of any kind had ever passed through it, and would have you believe that this is the very sublime of expression, such as it would appear in heroes, or demigods of old, when rapture or agony was raised to its height. they show you a landscape that looks as if the sun never shone upon it, and tell you that it is not modern — that so earth looked when titan first kissed it with his rays. this is not the true ideal. it is not to fill the moulds of the imagination, but to deface and injure them; it is not to come up to, but to fall short of the poorest conception in the public mind. such pictures should not be hung in the same room with that of orion.56

poussin was, of all painters, the most poetical. he was the painter of ideas. no one ever told a story half so well, nor so well knew what was capable of being told by the pencil. he seized on, and struck off with grace and precision, just that point of view which would be likely to catch the reader’s fancy. there is a significance, a consciousness in whatever he does (sometimes a vice, but oftener a virtue) beyond any other painter. his giants sitting on the tops of craggy mountains, as huge themselves, and playing idly on their pan’s-pipes, seem to have been seated there these three thousand years, and to know the beginning and the end of their own story. an infant bacchus or jupiter is big with his future destiny. even inanimate and dumb things speak a language of their own. his snakes, the messengers of fate, are inspired with human intellect. his trees grow and expand their leaves in the air, glad of the rain, proud of the sun, awake to the winds of heaven. in his plague of athens, the very buildings seem stiff with horror. his picture of the deluge is, perhaps, the finest historical landscape in the world. you see a waste of waters, wide, interminable the sun is labouring, wan and weary, up the sky the clouds, dull and leaden, lie like a load upon the eye, and heaven and earth seem commingling into one confused mass! his human figures are sometimes ‘o’erinformed’ with this kind of feeling. their actions have too much gesticulation, and the set expression of the features borders too much on the mechanical and caricatured style. in this respect they form a contrast to raphael’s, whose figures never appear to be sitting for their pictures, or to be conscious of a spectator, or to have come from the painter’s hand. in nicolas poussin, on the contrary, everything seems to have a distinct understanding with the artist; ‘the very stones prate of their whereabout’; each object has its part and place assigned, and is in a sort of compact with the rest of the picture. it is this conscious keeping, and, as it were, internal design, that gives their peculiar character to the works of this artist. there was a picture of aurora in the british gallery a year or two ago. it was a suffusion of golden light. the goddess wore her saffron-coloured robes, and appeared just risen from the gloomy bed of old tithonus. her very steeds, milk-white, were tinged with the yellow dawn. it was a personification of the morning. poussin succeeded better in classic than in sacred subjects. the latter are comparatively heavy, forced, full of violent contrasts of colour, of red, blue, and black, and without the true prophetic inspiration of the characters. but in his pagan allegories and fables he was quite at home. the native gravity and native levity of the frenchman were combined with italian scenery and an antique gusto, and gave even to his colouring an air of learned indifference. he wants, in one respect, grace, form, expression; but he has everywhere sense and meaning, perfect costume and propriety. his personages always belong to the class and time represented, and are strictly versed in the business in hand. his grotesque compositions in particular, his nymphs and fauns, are superior (at least, as far as style is concerned) even to those of rubens. they are taken more immediately out of fabulous history. rubens’ satyrs and bacchantes have a more jovial and voluptuous aspect, are more drunk with pleasure, more full of animal spirits and riotous impulses; they laugh and bound along —

leaping like wanton kids in pleasant spring:

but those of poussin have more of the intellectual part of the character, and seem vicious on reflection, and of set purpose. rubens’ are noble specimens of a class; poussin’s are allegorical abstractions of the same class, with bodies less pampered, but with minds more secretly depraved. the bacchanalian groups of the flemish painter were, however, his masterpieces in composition. witness those prodigies of colour, character, and expression at blenheim. in the more chaste and refined delineation of classic fable, poussin was without a rival. rubens, who was a match for him in the wild and picturesque, could not pretend to vie with the elegance and purity of thought in his picture of apollo giving a poet a cup of water to drink, nor with the gracefulness of design in the figure of a nymph squeezing the juice of a bunch of grapes from her fingers (a rosy wine-press) which falls into the mouth of a chubby infant below. but, above all, who shall celebrate, in terms of fit praise, his picture of the shepherds in the vale of tempe going out in a fine morning of the spring, and coming to a tomb with this inscription: et ego in arcadia vixi! the eager curiosity of some, the expression of others who start back with fear and surprise, the clear breeze playing with the branches of the shadowing trees, ‘the valleys low, where the mild zephyrs use,’ the distant, uninterrupted, sunny prospect speak (and for ever will speak on) of ages past to ages yet to come!57

pictures are a set of chosen images, a stream of pleasant thoughts passing through the mind. it is a luxury to have the walls of our rooms hung round with them, and no less so to have such a gallery in the mind, to con over the relies of ancient art bound up ‘within the book and volume of the brain, unmixed (if it were possible) with baser matter!’ a life passed among pictures, in the study and the love of art, is a happy noiseless dream: or rather, it is to dream and to be awake at the same time; for it has all ‘the sober certainty of waking bliss,’ with the romantic voluptuousness of a visionary and abstracted being. they are the bright consummate essences of things, and ‘he who knows of these delights to taste and interpose them oft, is not unwise!’— the orion, which i have here taken occasion to descant upon, is one of a collection of excellent pictures, as this collection is itself one of a series from the old masters, which have for some years back embrowned the walls of the british gallery, and enriched the public eye. what hues (those of nature mellowed by time) breathe around as we enter! what forms are there, woven into the memory! what looks, which only the answering looks of the spectator can express! what intellectual stores have been yearly poured forth from the shrine of ancient art! the works are various, but the names the same — heaps of rembrandts frowning from the darkened walls, rubens’ glad gorgeous groups, titians more rich and rare, claudes always exquisite, sometimes beyond compare, guido’s endless cloying sweetness, the learning of poussin and the caracci, and raphael’s princely magnificence crowning all. we read certain letters and syllables in the catalogue, and at the well-known magic sound a miracle of skill and beauty starts to view. one might think that one year’s prodigal display of such perfection would exhaust the labours of one man’s life; but the next year, and the next to that, we find another harvest reaped and gathered in to the great garner of art, by the same immortal hands —

old genius the porter of them was;

he letteth in, he letteth out to wend. —

their works seem endless as their reputation — to be many as they are complete — to multiply with the desire of the mind to see more and more of them; as if there were a living power in the breath of fame, and in the very names of the great heirs of glory ‘there were propagation to year; to have one last, lingering look yet to come. pictures are scattered like stray gifts through the world; and while they remain, earth has yet a little gilding left, not quite rubbed off, dishonoured, and defaced. there are plenty of standard works still to be found in this country, in the collections at blenheim, at burleigh, and in those belonging to mr. angerstein, lord grosvenor, the marquis of stafford, and others, to keep up this treat to the lovers of art for many years; and it is the more desirable to reserve a privileged sanctuary of this sort, where the eye may dote, and the heart take its fill of such pictures as poussin’s orion, since the louvre is stripped of its triumphant spoils, and since he who collected it, and wore it as a rich jewel in his iron crown, the hunter of greatness and of glory, is himself a shade!