Page 60 - Studio International - July August 1971

Invalides, drawings of Iowa Indians, one or himself.) The letters, in other words, are a kingship in the seventeenth century ? What of
two (rather murky) details from the more strategy, not a set of confessions. There are of Cromwell, and his court, and his court-
famous Salon pieces, a smudged self-portrait. occasional pages of revelation: the editor does painters ?
It adds up to an excellent study of one not include, for instance, a letter of 4 August There is not much sense in the book as a
aspect of the man—better treatment, on the 1849 where Delacroix relates a dream to whole that monarchies, most monarchies,
whole, than the Journals have so far received Madame de Forget—a dream of a lifelike hand, decline and fall. Hence the disappointment of
in English. (At the moment they are out of made of something resembling flesh, which the last chapter on the nineteenth century: it
print, once again.) That said, there are certain responds to the touch, and would be very useful sticks close to the safety of Landseer and
things to criticise. John Russell has written a on journeys! But revelation with Delacroix is Victoria, and I found myself wondering what
good essay, and produces material on often comic or pathetic; the achievement is monarchies order when they are in full,
Delacroix's life—a letter on his reactions in a disguise, finding a form to qualify and contain hysterical decay. What did the Habsburgs, or
brothel, for instance—which is not hackneyed, the fantasies. To do that the letters were the Romanoffs, commission in their last days ?
and very much to the point. But he uses the necessary, in counter-point to the Journals and Was it bourgeois-domestic, or a last throw at
letters as illustration, mainly; and his over-all the painting (and within the painting, there were divine right ? And what about those times when
comments on Delacroix's writing in letters and quite different strategies for the public works monarchs try to outrun their Republican
Journals seem to me wayward, optimistic. and the easel pictures). But why they were opponents—Louis-Philippe buying Delacroix's
The letters reveal him, so Russell says, as 'one necessary, and how the counter-point worked, Liberty from the Salon ? These are not, clearly,
of the great masters of tone: and of tone will only emerge when the three are studied questions Mr Levey wanted to answer. But
considered not as a matter of outward form, together, in detail. And to do that, unfortunately perhaps a few of them are essential to the task he
but as the heart's inmost expression'. They we need all the letters, not a selection. set himself q
were at certain times 'the only thing ...that Mr Levey's book is opulent, expensive; his T. J. CLARK
made human intercourse bearable'. And as for bid in the 'Civilization' stakes ? It has, as usual,
the Journals, 'Delacroix never forces the note, excellent paragraphs on particular pictures — Ethnographers of art
never writes for effect, never adjusts with an on David's late-night portrait of Napoleon, on The Structure of Art by Jack Burnham. 195 pp
eye to posterity.' Never adjusts for posterity ? March in the Palazzo Schifanoia frescoes. And with 46 monochrome illustrations. George
I'd like to believe it; but there are months on even when the pace slackens, and Mr Levey
Braziller, New York. $3.95
end where he seems to me to do nothing else. becomes repetitive—on Mantegna's Madonna
Where, in other words, is Baudelaire's della Vittoria, for instance—one is aware that As more is learnt about the nature and scope of
Delacroix: immaculate, impenetrable, 'tin this is no more than lecture-hall courtesy: human language, it is understandable that
curieux mélange de scepticisme, de politesse, giving everyone time to look at the slide. I attempts should be made to relate these studies,
dandysme, de volonté ardente, de ruse, de can't say I agree with much of what is said; difficult and fragmented as they are, to the
despotisme, et enfin d'une espèce de bonté or rather, what is said constantly seems just theory of art. Wollheim's Art and its Objects,
particulière et de tendresse modérée qui half of the story. The book sets out to deal with drawing on some of the implications of
accompagne toujours le génie' ? Russell's painting at court from the fourteenth to the Chomsky's linguistics, is one of the most
Delacroix is different from this, less guarded, nineteenth century in Europe: to discuss the successful of such attempts, within its rather
less mannered, more straightforward and rather monarch's use of visual art, the various images narrow limits. Jack Burnham's new book The
nicer. He never writes for effect. Is this a and justifications of royalty provided by Structure of Art draws on several bodies of
deliberate contradiction of Baudelaire's account, courtier-artists, the evolution from divine theory—particularly the structural anthropology
or is Mr Russell, almost unconsciously, kingship to domestic Victorianism. It is a rich of Lévi-Strauss and the semiological analysis of
producing a Delacroix for British consumption ? theme, and Mr Levey enjoys its detours. He Roland Barthes —to argue a general hypothesis
It is a pity in fact that Miss Stewart was not sees, for example, how rapid and factitious is that there are certain invariant structures,
allowed her own, parallel commentary on the the renewed deification of the ruler in the art of mechanisms or procedures underlying the
letters—since what we need, more than the later sixteenth century; so that one moves phenomenon of art; that the apparent
biographical details, is comment derived from from the homely coherence of Mantegna's evolutionary development of modern art, and
precise linguistic knowledge; the kind a good paintings of the Gonzaga family to the puppet the diversity of the avant garde (Burnham uses
translator acquires. What we want to know, for Habsburgs in Diirer's woodcuts, like so many mainly nineteenth- and twentieth-century
instance, is how the language of the letters figures prized from a twelfth-century reliquary, case-studies), mask a repetition of the same
compares with that of the Journals; we could `holy in the literal definition of kept apart, logical structures with different terms.
best discover that piece by piece, in the months inviolate'. But the question is—and it became a Burnham, like Wollheim, wants to assimilate
and years where we have both, side by side, life-and-death issue by 1642—inviolate from art to natural language—not to a simple logical
adopting different strategies—equally artificial— what ? Isn't this renewed divinity—or rather, code; and I am sure both are on a most
to the presentation of the same experience. this ugly mixture of divine and material, orb important trail. Burnham goes further than
(The third and most important presentation, and cash-box—an uneasy business, a reflex Wollheim, being immensely less cautious, and
of course, is the painting itself. But the action against a threat ? What of the new tension tries to assimilate art to myth.
problem here is that there is so often no relation between rulers and ruled ? (And between ruler Let me begin by considering what sort of a
—not even the vaguest analogy—between the and portraitist ? Is Raphael's portrait of Leo X reading Burnham invites. He rightly assumes
manner and matter of all three. It is for this really just a study in 'calm opulence' and that few people versed in the history of modern
reason that to talk of any one as 'the heart's in- `relaxed intimacy' ? And what does Mr Levey art are also versed in the analytical techniques
most expression' seems to me misguided. There mean when he writes of Velasquez's Philip IV that he offers. Chapter I is devoted to a summary
are moments where, oddly, disturbingly, the at Fraga, 'there is a distinct reserve about this of the relevant ideas of Lévi-Strauss, Barthes,
three somehow slip into gear : the themes of the most beautifully painted picture. Whether or the linguists Saussure and Chomsky, and Piaget
diary are taken up on canvas, the violence of not Velasquez codified the rules which seem to the psychologist. The vocabularies of these
the paintings spoils the good manners of the govern the answers in his work, he can scarcely thinkers are not mere accessories to a
letters. But these are exceptional moments. have fretted against them' ? This is graceful, free-standing argument set out by Burnham; a
What matters most of the time is the distance but thoroughly obscure.) The author tells us, in great deal depends on our accepting their
between these various modes; and it is a a line, that Philip IV presided over the loss of validity.
distance contrived and enforced by Delacroix Holland; but what of the general crisis of This would not be so if Burnham's art theory

48