IN the early exhibitions of the
Scottish Academy Thomson’s efforts in landscape held the foremost place,
and his claims to recognition as a master were so palpable that,
notwithstanding his being a member of another profession, these could not
possibly be overlooked, and he was accordingly elected in 1830 an Honorary
Member.
Many brilliant painters have
followed him since that time, but it will be frankly admitted that John
Thomson of Duddingston holds his own as one of the greatest in the
Scottish School. His Art is in many respects thoroughly original, and is
distinguished by a masterly, dignified style of composition which has
seldom been surpassed. It is a style founded in the first instance upon
the practice of the Dutch masters, afterwards drawing its influence from
Poussin, Claude, and the Italian School, but ultimately the outcome of a
close observation of Nature.
At
their best, his works show skilful selection of subject, powerful,
accurate drawing of details, and a happy combination in their composition
and arrangement of those qualities which give to the spectator the sense
of dignity, grandeur, repose, and harmony. These with the qualities of
abstract colour and tone, at once rich and deep, tempered by an
all-pervading sense of chiaroscuro, give to his portrayal of the scenery
of Scotland a charm and a glory that have not often been equalled by any
other native artist.
Whether it be a quiet, pastoral
scene, such as may be found in his pictures of the Lothians round his own
much-loved Duddingston Loch, or the wild, rocky scenery of Tantallon, Fast
Castle, Loch Scavaig, or Dunluce, there is the same masterful repose and
harmony. The parts balance one another in stately regularity, and the
colours blend in pleasing dissimilarity.
As compositions, Thomson’s
contributions to the Provincial Antiquities of Scotland, eleven in
all, compare favourably in these respects with those of Turner—also eleven
in number—in the same work. Of the two we prefer the former. They want the
turmoil and bustle, the almost wild disorder so characteristic of Turner,
and often quite misplaced; but for dignity of style, truthfulness of
delineation, and pleasing balance of parts, they are in no way surpassed
by that great master.
That the genius of the two men
differed in some respects is no derogation to either. ‘One star differeth
from another star in glory’; and though a non-discriminating crowd
sometimes mistake an oil-lamp on a railway signal for one of the heavenly
bodies, the genius of these two representatives of English and Scottish
landscape in the first half of last century still shines clear and
unmistakable. They were both artistic geniuses of a high order. Men have
been challenged to define genius, and they have tried to do it without
being asked. Each individual of the great humans family is presumed to be
endowed by Nature with special tastes, inclinations, or dispositions. The
bent of their genius may lie in qualities of the mind developing
themselves in certain kinds of action or employment; and if special
success attends their efforts we count them fortunate and great. But there
are many who are clever and many who are successful in life whom we never
think of associating with this faculty. If, on the other hand, genius
consists in distinguished mental superiority, implying high and peculiar
gifts of Nature, impelling the mind intuitively to certain favourite kinds
of mental effort, and producing new combinations of ideas, imagery, and
form, we at once restrict to comparatively few this Heaven-sent power. As
one writer has put it—.’ Real genius of the perfect kind would be more
than one man could carry.’ Such genius as a man can possess is
fragmentary, never whole. He may have literary genius, and that is enough
for one; he may have artistic genius, that makes his work the admiration
of many generations; he may have a genius for massing great bodies of men
and bending their actions to his will; or his capacity for evolving from
subtle problems the true philosophy of life may entitle a man to the high
character of a Newton, a Napier, or a Euclid. Difficulty is the spur to
genius, and frequently develops out of mere cleverness some latent
Heaven-born power. The fact is, clever people can do nothing unless it is
a little difficult; they cannot see what lies directly under their noses,
and one of the truths so situated is, that perfect genius has never
existed. But if we cannot get perfection, a man may still be true up to
the limit of his capacity. Very often what is wanting in great men is the
balance-wheel of common sense, and the want of it frequently nullifies
much admirable effort. But the true genius is ever plodding, persevering,
never satisfied that perfection has been attained. In such method and
spirit John Thomson studied Nature; and as Nature’s interpreter his
success was undoubted.
There are few painters whose
landscapes have so much of reality, so much even of a local impress about
them, and which are at the same time so uniformly the fruit of abstraction
and combination— works of Art in the strictest sense of the word. Thomson
studied Nature to master its elementary effects, and combined his
abstractions into groups of his own. He would spend hours, we are told,
‘striving to make an exact portrait of a graceful or majestic tree or
rock—to catch the exact effect of some twilight gleam, or of sparkling
water trickling below foliage in a stray sunbeam. But when he set himself
to paint a picture, his object was to reproduce and group beautiful
images, not to make a map or a view of a precise locality. Hence his
landscapes are at once intensely Scottish in their character, and yet
scarcely one of them approaches to a facsimile of. any known locality. He
has left views of particular places; but they are all representations of
the scenes under the influence of accidental atmospheric effects, and as
the momentary mood of his own mind apprehended them.’
He never lost sight of Nature. His
most powerful and successful efforts, indeed, are evolved from a
profounder knowledge of natural scenery, combined with the effects of
light and shade, than was possessed by any of his contemporaries in this
country. He had a deep, rich sense of the beauties of colour and form,
though, owing to his never having studied the human anatomy, he was less
master of form than of colour. He possessed a wonderful power of imparting
the appearance of motion to air and water, which may be seen well
exemplified in such pictures in the National Gallery, Edinburgh, as
‘Ravensheugh Castle,’ ‘Aberlady Bay,’ and the ‘View on the Clyde,’ where
the motion of the waves as they dash against the rocks is given with
exquisite truthfulness.
This could only be acquired by close
watchfulness and rapidity of execution; by being much in the open, and
noting the changing effects as they flitted before him. ‘The best
unofficial education for an artist is,’ says William Bell Scott, ‘daily
sketching—keeping a pocket sketch-book. If he in this way records every
characteristic action, every beautiful feature or form he observes, not
only in the accidents of society, or active human life, but also in
vegetation, or among the lower animals, be will be real and natural in
expressing whatever he invents. Without the faculty of observation the
ideal becomes simply unreal.’
Thomson was continually noting
changing effects, and his sketch-books were full of suggestions for future
application; in fact, he was singularly successful in his sketches,
particularly in subjects demanding grandeur of treatment or breadth of
effect. He studied, too, the works of the older masters—Salvator Rosa,
Poussin, and Claude; but instead of submitting to the drudgery of the
schoolmen, he studied them only to discover and note what they had
actually done for landscape art. He examined their works critically, no
doubt, with the sole view of fixing a true starting-point for himself.
Speedily mastering their defects and peculiar excellences, he strove to
avoid the former, and as eagerly struggled to acquire the latter. With all
the disadvantage of enjoying only a month under Nasmyth, he was still, in
a true sense, a student of Nature and Art all his days. To these masters
may undoubtedly be attributed his knowledge of the laws of composition and
effect; but he could not well imitate them, for the simple reason that he
was devoted to the delineation of Scottish, not Italian scenery.
Occasionally
he indulged himself in Italian subjects, introducing pillared temples,
grottoes, waterfalls, etc., after the manner of Claude, Turner, and Andrew
Wilson, with occasionally wonderful evening effects, but we cannot say
they were always happy or natural. They generally are strained and lack
the impress of Nature’s inspiration. His
forte was to
portray, not the gorgeous landscape of the clear clime of Italy, but the
deserted castles of his native land. The striking towers and fortalices
along the varied Scottish coast, famed as the ancient retreat of the
champions of Scottish independence, and not unfrequently the refuge of
titled lawlessness, were the special objects of his study. Whether it was
the castle perched high on some bold cliff or headland, with stern black
rocks and the angry sea-waves dashing themselves impotently into spray at
their base, as at Dunstaffnage, Dunnottar, Tantalon, Turnberry, or Fast
Castle; or some lone peel or tower by the margin of peaceful river or
lonesome lake; or in a deep, umbrageous setting of green, as at Castle
Campbell, Brahan Castle, Newark Tower, Carron, Brodick, or Craigmilar,— in
either class of subjects he was equally at home. The pine was his
favourite tree, which he utilised freely in compositions in which it was
desirable to have a foreground fringe of foliage, and frequently they are
so introduced, we must admit, when the particular locality could not even
boast of such a feature. Consistency in this direction never troubled
Thomson, for, as Lord Young once remarked when this characteristic was
pointed out, he put in trees where it suited his purpose, just as he would
put in sea-gulls! He originated and shaped out for himself a style of his
own, but a style that prominently expressed Scottish characteristics.
Caledonian skies, with all their
wonderful gradation of colour, of light and shade, from the coolest of
greys to the fiery glow of the setting sun, never failed to receive his
closest observation. There was,
indeed, almost no atmospheric effect
which our ever-varying climate presents which he had not noted. Early dawn
or golden sunset, noontide brilliance or moonlight glamour, the cold,
shivering sleet of the driving storm or the calm blue of the cloudless
summer sky, all found in him an equally faithful delineator.
We have already referred to
Thomson’s admirable rendering of water: whether it was the tiny stream
murmuring and sobbing over its pebbly bed, the majestic river, the deep
pool where the salmon lie, the ripple of the wavelets as they kiss the
yellow sand of the seashore, or the heaving billows charging the
relentless cliffs—in calm or in storm he was successful in all. No form or
aspect that water assumed ever came amiss to him, for, in motion or at
rest, he comprehended its most bidden characteristics and never failed to
represent them. There is a wonderful dash—a wild heave in his seas—and,
generally speaking, a grand purpose and design in his work, though
occasionally marred by what may be called slovenly execution. There is
nothing commonplace in his Art—even his worst—but everywhere thought and
fancy, if not absolute imagination, rising at times to the highest
artistic genius.
The studies for his pictures were
generally made from Nature in chalk and pencil, sometimes thinly washed
with colour; and not unfrequently, like other artists of his day, when
‘tallow dips’ were more in use than now, he made successful experiments in
light and shade with candle snuff. Water-colour as a medium had not then
attained to the brilliance, finish, and excellence of expression which now
distinguishes this beautiful branch of Art. The early water-colour art was
limited in its scope, being based upon the line and monochrome wash.
Thomas Girton, at the end of the eighteenth century, introduced the new
method of tinting to full colour and obliterating the outline, and bad he
been spared he would have been a powerful rival to Turner in this
particular medium; but, alas ! he died in 1802 at the early age of
twenty-seven. To get rid of outline altogether as an interruption of
colour and as practically non-existent in Nature has been the aim of our
best painters who have excelled in water-colour as a medium. For one
thing, the materials at the beginning of last century were not so well
made, and their supposed want of permanency caused artists to be diffident
as to their use. Turner emancipated himself from this] prejudice or
delusion, and with marvellous success showed the art-world what
extraordinary capabilities lay in water-colour. Thomson never attained to
the same excellence in this medium, though some of his water-colour
drawings are marked with much carefulness of finish and power of effect.
It
was in oil that Thomson excelled. He considered it as the only permanent
medium, and water-colour as merely a temporary material like pencil,
chalk, or candle snuff. But alas for the permanency of oil! It is the very
irony of fate that so many of the works of Thomson, and of nearly all the
artists of his day who worked in oil, should have suffered sadly from the
fault of the colourman, and have been in many cases thoroughly ruined,
while their watercolours remain as fresh as when they first left their
hand. This arose from the too free use of materials employed to give depth
and brilliancy to the colour, whose properties were not sufficiently known
or even suspected, but which time has proved to be
thoroughly pernicious. These were
asphaltum and megilp, which were mixed and used together; the former being
a mineral pitch or compact bitumen of a black or brown colour, with the
tempting property of giving a high lustre to the darker parts of a
picture; the latter, a gelatinous compound of linseed oil and mastic
varnish. The tendency of this compound to shrink under the influence of
heat is very great, and the sad condition in which some of the finest
works of Art of last century are now to be found, where this material was
used, is a warning to avoid the meretricious gloss which is of the earth
earthy. Thomson is not the only one whose work has suffered thereby. We
see the marks of it in the paintings of Reynolds, Gainsborough, Raeburn,
Macculloch, Hill, Lauder, and Sir George Harvey, many of whose finest
works have been irretrievably ruined.
Thomson’s practice was to lay a
foundation on his canvas of a substance composed of flour boiled with
vinegar, which he called ‘parritch,’ upon which he then worked in his
colours. If the ‘parritch’ were not sufficiently dried and hardened before
the asphaltum and other colours were applied, the tendency was to contract
and crack the painting more rapidly. Indeed, his reckless use of asphaltum,
even for glazing purposes, gives some truth to Sir David Wilkie’s
sarcastic remark, ‘Take from Thomson his asphaltum and his megilp, and
nothing remains!’ As a rule, the skies of his pictures have stood the test
of time better than any other part. Occasionally we may find a blue that
has slightly changed either to a dark opaque blue or greenish hue, but
this does not often occur, and where it does is no doubt due to the fault
of the particular pigment failing to retain its original purity. Generally
speaking, his greys are excellent, being pure and transparent, and nothing
can exceed the charming delicacy of some of his clouds, with their pale,
pearly shadows, so cool and yet so deep.
It
is said that during the process of painting he was in the habit of
repeating passages from the Greek, Latin, and English poets, that
approximately described the subject in hand, or the particular aspect
under which he proposed to represent it. The celebrated John Clerk, better
known under the designation of Lord Eldin, whose professional abilities as
a judge, joined to his exquisite taste in the Fine Arts, made him a most
congenial companion, would frequently spend hours in the minister’s
studio. Clerk, who was himself no mean artist, used, it is said, to
‘impress upon Thomson to be bold and resolute in painting, for the very
effort at boldness of expression contributed to strengthen the conceptions
of the mind.’ Thomson never forgot the lesson, and he was in the frequent
habit of quoting Clerk’s language to others and repeating it to himself at
his easel. He was never indeed above availing himself of a hint or
observation if given by a friend in a friendly spirit, especially if he
discovered in it a grain of sense or truth.
Thomson painted with great facility,
and frequently with rapidity, and would finish a pretty large canvas in
all its essential features in a few hours, leaving perhaps only a few
details such as figures in the foreground, or stray touches on buildings
or foliage till after it was dry. So hurried indeed was he in his work,
that we have been told by one who occasionally visited the manse, that
just before the time for the annual exhibition several pictures might be
seen out on the grass before the door to hasten the drying!
Work so done is, of course, open to
the imputation of imperfection, though not necessarily of ineffectiveness.
That a good deal of the deterioration that has befallen some of Thomson’s
work is to be attributed to these circumstances is undoubted. At the same
time, we must guard against the idea that his pictures have all a tendency
in this direction. This is not so. Many that we have seen are remarkable
for their freshness, purity of tint, and absence of any signs of cracking.
Judging from two of the extant
portraits of John Thomson, which both represent him at his easel, he
appears to have been very particular as to his garb, for even when at work
with his brush he always retained the orthodox clerical black coat, the
only precaution taken against accidental spots of oil or paint being the
upturned sleeves of his coat. He would never, however, it is said, either
on Sunday or Saturday, wear a white scarf or necktie, always preferring a
broad black scarf.
In his habits he was methodical and
regular, working on steadily and perseveringly without any regard as to
the disposing of his pictures, for, as we have already hinted, there was
very little of the commercial spirit in Thomson’s art. Once his friend
Bruce, the picture-dealer, took him a quantity of ultramarine, a colour
which then sold at a very high price—as much as £10 an ounce—which he
wanted him to buy. Thomson said he could not afford it as he had no money,
but the difficulty was got over by Bruce offering to take some pictures in
exchange. ‘Ah!’ said Thomson, ‘I will be very glad to deal with you on
these terms; help yourself, take as many as you think will pay for the
paint.’ On that occasion Bruce got several pictures away with him, any one
of which would now far more than pay for three times the quantity of
ultramarine for which they were then considered the equivalent. Even the
visits of friends caused no perceptible interruption to his art work. On
one occasion Professor Wilson (Christopher North) happened to be at the
manse, and expressed a desire to possess one of the minister’s pictures.
Thomson had none at the time which he thought quite suitable, ‘but,’ said
he, ‘I won’t be long in painting you one,’ and there and then he commenced
and all but finished a lovely view of Dunluce Castle, while the Professor
was beside him. This picture is still in the possession of the Professor’s
family, by whom it is highly prized, and it has been reproduced as one of
the illustrations to this volume, by kind permission of Mrs. Wilson, the
Professor’s daughter-in-law.
John Thomson is described by one who
knew him well as tall, well built, not stout and yet not slender; he had
an elegant carriage, which imparted to him an easy, gentlemanly demeanour,
and a winning manner most attractive to strangers—in fact, a jolly,
honest-looking, good-natured man; affable to the last degree; his beaming
countenance, with its fine rosy complexion, was, when he spoke, generally
suffused with a happy smile. One felt speedily at ease in his company, for
beneath the pleasant exterior and those bright, twinkling eyes of his,
there lay the kindly disposition, the sympathetic nature, the true honest
heart, without which all outward semblances are but shams; for, as Burns
truly says,
‘The heart ay ‘s the part ay
That makes us right or wrang.’
Like a great many clergymen of the
period—though it was by no means restricted to the ‘cloth ‘—Thomson was
much addicted to the habit of snuffing. It was a custom even more common
than smoking is nowadays, a snuff-box being an almost indispensable part
of a gentleman’s furnishings. It was certainly a custom which would have
been ‘more honoured in the breach than the observance,’ but the notion
prevailed that snuff acted in some stimulating way upon the nerves of the
brain, as whisky is supposed to revive exhausted physical activity, and
indeed medical authorities were frequently at great pains to enunciate its
importance and value in this connection. Dr. Gordon Hake humorously
describes snuffing as a ‘waking up the torpor so prevalent between the
nose and the brain, making the wings of an idea uncurl like those of a
new-born butterfly 1’ The late Earl of Stair, who when a lad was an
occasional visitor at Duddingston Manse, delighted us once with a
description and imitation of the minister’s
modus operandi in the performance of this
function. ‘He was,’ said his lordship, ‘a most voluble and artistic
snuffer; covering the hand which between finger and thumb contained the
pinch with his large red silk handkerchief, he would in resonant tones
magnify the importance of the action, and conclude with a grand flourish
of the silk.’
Thomson’s works are scattered far
and wide. They are to be found in the country residences of our nobility,
and not a few of the old families of Edinburgh and the neighbourhood have
treasured specimens to show, while some have found their way across the
Border, and are to be met with here and there in England.
Particularly we would mention the
fine collection possessed by the Earl of Stair [Thomson’s relationship to
the Stair family and to Professor Wilson linked them together in a very
close family bond, which it is pleasant to know is still remembered by
their descendants. Professor Wilson and North Dairymple, ninth Earl of
Stair, grandfather of the present respected Earl, were married to two
sisters, respectively Jane and Margaret Penny, so that they were
brothers.in-law by marriage; while Mr. Thomson’s second wife was the widow
of North Dairymple’s near kinsman, Martin Dalrymple of Fordell and
Cleland, second son of Sir William Dalrymple, Bart., of Cousland.]
at Oxenfoord Castle, including several of his best works, such as ‘Glen
Feshie,’ ‘Tantallon Castle,’ and ‘Castle Urquhart,’ than which it would be
difficult to find better examples. Reproductions will be found among our
illustrations.
The late Mr. Lockhart Thomson,
nephew of the artist, had a large and important collection of over thirty,
which since his death has been dispersed. Among these were such pictures
as ‘The Martyrs’ Tombs,’ engraved by William Bell Scott; ‘Carron Castle,’
‘Brahan Castle,’ ‘The Pass of Killiecrankie,’ ‘Fast Castle,’ and a ‘Sea
Piece with Battleships,’ the last-named said to be the combined work of
Thomson and J. M. W. Turner, while some of the smaller ones are gems of
Art.
The Right Hon. Lord Kingsburgh,
Lord-Justice Clerk, has a large and varied collection, consisting of not
less than forty-two specimens, some of them, such as ‘Fast Castle’ (an
engraved picture), ‘Cambuskenneth Abbey,’ ‘Innerwick Castle,’ ‘Stirling
Castle,’ ‘Crichton,’ ‘Conway,’ and ‘Roslin’ Castles, being excellent
examples. Several of these are reproduced in this volume.
The Right Hon. Lord Young, another
ardent admirer of Thomson’s work, is able to show some thirteen or
fourteen pictures from his easel. There, for example, we find his grand
painting of ‘Dunure Castle’ (etched by William B. Hole, R.S.A.), a large
view of ‘Duddingston House,’ ‘The Cuchullin Hills, Skye,’ ‘Tantallon
Castle,’ and an early but fine ‘View in Cumberland,’ after the manner of
Nasmyth.
The Right Hon. the Earl of Rosebery
is the owner of several local views at Dalmeny, notable for their careful
finish rather than for breadth of effect. As views of park scenery they
are very fine, the grouping and delineation of the trees being thoroughly
artistic.
In the splendid gallery of Thomson’s
works at Bowhill, Selkirk-shire, his Grace the Duke of Buccleuch is the
happy possessor of perhaps as rich and varied a collection as it has been
our privilege to examine. It includes such important works as ‘Newark
Castle,’ ‘Brodick Castle,’ ‘Ravensheugh Castle,’ ‘The Glen of Altnarie,’
and ‘Edinburgh from Inverleith House.’ As an evidence of the high
estimation in which the artist was held by the present Duke’s father and
grandfather, it may be mentioned that there are no less than thirty
specimens of his work now in possession of the family, many of which were
purchased direct from the artist.
After Mr. Thomson’s death his widow
removed to Edinburgh, taking with her a large and interesting collection
of his works in oil,
water-colour, charcoal, and crayons,
some of them unfinished. On her death, which occurred on 11th October
1845, such of these as had not been previously disposed of were sold by
public auction. By the public press of the time the event was the subject
of several appreciative notices, of which the following from the columns
of the Scotsman is a specimen. It helps us to judge of the
estimation in which Thomson’s work was held in Edinburgh at that date:—
‘The fine collection of this great
artist’s works, hitherto preserved by his family, is now about to be
broken up and dispersed by public auction in the saleroom of Messrs. Tait
and Nisbet. No man has done so much as Mr. Thomson to maintain the
character of native Art in landscape, and no man has more successfully
transferred to the canvas the grand and impressive features of his
country’s scenery. His pictures have also done much to educate the eye and
inform the judgment of his countrymen—to teach them that it is not a
slavish imitation of details which forms the great merit of a painter, but
the vigorous grasp which seizes the prominent and commanding features of
Nature, and without dissipating strength in their elaboration fixes them
at once upon the canvas. No one with any sympathy either for Nature or Art
can walk round the saloon where these pictures are exhibited without
acknowledging the high genius that inspires this great artist’s works. The
rudest sketch bespeaks freedom and power. Nature is not extinguished
beneath the heavy facts of mere detail; her great lineaments are here as
they address the eye and stir the fancy of the poet; and while we have the
boundless forest stretched before us, we can well spare the tedious art
that invites us to count its thousand leaves. To these and all such works
may well be applied the observation that they present us with Nature in
the spirit, not in the letter, for the letter killeth, but the spirit
maketh alive. We feel,’ says the writer very sensibly in conclusion, ‘that
we confer a benefit on the lovers of Art by directing their attention to
these great works, and even although they may not be disposed to enrich
their collections by purchasing from this source, let them embrace the
opportunity of at least viewing them before their final dispersion.’—
Scotsman, 11th April 1846.
If it be true that John Thomson’s reputation in the
place that once knew him so well is now perhaps somewhat obscured by the
galaxy of artistic genius which has since then given the Scottish School
of Painters a world-wide celebrity, do not let us forget that to him his
contemporaries, at all events, gave a deservedly first place.
Repeatedly do we find his works the subject of
laudation in the periodical literature of the day. In the pages of
Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine, which spared no one, but attacked
everything and everybody with masterly vigour and freshness, he is by his
good friend Professor Wilson invariably held up to admiration as ‘the
first artist of his country.’
Here is how he appears to them in Christopher North’s
Noctes Ambrosianae. Referring to the Exhibition of 1824, whose merits
are being discussed by Ambrose, Tickler, Shepherd, and North, the Shepherd
breaks out with— ‘Oh, the pictures! I was there the day. Oh man, yon
things o’
Wulkie’s are chief endeavours. That ane frae the Gentle
Shepherd is just Nature hersel’.
Tickler.—’ Mr. Thomson of Duddingston is the best landscape painter
Scotland ever produced; better than either Nasmyth or Andrew Wilson or
Greek Williams. Some noble landscapes of his are the chief embellishments
of the Exhibition.’—Blackwood, vol. xv.
Again, in 1827, North declares:—
‘Mr. Thomson of Duddingston is the best landscape painter in Scotland.
THE MAN’S A POET.’
Shepherd.—’ I dinna like that picture o’ his at a’
o’ Loch Catrine frae the Gobblin’s Cave. The foreground is too broken,
spotty, confused and huddled—and what is worst of all, it wants character.
The chasm down yonner, too, is no half profound enough, and inspires
neither awe nor wonder. The lake itself is lost in its insignificance, and
the distant mountains are fairly beaten by the foreground, and hardly able
to haud up their heads.’
North.—’ There is truth in much of what you say, James, but still,
the picture is a magnificent one.’
Shepherd.—’ I wadna gie the "Bass Rock" for a
dizzen o’t (another picture in the same Exhibition). You may wee! ca’ it a
magnificent ane— and I wud wish, in sic weather, to be ane o’ the mony
thousand sea-birds that keep wheeling unwearied on the wind, and ever and
anon cast anchor on the cliffs—still solitary and sublime—a sea-piece,
indeed, worthy of being hung up in the Temple o’ Neptune.’
North.—’ Kinbane Castle (also an exhibit of 1827) is just as good,
and
Torthorwald Castle, Dumfriesshire, is the best illustration I ever saw
of Gray’s two fine lines—
"Now fades the glimmering landscape on the sight,
And all the air a solemn stillness holds."’
Shepherd.—’Mr. Thomson gi’es me the notion o’ a man
that had loved Nature afore he had studied Art—loved her and kent her weel,
and been let into her secrets, when nane were by but their twa sells,
where the wimplin’ burn plays in open spots in the woods, where ye see
naething but stems o’ trees, an’ a flicker o’ broken light interspersing
itself amang the shadowy branches—or without ony concealment in the middle
o’ some wide black moss—like the moor o’ Rannoch—as still as the shipless
sea, when the winds are weary, and at nightfall in the weather gleams o’
the setting sun a dim object like a ghost standing alane by its solitary
sel’— aiblins an auld tower, aiblins a rock, aiblins a tree-stump, aiblins
a cloud, aiblins a vapour, a dream, a naething.’
North.—’
Yes, he worships Nature, and does not paint with the fear of the
public before his eyes. It is a miserable mistake to paint purposely for
an exhibition. He and his friend Hugh Williams are the glory of the
Scottish Landscape School.’
Again, in 1830 (April), we have the friends discoursing
together in Ambrose’s back parlour upon the Exhibition of that year.
Shepherd.—’Hae ye been at the exhibition o’
pictures by leevin artists at the Scottish Academy, Mr. North, an’ what
think ye o‘t?’
North.—’I look in occasionally, James, of a
morning, before the bustle begins, for a crowd is not for a crutch.’
Shepherd.—’But, ma faith, a crutch is for a crood,
as is weel kent o’ yours, by a’ the blockheads in Britain. Is ‘t guid the
year 1’
North.—’ Good, bad, and indifferent, like all other
mortal exhibitions. In landscape we sorely miss Mr. Thomson of Duddingston.’
Shepherd.—’ What can be the matter wi’ the
minister? He is no’ deid?'
North.—’God forbid! But Williams is gone: dear
delightful Williams, with his aerial distances into which the imagination
sailed as on wings, like a dove gliding through sunshine into gentle
gloom, with his shady foregrounds, where love and leisure reposed—and his
middle regions with towering cities, grove-embowered, solemn with the
spirit of the olden time—and all, all embalmed in the beauty of those deep
Grecian skies! Mr. Thomson of Duddingston is now our greatest landscape
painter. In what sullen skies he sometimes shrouds the solitary moors!’
Shepherd.—’ And wi’ what blinks o’ beauty he aften
brings out frae beneath the clouds the spire o’ some pastoral parish kirk,
till ye feel it is the Sabbath!’
North.—’ Time and decay crumbling his castles seem
to be warning against the very living rock,— and we feel their endurance
in their desolation.’
Shepherd.—’I
never look at his roarin’ rivers, wi’ their precipices, without thinking
somehoo or ither o’ Sir William Wallace. They seem to belang to an
unconquerable country!’
North.—’ Yes, James, he is a patriotic painter.
Moor, mountain, and glen—castle, hail, and hut—all breathe sternly or
sweetly o’ auld Scotland. So do his seas and firths roll, roar, blacken
and whiten with Caledonia from the Mull o’ Galloway to Cape Wrath. Or when
summer stillness is upon them, are not all the soft, shadowy pastoral
hills Scottish that in their still, deep transparency invert their summits
in the transfiguring magic of the far sleeping main ?’
Numerous extracts of a similar kind might be quoted
from the same gifted pen, all going to show the high estimation in which
Thomson’s work was then held.
Let another suffice, taken from an article by a
different writer in Blackwood, vol. xl. p. 76, on ‘The British
School of Painting.’ In this paper the writer, after a review of the works
of Turner, goes on to refer to Copley Fielding in London and John Thomson
at Edinburgh as typical men. ‘No one,’ he says, ‘will be so bold as to
deny to Fielding the merit of consummate delicacy in the management of his
pencil—a Claude-like richness in foliage and the happiest delineation of
the varying effects of coast scenery; or to Thomson a depth of shade,
vigour of conception, and strength of colouring which place him among the
most accomplished artists of the present day. But will either the one or
the other stand the ordeal with Poussin, Ruysdael, Claude Lorraine, or
Salvator Rosa? That is the question; and these truly eminent men will see
at once in what rank we estimate their genius, when we place them in line
with such compeers. And why should they not equal—nay, excel them? Why
should not the wild magnificence of the Scottish lakes, or the rich
furnishing of the Cumberland valleys, or the savage grandeur of the coast
scenery of Devonshire, inspire our painters as they have done our poets,
and produce a Scott, a Wilson, or a Southey in the sister art?’
In more recent times, and by writers of merit on the
subject of Art, there have been occasional references to Thomson’s genius
in such outstanding periodicals as the Art Journal and the
Portfolio. By them his work is recognised as of the highest excellence
and of undoubted value, because it told with effect on the Art culture of
his day to an extent perhaps which the work of few modern artists can
approach. It had its defects, no doubt resulting from occasional overhaste
and the use of pernicious material, but these were the accidents of
circumstances over which he had little controL ‘When newly painted,’ says
one writer, ‘his pictures were exceedingly rich and beautiful in colour,
and some still remain so. There is a grand purpose and design in his work,
though marred by what would nowadays be called slovenly execution.’
Another writer—Walter Armstrong — speaking of Thomson
as an artist says:
‘In
his painting he gave evidence of a truer gift for landscape than any other
Scotsman of his time. His fame ‘—referring more particularly to his
appreciation south of the Tweed—’ has suffered here through the presence
in the (London) National Gallery of an atrocious example of his work. Like
all amateurs he was very uncertain: now he would paint a landscape worthy
almost of Richard Wilson, and this he would follow up with a performance
feeble enough for a schoolgirl. His model seems to have been Gaspar
Poussin tempered by Claude and Wilson. As a colourist he was conventional,
but he often achieved a silvery harmouy which is very agreeable. Unlike
most amateurs he succeeded best when he tried least. Some of his more
sketchy pictures, in which the colour is put on freely, with a dexterity
and sympathy almost equal to Morland’s, hint at a mastery which is found
in none of his more ambitious 'pictures,' and, as an instance of this, the
writer refers to a small picture in the possession of the Earl of Wemyss,
exhibited by his Lordship in London in 1886, and now in the collection at
Gosford House.
We have said sufficient, we think, to justify our
contention that Thomson must be recognised as occupying the front rank
among British masters of landscape Art, and being undoubtedly one of the
best which his country has produced. You may call him the Scottish Claude
or the Scottish Turner, or by any other borrowed name you will, but he has
individuality enough to stand on his own merits, or to be criticised for
his faults. These we have attempted honestly to discover and point out.
For him, as one has well said, ‘Art was a passion. The deep, tremulous
emotions, ever ready when not held down by a strong will to break forth in
a cry, or break down in a flood of tears, were the dowry of a truly
poetic, essentially artistic nature. As he looked out upon earth and sea
and sky, all seemed to stir with the gleam of God’s eye. Beauty was to him
God’s handwriting — a wayside sacrament to be welcomed in every fair face,
every fair sky, every fair flower; to be drunk in with all one’s eyes.’
The influence of such a man as Thomson cannot well die.
His name may be forgotten and his works in time may perish, but the
ever-flowing, ever-swelling stream of the nation’s culture must for ever
be enriched by the impetus his genius imparted to the Art ideas of his day
and generation. His teaching and example become in a measure imperishable,
for they have made their impress deeply on the Art life of the people.
Even as Scott and Burns have influenced our literature, so Thomson has
been a moulder of the Scottish School of Art. Such works as he has left us
are a priceless legacy which must not be lightly valued. Like great deeds,
which cannot die—
‘They with the sun and moon renew their light,
For ever blessing those that look on them.’