&})£ 2fct*4B*rk SWSwne.SUNDAY, SOVBMBEU 8, 1008.

380 Boston: L* <\u25a0 Page & "-

GEOROK CRUIKS.IAXK.nyW.Illustrated. lbmo pp. i". io

—& Co.

Dr Julius Meier-nraefe is a German critic

with a ari-sianized point of view. He is not a

pp. 368. A Weasels Company.

\VI. CRAFTS INTIIKMIDDI-KAC.KS A

ton: L. C l'ase &°*

trateti. Royal Bvo. pp. ix. 325. ix. -.<•Putnam's Sons.

ner's S<m.-i.

Studies of Modern Men and of the

Old Masters.

NEW ART BOOKS.price npon Wr*T\ l*development, but neither \u25a0&»,she underestimate it He was never a man .*

formula?. ll**did not bring bark from Paris anycut and dried id«-a» to be exploited in a '>nv»n_

tional manner. The great French buildingthathe ?aw affected him. rather, as a broad f^rti'.ij.

in* influence: they acrelerated the play of fciimind, warmed and encouraged hi» imagination.Of course, rabid critics of Renaissance archi-tecture, who Iov» to talk as though -moat

structural principles wer** only to be found ia<',r<*ek or Gothic buildinga. willcontinue to hay*

their little flings at Wren. The (iisintfrt^teistudent win rw^otrnize in him an authentic <t».

ative genius who not only in the maj»«ty of St.I'aul'.s. but in the more intimate qualities Ofmany minor buildings, showed 3nperb g:ft3 ofstrength and dignity. Repeatedly Mis;< Milmaala>'3 .^tr^JW vp<>n hl.^ instinct for noble proper-tion.s. Partly one may

' mm in th:3 th<» work-ings of hi* mathematical faculty. Evn mot*

we seek in it. and find, his passion for beauty.This monograph given an admirable 3So»tch ofhis career, so full of achievement ar.d of honor,and so cruelly marked at ita close by public in-justice, and tJ. \u25a0 author performs an equally U3<»-

tuV service insummarizing h^-r hero's taboni of-fering brief but a<l*<iuat*- not*-s oo a Sonsr list ofbuildings. On this side- of her tarfk 3he 1.1

trreatly aidefl by a collectioa of :'one threescoreexcellent illustrations.

be,n ,o enthralled »v thnt th-y shouMnot rven >»•" th*- intention of the V*»<*

"'\u0084ssgMH

>M*a^«mpltan«l what no r^onabe person can

The point raised here is obviously debatable,

but therein lies its merit. Dr. Meier-Graefe at

least thinks for him-self. and offers thousht* for

consideration, not conventional vapidities. We

may disagree with him. as in his too laudatory

chapters on Rodin. Beardsley and divers others,

but at least we find it worth while to hear what

he has to .say It was a ro«m1 idea to put his

essays into English.

The author of "Sir Christopher V.ren has

made in that book a capital addition to the use-

ful "Library of Art." Th* builder of London^

great cathedral was. not onry an architectural

genius, but a rich personality, whose portrait it

Is well to have painted for the general reader.Keeping that Important personage constantly

A equine on William Morris in the "English

Men t>f Letters'; series has been prepared by

Mr Alfred Noyes, who has himself some pre-

tentiwfl as \u25a0 minor poet. lie thinks concerning

Mortis that "there is perhaps no i>oet whose"york is so marvellously sustained in quality."

We shall wait with patience, of course, to seehow Mr. Noyes undertakes to prove the justice

of this opinion. Meanwhile; we may point out

that the time is ripe for a z<»od book on Morns.

Itossetti and their group. English Pre-Uaphael-

ii.'tsin has already a fairly extensive literatureof its own. and in addition to the formal books

on the subject there must be countless fugitive

essays scattered about. Everybody has bad hissay. But nobody has ppwluced an absolutely

dispassionate analysis of the entire mevoment,

so rich in interesting manifestations of art ami

poetry and so strangely intertwined with all

manner of meretricious, second-rate tilings. It

is easy to say that we arc too near the men m

question to get at the truth about them, butthis is amiable nonsense. Their very detach-

ment from modern life makes it the simpler

task to estimate the value of what they did.

Morris's blend of romantic meilurvalism andlatter-day socialism is not, when all is said, bo

terribly complicated. No single member of thegroup is really an esoteric mystery. The truthis ,],,, the critics have I\u25a0 n too solemn and too

diffident. What is needed is a writer possessingnot only sympathy but common sense, humor,

and a certain ruthlessness. Such a writer.frankly refusing to adjust himself to the tein-

pettiture of n hothouse but studying the Pre-

HaphacHtes from a healthy, human point of

vi.w. would give us a stimulating book.

Son» yarn aen the Lit**Grant Alien contrib-uted to periodicals in Knsrland a number ofessays on Italian art. in which he endeavored tn

discuss th- sutij'-ct in the light of those *vo'ri-jtionary principles -which he held zli a biologist,The work was left practically complete at th<*time of his death, and now. with som*- r*-v:.j;.,n

by Mr. .1 W. Cruickshank. it ha.* I^--n printe.* junder the title of "Evolution in Italian .Art."*

1The book has a curious Interest, but qpite failsto carry conviction. It was Grant Allen's :<!• a •

that It :an art started r\ith a certain numberof stock subjects', and that these determini i

-1practice of successive generations of painter.*.Thus, according to his evolutionary ;.oir.* ofview, "we should n-sard any given earls l!work, not primarily a.-v a Ilapftap'. a Giottan orcaerna. but primarily as a 'Par I"Nativity." n 'St. Francia Receiving the Stig-mata,' a •Dosjp Presented :>y St. Mirk to thMadonna.' We should rti-r.t;:".y rst >re itt •

proper order in the historical or evolutseries', and should proceed to observe what traiuit borrows from earlier treatments, wbat ele-ments it foreshadows in later pictures." Kaprovides the reader with other instruction!', andif these are attentively followed his ten

-twelve chapters r>r. the development of \u25a0

•\u25a0-i.ti-iIsubjects in Italian art seem to take or. a '<::• !»;vapru'- plausibility. But thi* impression •\u25a0*

--|

structive criticism Is fie. tinsr. We ?.r>.l at thsend that we have actually made no pr>>_-->-.-, Jbecause the theorist ha? arbitrarily push< stathe background that element of in! ::.;?enius which counts for more than tn]!else in the growth of a nation's art. The volmna \u25a0

is readable as a souvenir of a well meaain^-

;-

entist—

not a.-* adding anything to \u25a0 ixr ka ••.•,;.

edge.

Miss Addison's "Arts ar.-l Crafts la the sri<f-dle Ages" is a pleasant, popular study in a f.-:Iof special interest in America at the :r -

\u25a0-;

tirr>-. The numerous workers in wood,'

th-> metals and so on. who figure more and m r-in our exhibitions everywhere, n>-'l to b<

[s :,\u0084 f.riine ;,, th< • to publish

a year as lie can.'. to put ti -' Ihi '\u25a0': A satirical commenta-

tor dd \u0084,,,. portent" nsly voluminous author ofthe ilaj plays ingeniously round the "proud

;\u25a0• of a man \.' a1what

i!\u25a0 u.h for him to t;ik< ible of wi.- „.,] eno ijrj] or th \u25a0 \u25a0• : \u25a0 unded public to read."

in this attit tide. "The public

[) in its tl i read." Tlien is not»Hue autln ; il of his lal>ors? The

\u25a0 |!e jokes ond with srn 1 reason but the

\u25a0•, that exists to-day invites an re serious reflection.C c extraordinary change which has come over

n-e within a comparatively short period.

Ke-

\u25a0 subtle in its development that it is

perhaps, generally realized. People talk ina vague w:iy about the commercialization of

[Kirt from that, books are con-ceived and written in ;i fashion which would

. bewildered the authors who flourishedouly a generation or tw< ago. They are moreemphatically than ever l»efore the producl of astrictly professional activity. Would even a

masterpiece, if it turned op to-day. !»• an abso-lutely spontaneous gift from the gods?

PTR CHRISTOPHER WRKN.(From tho portrait by Knelter.J

The transactions of the -rods themselvescould hardly escape at this date the influence ofour modern pass for organization^ The

writer of books is a business man not simply

because he is careful about his contracts andexploits his "rights" in every country wherethey may be recognized. lie lakes account oflimes and seasons. I!"is alert to seize upon the'-topic" in which the public is at the moment

most interested. Inorder to do this he 'locs notneed to be a "special writer." contributing to

the magazines. Kven the "creative artist."dwelling in his ivory tower and dedicating hisenergies to "imaginative art.* is careful toavoid anything like conclusive isolation. Hisnovel or liis poeui is judiciously framed to

demonstrate the fact that he is "in touch" withIlie movements of his time. Then the world is

full of publishers waiting to give instant andwide circulation to his writings. Thousands of

critics are ready to review them, ami. as has

been noted above, "the public rolls up in itsthousands to read." In short, the whole fabricof things literary is now so nicely adjusted thatit puts one in mind of :i gigantic machine, elli-cient, unsleeping and inexorable. Contrast thisstate of affairs with the conditions of a day. not,

after all. bo Remote, when the man who wrote abin.- gave in sonic sort a hostage to fortune andwas marked out from amongst his fellows asan essentially adventurous type. Decidedlythings have changed. Have they changed forthe worse. Why should we assume that theyhave done so? On the contrary it is good tothink that the man of genius is nowadays surerthan ever of prompt recognition and reward.The only serious drawback to the creation ofthe great machine to which we have alluded is

that it does more thai anything else to makemediocrity articulate. \u0084.e lhat the Romanticists i

It us not i-\u25a0• Lry to pay much attention toDr. M' r-Graefe as a contributor to a "new

of aesthetics." His system is ii"t madevery clear, nor Is it. in any case, a matter ofconsequence. The main point i.- that he grasps

the place of the a'ti.--t in our modern socialfabric, enters into the spirit of the painter'stask, and interprets him with sympathy andju tice it is is habit of mind that makes him

ting; he has a gusto for h:s subject, andhe communicates to us something of his emo-tion. 'ii.11 writer on art who run do this is doing

deaL Moreover, the heart of this writeris in the right place. Hi- has a sense of values,and can draw distinctions that are Illuminating.Above all. hi can praise a great man for theti-1 t thing, ami praise him with exhilaratingardor. His pages on Rembrandt, for example,

arc as shrewd as they arc fervid, and then hecan go on to discuss with the same penetrationand enthusiasm such a man as Ingres. Promthe <ssay on the great classicist we take thispassaj

he has written m his "ModernArt" a Iook that is oft< n stimulating and nearly

always amusing. In fact, this nominalltematic but really discursive collection of essays

contains so i d reading that we wish it

could have been published In more convenientform, it was scarcely worth while to make two

cumbrous volumes out of th.' work, since the

\u25a0is illustrations are not really indispen-

:. •\u25a0 . :, . . .. made over we wouldalso dispense with a number of chapters in

which the author takes some unimportant paint-

ers, and himself into the bargain, a shade tooseriously. But there would still be left a quan-

i\ \u0084 of talk a! out art to which it isa pleasure to listen.

in mind. .Miss Milman has traced Wren's biog-

raphy in just the right fashion, describing andcriticising his buildings fullyenough, but takingpains to .-how him forth as a man. It must al-ways be regretted thai so lit) has come down,

to us about th.- traits, of this delightful English-

man. We know just enough about him to make

us wish that we knew more. Miss Milman at allevents well handles the material available, and

as she follows Wren from his earlier years as ascholar and astronomer to his amazing entranceinto the architectural profession she somehowcontrive- to disguise the sparseness of her data.

She gives us, indeed, an almost vivid sense of"that miracle of a youth." as John Evelyn

called him. illustrating his extraordinary intel-lectual power, his treniality and his almost un-canny giftfor assimilating the things he wishedto know. The chapter on his first visit to Parisis charming. "Ihave busied myself." he writes,"in survey the most esteemed Fabricka ofParis and the Country round." He meets Ber-nini and Mansard, he collects engravings andmakes drawings, and, in a word, drinks deepdrafts of architectural inspiration. We mustreproduce a few of his impressions:

The King's Houses Icob not mis.*; Kontaine-bleau has a stately Wildneaa and Vitstness suitableto the .... it lands in. The antique Mass ofthe Castle of S. Germain and the Hanging Oar-dens are delightfully surprising (I mean to anyMan .if Judgment), for the Pleasures below vanishaway in the 81. :i h that is spent in asceniiin^r.The Palace or if you please, the Cabinet of Ver-sailles . i!!'.! nit- twitv to view it. the Mixtures ofBrick. Stone, blue tile and pol.i make it look likea rich livery. Not an inch within but is i-rownedwith little Curiosities of Ornaments. The Women,

as they make here the Laniniajce anil Fashions andmeddle with Politicks and Philosophy, so theysway aUo in Architecture: Works of Fllgrand andlittle Knacks are in great Vogue; but Buildingcer-tainly ought to have the Attribute of eternal.

Miss Milman wisely docs not press too far the

matter of the influence of this French exx^eri-

\u25a0-

I

I!

\u25a0

\u25a0 \u25a0

\u25a0

\u25a0

\u25a0

\u25a0

\u25a0

\u25a0

To \u25a0

\u25a0

-

-I

\u25a0•

• \u25a0 \u25a0

-

NEW-YORK DAILY TMBUNK. SUSDAY. NOVEMBER R. 190 a4 Rayg.

BT HARTLEY COLERIDf.K.

Stic- is not fair to outward view

As many maidens be;

Her loveliness Inever knewUntil she smiled on me.

(i then Isaw her eye was bright.A well of love, .ispring of light.

But now her looks are coy and cold.To mine they ne'er reply.

And yet Icease not to beholdThe love-light in her eye:

Her very frowns are fairer farThan smiles of other maidens are.

6