he critic as follows; "to utter
unpopular truths; to instruct the public in the theoretical knowledge of
art; to defend true living artists against the malice of the ignorant; to
prevent false living artists from acquiring an influence injurious to the
general interests of art; to exalt the fame of dead artists whose example
may be beneficial; to weaken the fame of dead artists whose names have an
injurious degree of authority; to speak always with absolute sincerity; to
give expression to vicissitudes of opinion, not fearing the imputation of
inconsistency; to make himself as thoroughly informed as his time and
opportunities will allow, about everything concerning the Fine Arts,
whether directly or indirectly; to enlarge his own powers of sympathy; to
resist the formation of prejudices." The above requirements are well
stated for critics who, by reason of the authority of their position as
press writers, are teachers of art. As to the personnel and
qualifications of this Faculty of Instruction, investigation would prove
embarrassing. The shallowness of the average review of current
exhibitions is no more surprising, than that responsible editors of
newspapers place such consignments in the hands of the
all-around-reporter, to whom a picture show is no more important than a
fire or a function. Mr. Hamerton in his essay urges artists to write on
art topics, as their opinions are expert testimony, a suggestion
practically applied by a small group of daily papers in America. Says Mr.
Stillman, "No labor of any human worker is ever subjected to such
degradation as is art to-day under the criticism of the daily paper."
Probably no influence is more responsible for the apathy and distrust of
the public regarding art than these reviews of exhibitions for the daily
press. The reader quotes as authoritative the dictum of a great journal,
seldom reflecting that this is the opinion of one man, who, with rarest
exception, is the least qualified of any writer on the staff to speak on
his theme. Such is the value which the average manager puts upon the
subject. To review the picked efforts of a year, of several hundred men, a
scant column is deemed sufficient. Howsoever honest may be the intention
toward these, the limitations render the task hopeless, for all efforts to
level the scales to a nicety may be foiled by the shears of the managing
editor if perchance another petit larceny should require any part of the
space.

So