ve gone further, and added that their secession corresponded in time
with his own election as president. It is well known to artists that
one, if not both, of these gentlemen left the Society knowing that
changes of policy, of which they could not approve, were inevitable
under the presidency of Mr. Whistler. It will be for the patrons of
the Suffolk Street Gallery to decide whether the more than
half-uncovered walls which will be offered to their view next week are
more interesting than the work of many artists of more than average
merit which will be conspicuous by its absence, owing to the selfish
policy inaugurated.
A BRITISH ARTIST.
"_Autre Temps autre Moeurs_"
_TO THE EDITOR:_
[Sidenote: _The Daily News_, Nov. 26, 1886.]
Sir--The anonymous "British Artist" says that "Mr. Whistler denies
that the recent policy of the Society of British Artists was the cause
of the secession of Messrs. Reid and Burr from the ranks of that
Society."
Far from me to propose to penetrate the motives of such withdrawal,
but what I did deny was that it could possibly be caused--as its
strangely late announcement seemed sweetly to insinuate--by the strong
determination to tolerate no longer the mediocre work that had
hitherto habitually swarmed the walls of Suffolk Street.
This is a plain question of date, and I pointed out that these two
gentlemen left the Society six months ago--long before the
supervising committee were called upon to act at all, or make any
demonstration whatever. Your correspondent regrets that I do not "go
further," and straightway goes further himself, and scarcely fares
better, when, with a quaintness of _naivete_ rare at this moment, he
proposes that "it will be for the patrons of the gallery to decide
whether the more than half-uncovered walls are more interesting than
the works of many artists of more than the average merit."
Now it will be for the patrons to decide absolutely nothing. It is,
and will always be, for the gentlemen of the hanging committee alone,
duly chosen, to decide whether empty space be preferable to poor
pictures--whether, in short, it be their duty to cover walls, merely
that walls may be covered--no matter with what quality of work.
Indeed, the period of the patron has utterly passed away, and the
painter takes his place--to point out what he knows to be consistent
with
|