Abstract
ONLY of late years has the importance of accuracy in the drawing of rock structure been recognised either by artists or by the general public. For this we are indebted to no one so much as to Mr. Ruskin, whose chapters on the subject in the fourth volume of “Modern Painters” should be read again and again by every student who considers the faithful representation of Nature not unworthy of the aims of Art. It is true that some of the greatest among the older masters—as Titian or Durer—rendered with great spirit and considerable accuracy the more salient features of rock structure, but from one cause or another they seldom entered into details, and were rather prone to exaggeration. The majority, till almost the present time, appeared to consider themselves unfettered, and “improved” upon Nature in accordance with the fancied requirements of the principal theme of their pictures. Some of the results may be seen in the volume to which we have referred. Within the last few yesrs a due estimate of the special excellencies of Turner's work has produced a salutary influence, and more than one artist (like Elijah Walton, to speak only of the dead) has grappled successfully with the difficulties of rock structure. Thus the boulders, studied apparently from lumps of modeller's clay, the dilapidated crags, tottering like habitual inebriates, the attenuated peaks, which might have been decapitated with a walking-stick, are rapidly disappearing from the walls of our exhibitions. In many pictures however we still perceive more of good intention than of knowledge, and the number of those who cannot be said to “draw with the understanding” is by no means small.
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
BONNEY, T. A Geologist's Notes on the Royal Academy . Nature 24, 85–86 (1881). https://doi.org/10.1038/024085a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/024085a0