DEAR B. B.—One word more of the picture verses, and that for good and all; pray, with a neat pen alter one line
His learning seems to lay small stress on |
His learning lays no mighty stress on |
Your specimen of what you might have written is hardly fair. Had it been a present to me, I should have taken a more sentimental tone; but of a trifle from me it was my cue to speak in an underish tone of commendation. Prudent givers (what a word for such a nothing) disparage their gifts; ’tis an art we have. So you see you wouldnt have been so wrong, taking a higher tone. But enough of nothing.
By the bye, I suspected M. of being the disparager of the frame; hence a certain line.
For the frame, ’tis as the room is, where it hangs.
It hung up fronting my old cobwebby folios and batter’d furniture (the
fruit piece has resum’d its place) and was much better than a spick and
| 1827 | BELSHAZZAR IN ART | 731 |
Martin’s Belshazzar (the picture) I have seen. Its architectural effect is stupendous; but the human figures, the squalling contorted little antics that are playing at being frightend, like children at a sham ghost who half know it to be a mask, are detestable. Then the letters are nothing more than a transparency lighted up, such as a Lord might order to be lit up on a sudden at a Xmas Gambol, to scare the ladies. The type is as plain as Baskervil’s—they should have been dim, full of mystery, letters to the mind rather than the eye.—Rembrandt has painted only Belshazzar and a courtier or two (taking a part of the banquet for the whole) not fribbled out a mob of fine folks. Then every thing is so distinct, to the very necklaces, and that foolish little prophet. What one point is there of interest? The ideal of such a subject is, that you the spectator should see nothing but what at the time you would have seen, the hand—and the King—not to be at leisure to make taylor-remarks on the dresses, or Doctor Kitchener-like to examine the good things at table.
Just such a confusd piece is his Joshua, fritterd into 1000 fragments, little armies here, little armies there—you should see only the Sun and Joshua; if I remember, he has not left out that luminary entirely, but for Joshua, I was ten minutes a finding him out.
Still he is showy in all that is not the human figure or the preternatural interest: but the first are below a drawing school girl’s attainment, and the last is a phantasmagoric trick, “Now you shall see what you shall see, dare is Balshazar and dare is Daniel.” You have my thoughts of M. and so adieu
