Claps XXX. j

SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT OX DESIGN.

715

to correspond; but the periods of each, -whether simul-taneous or otherwise, when utility ami beauty were mostfully understood and attained, should be diligentlystudied in search of the principles that guided the artistsof tiiose times, and that which is best should be chosen,irrespective of mere correspondence of epoch or antiqua-rian authority. Moreover, the errors which the ignoranceof an early age evidently occasioned should be carefullyseparated from the truths, and not considered as of neces-sity a part of the style of the period in which they arefound—such, more particularly, as bad drawing and wantof knowledge of the human figure: at the same time,that simplicity of treatmeut which is so highly character- :istic of early works, which overlooks all details, andrenders a composition from the Scriptures, or a singlefigure, more as a symbol than as a picture, should, if itis found to be a principle of excellence, be carefully jretained.

As is the case with all other manufactures and fabrics,so it is with painted glass: the question of utility, rightlyconsidered, will lead us to some knowledge of what ismost suitable in its treatment as a decoration. Glass wasintroduced into the numerous windows of Gothic archi-tecture to temper the. glare of light, and to serve in amaimer as a blind, by preventing the direct entrance ofthe sun’s rays, and also to shed that solemn religiouslight which so well accords with the sacred mysteries ofreligious worship. The mosaic glass of the early artistsof the 12th and l.'lth centuries was most admirablyadapted for this purpose : being composed of many smallpieces of full and pure tints, with little wldte glass, therays of the sun were broken and dispersed, the lightlowered in brilliancy, and the whole effeet was homo-geneous, rich, and solemn, sufficient light being stillpermitted to enter for the performance of the religiousservices of the church. Even compositions of figureswere subject to the principle that regulated the whole:the figures were small, so that the colour of their dra-peries and accessories might be broken up into manypieces to give the same equal distribution as in the orna-mental parts of the window. It would seem, indeed, thatthe painter did not intend to simulate a picture, butrather to symbolize a sacred text or thought, and thefigures, therefore, were not so much pictorially arranged,as composed with extreme monumental simplicity; thusthey not only partook of the general effect of the window,hut the attention of the spectator, impressed with thesolemn yet beautiful light, was, at the same time, filledwith the holy thought conveyed by the subject, withoutbeing distracted by too great an individuality of parts.The representation of shadow, strictly speaking, was notadmissible, the composition consisting only of Hat formsof the greatest simplicity. For this, even, there wouldseem to be just reasons: the light being transmittedthrough the glass to the spectator within, shadow wouldappear to he anomalous and out of place, since the illu-mination in such a case emanates from the figures them-selves ; moreover the simplicity of the shadowless formswas better suited to impress the eye from the distance atwhich such works must necessarily be viewed. Suchwould seem to he some of the principles which ought toregulate, and which in the best times did regulate, thedesign for painted glass. An entirely different view ofthe art has however sprung up with its revival, and hasobtained many advocates, especially on the Continent.It lias been felt how greatly art has advanced in thebauds of the historical painter since the time spoken of:that the principles of composition, of foreshortening, ofperspective, of light and dark, and of the arrangement ofcolour, then quite unknown, have been discovered anddeveloped ; that drawing, then in its infancy and unaidedby knowledge, has now arrived at maturity; and thatscience has given us power over the materials which theypossessed not, and enabled us to conquer difficulties whichthey considered insuperable: and it is asked why thepainter on glass should not avail himself of all theseadvantages, to perfect his art, and render it as pictorial asthe works of his brethren. By artists who entertainthese views the surface of the window is treated almostas a canvas would be: the forms of the figures are large,

even as the size of life: the draperies are massive, andthe heads painted with great imitative skill and complete-ness. Clair-obscur and perspective are studied, anu fore-shortening and pictorial attitudes in the figures supplythe place of the monumental and statuesque delineationsof the earlier artists : in fact everything is done to treatthe window as a picture.

To the advocates of this style it may he objected, thata picture is specially intended to address itself to themind and imagination only, while painted glass has areference to use also; and that, apart from this considera-tion. eacli and every art has its own mode of renderingnature - not necessarily implying deceptive or completeimitation ; thus, for instance, the art of the sculptor is ageneralized imitation of furm, and even the painter ofhigh art does not desire to make his picture deceptivelyimitative, but listens with impatience to the remarks ofthe ignorant, who are apt to praise his work for thisquality above others proper to it which they do notunderstand. An outline of Flaxman’s fills the mind witha perfect sense of beauty and with the fulness of a poeticalidea; surely, then, the fiat and simple treatment of sub-jects in glass-painting, if such treatment is requisite forits utility and most in consonance with its other qualities,may he found sufficient to give as complete an expressionto the pictorial rendering of a Scripture truth as thematerial and situation of such works require.

Among the works in the Great Exhibition , both man-ners are adequately represented. Tims the pictorialmethod is well illustrated in the ably executed windowof Marechal and Giynon (329, France , p. 1193), of“ St. Charles administering the Communion to the Plague -stricken.” Here the forms are simple and broad, themasses of colour large, and the effect thoroughly that ofa transparent picture, with all its details well drawn,carefully painted, anil rounded by shadow; while thecomposition is arranged with regard to the laws of clair-obscur. But instead of that general ami harmoniouseffect of sobered light, which is so desirable in stainedglass for the windows of a religious edifice, the effect ispainful to the eye from its extreme brightness, and thewindow would irresistibly obtrude itself upon the atten-tion of the spectator, and rather distract his thoughtsthan induce that solemn repose of mind which is so con-sistent with the place. The great Dante Window, byG. Bertixi, of Milan (Main Avenue, West, p. 1044', isanother example of this method. It is a very skilfulwork so far as regards the manipulative means, welldrawn and painted, and exhausting the resources of thematerial. As a window, however, it is exceedingly-sombre, and would far too much reduce the light in anybuilding to which it might he applied. The colouring iscool and pleasant, in which respect it is better thanMarechal’s window, which is too hot. It is to be observed,also, that the construction of the window is greatly inthe way in these pictorial treatments, and that a falseconstruction has been adopted in both these works, in thelatter, indeed, without the slightest architectural fitness.The other method of treatment has also many represen-tatives, some of much merit. Among these, the “ Historyof Samson,” by A. Gerente (517a. France, p. 1203), awork of great purity as to traditional style, although inadopting the just principles of design the faults of theage have been adopted also, which must he objected to.The texture of colour in the glass, if such a term may beused, has been obtained with great skill by this artist.Lesson’s window (565, France , p. 1205 , competitivefor the St. Chapclle, is also a g^od example of thismanner—dust and time, and the corrosion of the glass,have, however, been too much imitated, necessarily per-haps in a restoration, but rather interfering with thisotherwise meritorious work. Holland, of Warwick,“ Life of Christ ” (407, Class XXVI., p. 760), I. A. Gibus(North-east Gallery, 75, Class XXIV., p. 7U7 1 , J. G.Howe (67, Class XXIV., p. 707), and Messrs. Chanceand Co. (60, Class XXIV., p. 706;, have specimens ofglass of this style of various merit.

It would seem to be a great fault in glass to havea prevailing tint or hue, since by a truly harmoniouscomposition of colour such a result would he avoided.