Some practical hints on wood engraving for the instruction of reviewers and the public

OME;^PF^CTlCAI^fllNT^

o/ Wood E^Nqf^viNq

mmmmmmmmimmmmmmmimmimmimmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm^

c

^'^\h^-

. y/, .^x'a^j^^^

r^

Platk II.

SOME PRACTICAL HINTS

WOOD-ENGRAVING

FOR THE INSTRUCTION OF REVIEWERS
AND TME PUBLIC

BY

W. J. LINTON

BOSTON
LEE AND SHEPARD, PUBLISHERS

NKW YORK: CHARLES T. DILLINGHAM
1879

COPTRIGHT,
1879,

Bt Lee ajtd Shepard.

Elcctrotyped at the Boston Stereotype Foundry,
No. 19 Spring Lane.

TO THE AUTHOR

AN EXPOSITION OF THE FALSE MEDIUM

I DEDICATE THESE HINTS, IN TOKEN

OF ADMIRATION AS WELL AS

PERSONAL REGARD.

ADVERTISEMENT

THE object of the following treatise is to help the general
public (that is, those who had not the good fortune to read
the Atlantic Monthly for June) toward some accuracy of judg-
ment as to what is good and what bad in Engraving-on-Wood.
What is said may also have an interest and be of advantage to
engravers. The remarks interspersed for the special benefit of
Reviewers whose ignorance evaded the Atlantic teaching will
not perhaps acquire for me their spontaneous thanks. I have
been compelled however to take the risk, said Reviewers' blun-
ders serving me as texts, themselves as convenient blackboards
whereupon my Hints might be made more sufficiently conspicu-
ous. Why else should 1 have troubled them ?

For tlic loan of Plate I, I am indebted, through the kindness
of Mr. E. J. Whitney, to the American Tract Society ; and for
Plate IV my thanks are due to Messrs. Putnam.

New Haven, Conn., W. J. LINTON.

August, 187 >

CONTENTS

My Reviewers 3

Noble Simplicity 14

FAc-siMiLE 27

White-Line 4-

Mechanism and Art 54

Photography on Wood 70

Further Hints 82

SOME PRACTICAL HINTS

WOOD-ENGRAVING

HINTS ON WOOD-ENGRAVING.

MY REVIEWERS

FOR the last June number of the Atlantic Monthly
I wrote an article on Art in Engraving on Wood.
Aware how little technically was known concerning en-
graving, I tried to make my meaning plain "to the
meanest capacity." I confess I did not think of the
Reviewers.

The article attracted much notice : a fact which I may
state without any straining of my modesty, since the re-
marks of the Reviewers generally were the very reverse
of complimentary. Wherefore it has become necessary,
by way of preface to the present work, that I should
endeavor at some reply. Not — though as sensitive as
most men to the opinion of my fellows — not that I am
very sore from the flaying I am supposed to have un-

4 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

dergone ; the many stripes, like those of the wicked
step-mother in the fairy tale, fell upon me soft as feath-
ers (the foolish words of a few angry young men have
no more weight), — but only to establish some qualifica-
tion for my daring to write again.

It would seem that, my literary style not being suffi-
ciently " lucid," my Reviewers generally missed my mean-
ino- ; indeed they so comically contrariwise construed my
words, furthering their misunderstanding by misquota-
tion, that it is due not only to myself, but also to a
book-buying, bewildered public, that I should rescue my
character from these critics before attempting to explain
my Atlantic explanations. The impatient reader may
have heard what becomes of those who allow themselves
to be led ditchward by tlie blind.

According to my Reviewers I am one of '• the old
fogies of Christendom " (a very ancient and respectable
guild, for admission to which I am indebted to the kind
and potent influence of Dr. Holland) ; a feeble and mo-
notonous pugilist, at the end of my development; a
worn-out, mechanical wood-engraver, whose blocks are
disesteemed and declined by the publishers ; " discon-
tented," '-disappointed," and "self-interested;" "petu-
lant," " splenetic," " angry," " spiteful," " bigoted," " ex-
aggerated," " exasperated," " vituperative ; " eager only
to pick holes, " like an artistic pickpocket," in the works

MY REVIEWERS 0

of better men — especially rising young men of whom I
am envious. I bring, according to these gentlemen,
neither honesty, nor intelligence, nor good-humor, nor
liberal regard for Art to the platform from which I
have the impudence to preach. In short, there is noth-
ing except fifty years' experience to justify, or rather to
excuse, the o2:)ening of my malicious lips or' the scratch-
ing of my envenomed pen. Perhaps the allov^'ance of
that small advantage, of which even critical acumen can-
not deprive me, the one seed-corn remaining out of mv
Reviewers' chafl-sack, may be accepted by a kindly pub-
lic as some warrant for my presumption in ofiering so77ie
practical hints on wood engraving.

Why all this hubbub of their unfriendly voices? What
have I done? lam guiltless of intentional offence. I
did but to the best of my ability, and conscientiouslv,
honestly and fairly criticize a st)le of work which, so far
as my untaught judgment could or can perceive, is mere-
tricious and mischievous. I named, but ^vith " bated
breath," one engraver only, not singled out liy myself;
and him I dealt with generously, sugaring with not stinted
praise the censures I was bound to administer, even for
his own medicining. I avoided other name-mentioning,
confining my rebukes to the work, sparing the insignifi-
cant workmen. Is it treason to object to the use of a mul-
tiple machine in what ought to be a work of intelligent

6 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

art? Is it scandalous — scandahun i7iagnatum — to name
somebody's magazine, when it so loudly trumpets its
ownership of the New Style? Is criticism of contempo-
rary wood-engraving the unforgiven sin? What means
this noise then in our ears? Is it only because my
simple voice has disturbed that little brood of imfledged
roosters that nestles under the motherly wings at 743
Broadway? For it is thence comes all the cackling.
Dear little gentlemen ! I am indeed not the fearful hob-
goblin you in your skurrying have imaged. I have not
the heart even to wish harm to one of you.

For myself, if I must speak autobiographically, partly
for the sake of my Reviewers, whose generosity will cer-
tainly rejoice at my vindication, but chiefly in deference
to a much-deluded Public, — since the adverse cackling
is not ojDcnly announced as from Little Roosterdom, but
comes out with the indorsement of respected and experi-
enced editors (of the Sim, the Nation^ &c.) as the quite
coincident cackle of accepted wisdom, — for myself, then,
speaking humbly, I protest that I am somewhat less offen-
sive, and more trustworthy withal, than Little Roosterdom
through the respective journals reports. It is more than
fifty 3'ears since I began to handle a graver and to learn
concerning wood-engraving. I cannot charge myself
with having during that length of time ever written or
spoken or thought enviously or uncharitably of a brother

MY REVIEWERS /

artist. Jealousy I do not recognize as an artist's feeling ;
and I have faithfully and unfalteringly endeavored to
make myself and my conduct worthy of an artist's name,
however low might be my rank in Art. Among men
older than myself, who had won repute while I was yet
unknown, I counted many friends : John Thompson,
William Harvey, Orrin Smith (whose partner I after-
wards became), and others. I had some opportunities
among these men of learning what good work is, even
if my master, G. W. Bonner, — a nephew and pupil of
Branston, and a good artist, — had not taught me. By
my contemporaries, in some sense of course my rivals,
1 was well and friendlily esteemed : I do not recollect
that I ever had an enemy or a dispute. And younger
men in England, and not a few hei-e, will speak of me
as never withholding help, whether of advice or praise,
and as incapable of grieving at the advancement of my
juniors. What I have been able to do will not be les-
sened by the greater achievements of others. Methinks
it is not only unconscious assurance which encourages me
in saying that I have the right to speak, and at least as
authoritatively as an art-critic, of Art in Engraving on
Wood ; and to escape (as I shall with thoughtful and
gentlemanly opponents), even personal abuse, counter
argument failing, when I speak with severity of what, in
giving judgment, I am bound to condemn.

0 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

Enough of myself. To pass now to a few of the
curious utterances which my Atlantic article provoked.
One has to clear away rubbish before building ; and after
consideration of some queer criticisms, there may be room
for observations which an intelligent reader, if not a Re-
viewer, may be able to compi'ehcnd.

First in order, preluding Scrih7ier^ comes that unusual
authority in art matters, the Timcs^ whose young man's
remarkable remarks on " realism " and " impressionism,"
high art and photography on wood (not signed D. K.),

1 reserve for notice in another place. In the wake of
the Times follows Scribner for Jul}'. I take off my
shoes before I ascend those awful stairs to crawl beneath
the bust of Pidlas, overhanging the editorial portal.
Scribner of course was bound to go for me. Is it D. K.
again.'' Surely not Dr. Holland himself.? He, a good
man, the Washington of engraving independence, who
may throw his little hatchet, but cannot lie, — he could
not, even as matter of private opinion, have written, nor
have allowed to stand had he read, that " we believe it is
pretty well understood among publishers that Mr. Lin-
ton's work is not what it used to be." You did not be-
lieve that, Dr. Holland! knowing that four times — I
think I may say five times — during the last few months
Mr. Linton was asked to work for Scribner^ and did de-
liver work so late as within a month of the above-quoted

MY REVIEWERS \f

belief. But who knows? Work was pressed upon the
" old man at the end of his development," solely because
of past respect and pity for his decline. And judging
from other of the productions appearing in the magazine,
— allowance cheerfully made for much of excellent
quality^ — I may not be the only recipient of the Scrib-
ner alms.

Scribner had, of course, to review me ; but did not at-
tempt to meet my arguments. In accordance with an old
disreputable law maxim, "'When 3'ou have no argument,
abuse vour adversary ! " personalities such as I have sam-
pled usurped the place of defence, even to the unhand-
some dragging in of the names of persons who had nothing
whatever to do with the questions at issue ; and besides
the personalities there was the reiterated disingenuousness
of misquoting. Some half a dozen times the word le-
gitimate is given as mine — a word I have never used.
To borrow the Reviewer's words, " it certainly has not a
very pretty look." That phrase does strike one as Hol-
iandish, after all. Perhaps he reviewed the writing. It
is only the Times article improved. One notice by-and-
by may serve for both.

J3ut if Scribne?' shirks the question, hiding behind its
deeds of charit}', the Sun still shines for all, and thence
we may expect enlightenment. Nearly three columns of
the Sunday Sun, more than an ordinary octavo pamphlet,

10 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

and all for three cents, inform one hundred and twenty
thousand readers " concerning wood-engraving." The
paper has been sold ; the editor and the one hundred and
twenty thousand readers sold also. Some little worthless
information, so much as might be picked up from an
engraver's errand-boy — not always correctly reported —
is given at the outset. Such as : —

Wood-engraving is the converse of steel. In inking the
steel plate, " the furrows and depressions receive the ink,
the surface remains clean." [Which would rather aston-
ish a steel-plate printer.]

W'ood-engraving is done on box-wood, and the work is
not healthful. [Probably on account of the fumes arising
from the decomposed wood.]

Engravers as a class are among the most industrious
of workers.

And designers ditto. An industrious and clever one,
who is also a writer, " can turn out one article a month
with ease, tliereby making five thousand dollars a year ; "
but (carefully salting the provision in same paragraph),
" as a matter of fact turns out only one in a year." And
so does not make five thousand dollars a year.

'' To prepare a block for a picture " [very clear that !]
" it is whitened lightly, — some artists preferring for the
purpose the surface of white enamelled cards." [And he
might have added, for further elucidation of the mysteries.

MY REVIEWERS 11

that they sometimes turn up their coat-sleeves to prevent
whitening the cuffs.]

Also " some artists draw with a mixture of black and
white — ^iiache ;" "but the effects they secure are not
very brilliant."

Others mix colors with their Indian ink.

" It must be understood that the drawing on the block
has to be reversed — that is, drawn inversely as it appears
when printed." [So. The style is worthy of the infor-
mation.]

And so on through more than half the article ; after
which the teacher quits the mere explanatory and j^repar-
atory platform, and comes down to personal remarks and
" criticism." Samples of both may suffice.

" Mr. Linton's great trouble now is that he cannot any
longer exploit his own peculiar, and often ignorant, no-
tions at the expense of the artists, because p/ioiog-raphy-
on-wood has ittterfered with hi?n, and because when — as
we have heard it expressed — he ' cuts the whole soul out
of a drawing,' it is compared with the original, the fact
noted, and the block declined." Photography-on-wood is
not the new invention my Reviewer seems to suppose.
It has been "interfering" with me for twenty years, dur-
ing which period, and for twenty years before, I have
never had a block declined. When this unveracious sat-
ellite of the Sun asserted the contrary, he was probably
" misinformed."

12 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

We call a man unveracious when he states the opposite
of truth. I liope that is not " vituperation." What fitter
word may I courteously employ toward the writer of the
following? —

"Mr. Jungling engraves the white paint that Mr. Kelly
uses. . . . Mr. Linton gets extremely angry with him and
implies that he uses a ' multiple graver.' This remarka-
ble tool is probably the oftspring of Mr. Linton's imagi-
nation, because we can7tot jind that any engraver of
repute in Nevj York ever saw one."

Mr. Linton never either named or referred to Mr. Jung-
ling. The only cut drawn by Mr. Kelly which Mr. Linton
criticized (a second being barely mentioned) has Mr.
Evans' name to it. Doubtless the multiple graver —
which this inquiring Reviewer dared not defend, and
which, therefore, /le could not fnd '■' that any engraver
of repute in New York ever saw" — w\as, at the time
Mr. Linton wrote, in use by the Reviewer's friend, Mr.
Jungling. Unveracity does not fit the occasion here.
Am I "spiteful"? I knows but refrain from giving, this
Reviewer's name. He has friends who would be ashamed
of him.

Of Mr. Jungling he writes that he engraves Mr. Kelly's
" white paint," and really "conveys its quality." But
" the eflects are not brilliant."

Concerning photography, the remarks of this teacher

MY REVIEWERS 13

of " one hundred and twenty thousand readers " are of
equal value. That subject will be treated further on.
Here it may be enough to observe that he has evidently
been misled by the errand-boy. The errand-boy must
have known better.

Am I counting — rather discounting — all the Sun
spots.? Mercy, no! It were a labor of Hercules. They
lie so thick that the sunlight on this occasion is but
•' darkness made visible." It is a veritable eclipse of that
brilliant luminary, an eclipse not foretold in the almanac.
But lo ! before my mental vision stalks a profane person
turning up his nose at the SUN. " Who looks there for
Art?" Most irreverent! shall we try the Nation?
Nil-admirari is not always blind ; may possibly have
discovered the hidden secrets of engraving on wood. Let
us see. But the Nation requires a chapter to itself.

" NOBLE SIMPLICITY "

" '' I ^HERE are two old styles of wood-engraving be-
X loved of purists and critical students of this art,
and each of them is noble and good : the plain black-
outline work, best known to moderns in Dtirer's and in
Holbein's designs ; and the white-line work known as
Bewick's, in which the untouched surface of part of the
block gives strong blacks, into which the white is car-
ried by touches of the graver, every one of which tells.
We might add to these the so-called ' chiaroscuro' prints
of the Italians and others ; but their large scale and use
of tints, of color and of shade, put them to one side.
The black-outline style and the black-mass-and-white-line
stvle are both excellent, and those who love them may be
forgiven for feeling a certain repulsion from modern
work ; but it is clear that modern work cannot follow
both these styles at once. No person can conceive a
combination of the two. We agree with Mr. Linton's

H

NOBLE SIMPLICITY 15

definition of the first as a mere mechanical cutting out of
an outline-drawing made by a master, and of the second
as the earliest and greatest development of fine art in
wood-engraving — provided, always, that we except the
chiaroscuro prints. And we think there is a tendency
visible through the exaggerations and mistakes, and even
the affectations, of the new and peculiar style of engrav-
ing which is now being developed by Scribner' s Alonthly
and Harpei'''s JMonthly, to work back towards the con-
ception and handling of the Bewick school. Its noble
simplicity it may not be for the nineteenth century to
attain, but its directness of method we may reach ; and
if we do, it will be through such work as Mr. Linton
either assails with violence or passes with contemptuous
silence."

This is the Nation's summing up of a labored and
much-considered article, headed "Fine Arts — Wood-
Engraving," reviewing the controversy between the At-
lantic and Sc7'ibner. Fine words ! over which never-
theless the Reviewer stumbles and breaks his shins.
For " fine words butter no parsnips." Let us examine
the whole judicial utterance !

" There are two old styles of wood-engraving beloved
of purists and critical students of this art, and each of
them is noble and good : the plain black-outline work,
best known to moderns in Durer's and in Holbein's de-

16 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

signs;" and then, "We agree with Mr. Linton's defini-
tion of the first as a mere mechanical cutting-out of an
outline-draivingy

Now one would suppose tiiat " purists and critical
students of this art " would at least have some clear idea
of what it is that is " beloved of" them. Also the Re-
viewer of Mr. Linton's writing should have read, not
only with his elbows, what Mr. Linton's definition was of
the engraving of Durcr's and Holbein's designs. Surely
Mr. Linton never defined it as the (mechanical or other)
" cutting out of an outline-drawing;" simply because, as
every engraver knows, and everv print-collector also
knows, neither Diirer's nor Holbein's designs can be so
defined. Dlirer did draw in outline — his Apocalypse^
for instance ; Holbein has some outline designs in Eras-
mus' Praise of Folly^ and a few others of little impor-
tance elsewhere ; but neither can have his work charac-
terized as outline-work. None of Diirer's most important
drawings-on-wood arc in outline: the Greater Passion^
the Little Passion, the Life of the Virgin^ the Arch of
Alaximiliaii, like evervthing else I can call to mind of
any importance, are all shaded, sometimes even rich in
color, light and shadow. I repeat, I can at this moment
recollect nothing in outline except the Apocalypse. Nor
is Holbein's method different, save in the slight exceptions
I have noted. His one great work on wood, the Dance

NOBLE SIMPLICITY 17

of Deatli. is certainly not in ontlinc, nor, by any amount
of courteous equivocation, to be allowed to be so -defined.
When a Reviewer comes out so grandiloquently with his
purists and critical students, he should know what he is
talking about. Of course he has never seen the original
Dtirers or the original Holbeins ; I know they are scarce :
yet he need not take all upon hearsay. Is it possible he
has never fallen across any of the many copies extant.?
In J. W. Bouton's bookstore (address in New York Di-
rectory)^ or, handier perhaps, at the New York Litho-
graphic, Engraving, and Printing Co.'s (used to be at
i6 and iS Park Place — may have removed but will also
be found in the Directory)^ the Little Passion may be
seen, reproduced in fac-simile, so that the critical student
cannot be deceived; and he will see that so much at least
of Dtlrer's work is not to be defined as outline. It may
be worth his seeing before his next Fine-Art article.

But though the charitable re-reviewer may opine that
the critical student has never seen a Dtirer or a Holbein,
said student's further remarks may yet be instinct with
artistic wisdom. Give him the benefit of the iloubt till
you have read the following !

Of the two styles beloved of him, he says, one is the
black-outline (let him off the outline) work of Durer and
Holbein ; the other the white-line work known as Be-
wick's, "• In -which the untouched surface of part of the

18 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

block gives st7'ong blacks" whereby he distinguishes that
from the Dtirer black-not-outhne style. But the un-
touched surface of the block gives blacks in the Diirer
work also ; does so likewise in the veriest outline work :
it is the peculiarity of wood-engraving and all work
which has to be printed from the surface. And the
strojtg blacks he notices as so distinctive of the Bewick
blocks are not in any sense stronger than the blacks in
the Dtirer blocks. Indeed, black is just black everywhere ;
and one black differs not from another in blackness. It
is only the quantity of black, or its relative position, that
can justify you in saying this is blacker than that.
Wherefore I am forced to admit that I know nothing in
Bewick's work more black — with a greater proportionate
quantity or power of blackness in it — than the blackness
to be found in some of the before-mentioned Little Pas-
sion blocks and other of Diirer's "outlines."

I am closely following the argument of my learned
friend. Into these strong blacks of Bewick's, he tells us,
" the "johite is carried by touches of the graver^ every
one of -which tells." This almost looks like technical ac-
quaintance. Yet really it does not matter what the block
is, or whose, Bewick's or anybody's ; every touch of the
graver in a piece of wood produces white, and cannot do
otherwise. The Reviewer is merely saying, in his pecu-
liar way, in words that are not very clear, not being

NOBLE SIMPLICITY 19

clear himself, that the untouched part of the Bewick
block (as of any other) would print solid black, and when
the graver cuts out a piece of the solid, there is so much
white. If you cut a piece out of a potato, there will be
a piece out. We need not a Fine-Art Reviewer im-
ported expressly by the JVatio7t to tell us that.

He proceeds : — "The black-outline style and the black-
mass-and-white-line style are both excellent, and those
who love them (purists and critical art-students) may be
forgiven for feeling a ceitain repulsioii from modern
work ; but it is clear that modern work cannot follow
both these styles at once. No persofz ca?z conceive a
combination of the t-ivo." Gently ! gently ! A combi-
nation of \vl)at two? Black lines left on the block and
white lines cut in the block? My good sir! are you
prepared to say that } ou ever took note of a block in
which there was not that combination? I do not tell
you that the two styles cannot be kept distinct ; I only
doubt your perception of the diflerence. Did you ever
see a number of Harper's Weekly jfouriial of Civiliza-
tion? In any number of that, or of Harper's Monthly^
or of our favorite Scribner^ you may find your inconceiv-
able combination. I do not mean (to be plain with
you) that you will find anything equal to a Holbein
"outline," whicli was cut altogether in fac-similc [the
also fac-similc Jetlcrson, p. 333 in Scribner for July.

20 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

is not quite up to that] ; or anything even of the guache
series so good as Bewick's white-line, which, as you cor-
rectly inform us, was done by touches of the graver [so
was the Jefferson] ; but you will find black-line of the
Holbein fashion — if not to be beloved like the Hol-
beins, and white-line as in Bewick — if not of his
artistic excellence, in almost every cut on which your
" certain repulsion " may allow you to set a purist's
eyes.

Yet another comment as you continue. Each of these
styles of wood-engraving (you tell us), " that best known
to moderns in Diirer's and in Holbein's designs — " [Par-
don me a moment! Moderns who know anything about
this early style know it just as well from the Ntiremberg
Chi'onicle^ or from the works of the " Little Masters,"
as from any other plank-cuts. Go on again !] " Each
of these styles" — that known in Diirer's and Holbein's de-
signs, and that known in Bewick's — "is noble and good."
How is that — when " we agree with Mr. Linton's defini-
tion of the first as a mere mechanical cutting-out".'' Very
good mere mechanical cutting out may be ; but what of
nobleness is there in unskilled carpenter's work, the merest
mechanism, which requires but hand-labor, patience, antl
exactness, and has never need or even room for art, or
taste, or judgment.? Surely noble in this connection is
a misapplied term! Each noble and good? And no

NOBLE SIMPLICITY 21

difference between the ''mere mechanical cutting out"
and the " greatest development of fine art " ? Yes ! one :
the greatest development is further characterized as of
" noble simplicity." Simplicity should rather belong to
the ruder and primitive method. One would think that
it were simpler to outline with a jack-knife, and to gouge
out the spaces between four straight lines, or even four
curved lines, than to draw expressively with a graver —
which drawing alone entitled Bewick to the rank of
Artist. " Noble simplicity " perhaps means something
else ; but will not in any sense apply to Bewick. His
mechanism was not so much simple as rude ; and his
work is noble only as artist-work, in spite of mechan-
ical disability — which is not simplicity.

Let the Reviewer finish ! Here is his peroration, his
conclusion of the whole matter: — " Wc think there is a
tendency, visible through the exaggerations and i7iis-
takcs, and even the affectations of the new and pectdiar
style of engraving which is now being developed in
Scribner's Monthly and in Harper''s Monthly, to work
back towards the conception and handling of the Bewick
school. Its noble simplicity it may not be for the nine-
teenth century to attain" [a sad look-out for the masters
of the peculiar style] ; '-but its directness of method we
may reacli ; and if we do, it will be through such work
as Mr. Linton either assails with violence or passes with
contemptuous silence."

22 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

Which means (if it be worth while to seek the mean-
ing of a teacher wliose incompetence is so manifest, a
critic who defines Diirer's work as outline, and who in
his noble simplicity — I dare wager — cannot tell a Bewick
from a Clennell) tliat the artistic and most nnmechanical
handling of Bewick is to be "worked back to" — mean-
ing perhaps recovered — by a purely mechanical and
utterly unartistic method, the tendency to such recovery
being shown in the exaggerations and mistakes and
affectations of its mechanical peculiarities, in such en-
<Travings as Mr. Cole's undeveloped Emerson — suffi-
ciently noticed in the Atlantic^ and the " pen-and-ink "
St. Gaudens — to be noticed hereafter, in Scribner for
June.

What we ought to understand by the co7iceptio7t of
the Bewick school I am at a loss to conceive. The
knowledge may not be necessary for the nineteenth cen-
tury. Twenty years hence some Nation Reviewer may
explain, and tell us also how elaboration of useless work
and multiplication of meaningless lines betray their ten-
dency towards directness of method. The nature of my
present subject may excuse me from following the Re-
viewer further into chiaroscuro. He is probably as
clear in his obscurity there as in his perception of black
and white. Only I may inform him that he is wrong as
to the exceeding size of such works. They are not larger

NOBLE SIMPLICITY 23

than many things in what he calls outline. Dtlrer's Arch
of Maximiliaji measures some ten feet each way. I
speak from recollection, not actual measurement.

Does an innocent reader wonder that the editor of
the N^aiioti can publish such a farrago? What is a
poor editor to do? Mostly or nearly omniscient, he does
not know everything. Of engraving on wood I may
safely assert that an editor is sometimes without exten-
sive knowledge. Wliat can he do, when our subscribers
have to be told concerning it? O'C. writes readably on
art-subjects ; he has the rim of the studios, has crammed
himself with art-nomenclature, knows what guache is,
and is up to scutnblhtg. So O'C. is detailed for an
article concerning wood-engraving.

Having studied the cookery-book, he first catches his
engraver. Honest man, he goes at once to head-quarters
for the information that shall put a soul into his periods.
Now we engravers, " the most industrious of workers,"
if we ma}' not drink like draughtsmen, or Reviewers, are
not universally inaccessible to beer. Although an Eng-
lishman, I can drink some myself. In the present diffi-
culty the talismanic words, instead of Open Scsa?fic, are
Zzvci Lager. Behold us insifle the cave, embryo Re-
viewer (only interviewer as yet) and his captured instruc-
tor, seated at some round or square table in a quiet
corner, where unmolested we may pursue our studies,

24 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

make inquiries, and note down replies ; only occasionally
interrupting our research with the cabalistic sign of two
fingers held up bar-ward, when fresh draughts of the
soothing if not inspiring fluid help us on our dreary
way. How many afternoons must be devoted before such
a mass of information as that three cents' worth in the
Sun can be noted down, the mere fruit of inquiry gath-
ered, to be afterwards pressed and strained and watered,
shall we sav also fusil-oiled to give the required pun-
gency?— and then tlie vintage fresh from the wood
served out through the editorial tap ! Is it not rather a
wonder that newspaper readers are put in possession of
so much ; which, if they cannot understand, they yet in
their noble simplicity may believe to be ver}' good?
Only I would advise them not implicitly to trust even the
little they may think intelligible. Interviewers may be
experts ; but their evidence would not stand as such in
a court of law. See what a mess both Sun and Nation
have made of this engraving matter! Do not imagine
that they are singularly luifortunate. An editor cannot
help it. He can but pick up his man, see that his Eng-
lish is tolerable, and keep unnecessary personalities out
of his paper. That last item it were well if he supervised
more religiously.

For the rest, reviews are not always so honestly ob-
tained and furnished as that of our accomplished cellar-

NOBLE SIMPLICITY 25

man. Private malice (of which the editor cannot he
aware) may creep in. Would yon care to read A's
" opinion " of B's engraving, when you knew that A
lay in wait for the opportunity to revile B, because B
had not admired A's sister's drawings? Such petty mo-
tives do actuate Reviewers ; and find encouragement in
mutual-admiration societies, small semi-private clubs or
coteries, whose members esteem it the whole duty of
man, or woman, to laud and magnify each other, and to
fall foul on all who doubt their claim to glory.

x\gainst these abuses of reviewership there is but one
safeguard and but one remedy. The safeguard is to trust
no anonymous writing. The remcdv will be a whole-
some law against such writing. The " remedy " of an
action for libel against an impecunious slanderer or a
wealtliy vendor of slander, is not of much avail. Hon-
orable Reviewers of course there are, men who would
disdain to let their personal feelings have weight for or
against their unbiassed opinions. Capable men there
aie too, even in art-matters, who know the limit of
their own knowledge and who would not consent to
pronounce on subjects on which they had to be coached.
But how shall 3 ou distinguish these while all alike con-
sent to wear the coward's mask? The uninitiated can-
not always discern a writer's style. And when the
writer has no style.? You fancy you have the erudition

26

HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

of Mr. Shinn, and it is only the eloquence of Mr. Laf-
fan, or vice versa. It does not matter. The public is
an unseeing public ; and in the country of the blind
Polyphemus-Anonymus bears rule as — "a Reviewer."

K.-^

TWO ART CRITICS
After Holbein — from the Fraise of Fc"y.

FAC-SIMILE

F AC-SIMILE, to explain for the benefit of the un-
scholarly, — including Reviewers who take it to
mean outline, — fac-simile is a compound Latin word
meaning so7nething done i?z exact likeness of something
else.

Exact likeness. Bear this in mind ! A reduction or
an enlargement is not a fac-simile ; and when a pen-and-
ink drawing is reduced even by the exactest photography,
and so placed on the wood, the engraving can only be
a fac-simile of the photograph. It is not a fac-simile of
the original pen-and-ink drawing. A noteworthy instance
of the mistake of supposing a i-eduction to be a fac-
simile is to be found in the History of Wood-engraving
by Jackson and Chatto. Jackson, to show the character
of the plank-blocks, gives a representation of one — a
Rubens. The size of the original block is perhaps
two feet by sixteen inches. He reduces it to about three

27

28 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

inches by two. Of course the reduced cut, not being a
fac-simile, gives the design and nothing more ; does not
show the style of work, and so is worthless for the pur-
pose for which he took it — as an example of plank-
cutting.

Fac-simile, as applied to engraving on wood, means
that the drawing or photograph on the wood is chiefly
in lines, which lines should be distinct, not blurred, or
rubbed in confusedly. Whatever of rubbing in or blur-
ring, or of what is called tint (washing in with a brush),
is in the drawing is so much of departure from pure
fac-simile. These clear and definite lines the engraver
has to faithfully preserve, so as to produce by his en-
graving an exact repetition of the drawing or photo-
graph. An outline-drawing must be cut in fac-simile ;
but a fac-simile is not necessarily an outline-drawing.
Plate I (engraved by E. J. Whitney from a drawing by
John Gilbert, one of the artist's early drawings before
success and newspaper haste had led him into careless-
ness) we will hex'e consider as an example of fac-simile
work, the exact representation of Gilbert's lines with the
exception — the exception proving the rule — of some
small portions which I proceed to point out. The con-
stable's waistcoat, the shadow over the basket and under
the old woman's cloak, the shadow of the basket-handle
on her arm, a little bit under the basket, the shadowed

"^--^"^..^^T^^

Plate i.

FAC-SIMILE 29

face of the boy in front, some slight shadow on the two
distant figures at the right of the cut, and it iiiay be the
level sky, are engraved in regular lines, indicating that
Gilbert had merely rubbed in those parts, trusting to the
engraver to render his effect with suitable lines. The
rest may be considered as exact to the drawing, cleanly
cut, line for line — very excellent work. I do not mean
that there is any pretence of passing it off as the likeness
of a pencil-drawing. Gilbert's lines, many of them, were
certainly grey ; and in the printed cut, however delicately
printed, the most delicate lines are black. I have known
men draw with a silver point, so that their firmest lines
were grey, not black ; and a photograph, even from a
black-line drawing, may be not black, but brown, on the
wood. It is therefore not a mock pencil-drawing or
sham photograph which the exact engraver produces, but
a fair and, so nearly as his mechanical skill enables him,
a close reproduction in black lines of the grey lines of tlie
pencil, the brown lines of the photograph, or the jjositive
black lines (but even here some lines may not have been
really black) of the pen-and-ink drawing.

On the first rude plank-blocks — I suppose on all —
the drawings were made with brush or pen in bold,
firm, unvarying black lines, with little crossing of the
lines. Gravers could not be used on the plank, as the
grain would rough up, or the wood split and rend, ac-

30 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

cording to the direction in which you attempted to cut.
All this old work was done with knives, and gouges for
the broader lights or masses of white ; and as the work
became more difficult, from the greater elaboration or
minuteness of the drawings, variously-shaped knives, and
gouges of different sizes to clear out tlie larger spaces,
came into use.

The earliest of these plank-blocks, on which, before
the invention of movable types, both picture and lettering
were cut, were very rude. Any boy could cut such.
When purists go into ecstasies over the noble engraving-
work from Diirer's drawings, they do but ignorantly
rave and imagine a vain thing. The designs are noble,
and the drawing ; but the engraving is only mechanism,
not always skilled mechanism. The cutting here-beneath

FAC-SIMILE 31

is a tolerably close copy of part of an engraving from the
Greater Passion^ and may serve to show the character of
the best work on these plank-blocks. Skilfnl indeed is the
mechanism of the cnts of Holbein's Dance of Death.
Wonderfully minute and precise and delicate must have
been Holbein's touch ; and one would hesitate before de-
nying to workmen who could perceive and preserve that
delicacy some title to be considered artists. Notwith-
standing, if there is — and surch' tlierc is — a distinction
to be insisted on between the artist and the mechanic^
we can but at last place the producers of even such con-
summate workmanship, at the head of the mechanical
class certainly, but not higher. Excepting these Hol-
beins and very little else of the old time, Japanese cut-
ting of to-day, of the same character, is quite as good as
that so lauded and beloved of purists ; and some quite
recent German work far more skilful, of such clearness
.and delicacy as scarcely to be distinguished from the best
fac-simile done with the graver.

Bewick's \vork was all graver-work (if any one used
the graver on wood before him, I do not know), cut on
the end of the grain, on rounds, or parts of rounds of
boxwood, a wood chosen because, while hard and close-
grained, it yet is easily cut. The old plank-blocks were
of jiear, lime, or some other kind of soft wood, more easily
cut and so more suitable for knife-work.

32 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

Bewick's work was in white-line ; that is, his drawing
being made with a brush, and perhaps some little defini-
tion with a pencil, he trusted to his graver for the rest,
inventing the requisite lines as he went on. Of this
white-line work I shall speak later. I confine myself
now to fac-simile — the leaving of lines drawn, as in
Plate I and other cuts, Durer's, etc., of which I have
spoken.

Branston (contemporary with Bewick, though not quite
so early) and his school, also used the graver ; and since
them English, French, and American engravers have
done the same. They were using knife-tools in Paris
sixty years ago, when Charles Thompson, a younger
brother of John, went there to establish himself as an en-
graver. In Germany I am not sure that knives, as well
as gravers, are not used even to the present day.

Branston and Thompson engraved in both white-line
and fac-simile. I use the word fac-simile in contradis-
tinction to white-line because in both cases the engrav-
ing is printed in black ; and the talk of " black-outline "
as the opposite of white-line is meaningless.

Thurston's drawings for John Thompson, in which
Thompson's excellence as an engraver was first mani-
fested, were, I believe, drawn line for line on the wood,
as if he were etciiing on a plate, only with the regularity
of line to which a line-entrraver is educated and which

FAC-SIMILE 33

the freer-handed etcher avoids. I do not say that al!
were so drawn, though I have seen sucli from his hand.
Thompson probably did not cut any in quite absolute
fac-simile, because in most of his work, certainly in all
his later work, there is the stamp of his own individu-
ality ; and Thurston, no doubt, knowing Thompson's
ability in white-line, would have often spared himself
the drawing of mere lines, trusting to Thompson to draw
with his graver the sufficient equivalent — a mf)re regular
tint. In the parts I noted as exceptional in Plate I, the
same license is observable. That combination of the two
styles, so impossible for the Natioit critic to conceive, is
to be seen there, as it is throughout Thompson's Thurs-
ton-work ; the fac-simile not absolutely exact, but only
departed from as taste and judgment ordered, when the
engraver's own white-line was brought into use. Infe-
rior to Bewick as an artist, claiming no originality as a
designer, John Thompson is unequalled as an engraver.
The same taste and judgment are recognizable in Plate
I and in the cut at page 69. " Washed drawings," how-
ever, from Bewick's first beginning were in common
use, — drawings in tints, for which the engraver had to
design the representative lines. Drawings on wood were
either such, or else generally of the mixed fac-simile I
have described as Tluirston's, in which the copper-plate
" line-engraving " was taken as pattern. So the absolute

34 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

fac-simile of the old plank-cutters went somewhat out of
fashion, but certainly never out of use. The Cruikshanks
and Seymour maintained its reputation. Every appren-
tice was taught to master fac-simile before venturing on
his own lines. The kind of " fac-simile " for which the
brothers Dalziel were famous, and with which I have
found fault, was not, as an ignorant Reviewer has stated,
a " resuscitation " of the old plank-work ; and though it
is true that I compared it with that as being only me-
chanical^ I never spoke of it as reaching to any even
mechanical excellence. The manufacturers to whom I
objected did not indeed cut in fac-simile {exact folloxv-
ing of the drawing) ; but were content to leave un-
meaning wood, " near enough," in place of drawn lines,
as the following diagrams will explain.

A — Durer-work : lines cut by a careful knife-
nser of the early time : an exact reproduction
(tliat is, fac-simile) of the lines drawn. Good
graver-work is of the same character.
B — Dalziel-work. The same lines as in A,
but as they would be engraved by the near-
enough fac-simile school; which a well-
trained Chinese rat would gnaw out with
more nearness. The example is of course much mag-
nified, as the difference might pass uniioticed in very
"fine" — that is to say, minute work.

FAC-SIMILE

35

This (B) is the pretence of fac-simile against which
I have always striven as deteriorating and demoralizing
the worker, whatever excuse might be foimd for it in the
unintelligilMlity and worthlcssness of the confused net-
work of lines with wliich Leech and Gilbert, and other
hasty or slovenly or careless draughtsmen, covered so
large a portion of their drawings. For Leech, if he
rarely considered a line (proof, the Stin critic thinks,
of his certainty of hand), it was not because it did not
need consideration, but because he had not the faculty,
wanting an artist's education : which is not underrating
his natural artistic gift.

In course of time the Dalziel rats improved, and at last
turned out some really good fac-simile work, clean,
honest, and minute, but at best mechanical. The me-
chanics in Punch also improved, in a great measure
owing to the careful drawings of Tenniel.

It is good fac-simile work, however mechanical, when
the lines are so cleanly cut that they look like steel-en-
graving, whether laid regularly and designedly as in a
" line-engraving," or loosely and easily (not carelessly)
as in a good etching. Of course there can be good fac-
simile rendering of even a careless drawing ; the engrav-
er's skill thrown away on it, as on the Jeflcrson and the
St. Gaudens, in Scrib7ier (July and June). The test of
good work is readily applied, even by the most ignorant

36 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

of inquirers. Refer again to examples A and B, at
page 34. The best pure fac-simile work I know of at
the present day will be found occasionally in the Ger-
man illustrated papers. I call to mind, though I cannot
at this writing place them for reference, certain portraits
which might fairly pass for engravings on steel,* the
highest praise I can give to works of such perfect mechan-
ism. But note that all this is mechanism, and not art.
The Dalziel-work is, I think, sufficiently shown to be
not fac-simile at all. Using the term " Dalziel-work," I
am merely giving a name to the whole class of dishon-
est, "near-enough" pretence of following lines, without
any real care to maintain them in their purit}', — work
which I have already described, which the Dalziel es-
tablishment was, I think, mainly instrumental in popu-
larizing, although it is to be seen also in the early num-
bers of Pttnch^ and wherever else cheap cutting was
thought good enough for the publisher's purpose. I
would by no means la}' all the responsibility upon the

* Lest the Reviewer suppose that this contradicts what I said
in the Atlantic, that it is 710 Jiattery to have a wood-e7igravi)ig
supposed to be on steel, I would observe that I am here speaking
of only facsimile, the mechanical excellence of which cannot
be other than an imitation of metal-work. In all but this
mechanical fac-simile, wood-work has its own peculiar excel-
lence, which ought not to be mistaken.

FAC-SIMILE 37

Dalziels, and mention their name, as I name also Leech
and Gilbert, only as repiesentative. They were not the
only sinners. And here, lest again I be taken to task for
spite and personal animosity, by some gentle-souled Re-
viewer, I embrace the occasion to declare that I mean
no disrespect personally to the brothers Dalziel, men, so
far as I had opportunity of judging of them (and I was
not without opportunity), honorable and of considerable
talent, and I suppose not without artistic instincts and
care for reputation as artists. . Nevertheless they seem,
to me, in this matter of engraving to have preferred suc-
cess in business to success in art. It is said you cannot
serve God and Mammon. Their art has suffered accord-
ingly, and their example has been harmful to engraving
in general. Something has to be said, too, not only of
the carelessness, but also of the foolishness of painters
who, insisting on their every line being kept, could not
see or did not notice that it was kept only in appearance,
not in reality. Take notice again of

I have praised the German work for its likeness to steel.
Strictly speaking, all absolutely fac-simile work, from

38 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

Diirer's to the latest Scribner^ is but an imitation
of steel (or copper), a rendering, by wood left on the
surface, of the lines which in a steel engraving are in-
dented. The one reason for having such woik done on
wood is that it can be printed with t3'pe. It never can
rival the delicacy of steel.

In artistic worth, beyond this exact fac-simile is the
rendering of line-drawings (in outline or with complica-
tion of lines) in which the very line itself has variety and
feeling: not to be seen in the work of the ordinary
draughtsman. Such lines will be found in pencil-draw-
ings by Flaxman or Mulready ; and in some little pen-
and-ink outlines by Stothard, in Rogers' Poc?ns, men-
tioned in my Atlaiitic article. No mere mechanic could
perceive or without perceiving reproduce the subtle
beauty of these last. Thompson, the master of the
graver, was not artist enough for that ; and the advan-
tage an artist may have even in ''mechanical" work
was shown by Clennell's rendering of some of these. I
have them by three hands. One man, only a mechanic,
missed their beauty altogether : yet I dare say the unar-
tistic critic and purist might have praised him for his
exact rcinodiiction of the drawing, and found a noble
simplicity in his work. Thompson, perhaps from his
very mastership not caring for close exactitude, also
missed the beauty of touch in the originals. Of course

FAC-SIMII,E 39

he came very much nearer than the mechanic : but the
cuts are Thompson's. Only Clennell reproduced Stoth-
ard. The one man could stamp the inark of his own
genius and individuality upon them. His was a higher
art who forgot himself in his work.

I speak of this (not able to give specimens, and know-
ing that the work is too scarce for reference) to show that
I appreciate and to obtain appreciation for the difficulty
of engraving even the simplest work ; and to emphasize
the necessity of artistic feeling in everything that is to
bear the name of Art. I return to Plate I, having yet
some remarks to make on the already indicated differ-
ences of fac-simile.

Observe especially the lines on the right thigh of the
constable. They are probably line for line where Gilbert
drew them ; but yet they are not his lines, nor could he
have drawn such. They are graver-lines. They are not
merely mechanical rendering, nor only the i-egular lines
in place of rubbing-in which I elsewhere distinguished ;
they arc such artistic work as Thompson put in his
Thurston drawings. The same sort of rendering will be
found wherever the engraver is the equal of the draughts-
man. He does not servilely, Chinese-like, repeat each
individual line. Where the draughtsman has halted or
slipped, drawn falsely or insufficientlv, he takes his place,
enters into the spirit of his work, corrects, and can some-

40 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

times more truthfully express the real intention of the
original even in what we have called, and for distinction's
sake must call, fac-simile.

So I would lead the student of wood-engraving to un-
dei-stand that of " fac-simile " there are four kinds: —

I — Absolutely exact mechanical rendering: whether
of the old plank-cutting, or as in ordinary good graver-
work since. An excellent example of the last may be
found in Scribner for August : Jungling's " Riault the
Engraver," page 488.

2 — Equally exact but artistic rendering (for there is
artistic exactness as well as mechanical exactness) of
such exceptional drawings as the Stothards : the nearest
to which in the mechanical class are the cuts in Holbein's
Dance of Death. No classification can be perfectly cor-
rect. Only we must sometimes classify, to get through
comparison at clearness of judgment.

3 — Not exact rendering, but artistic modification and
ti'anslation of even clearly-drawn lines, vvhich I may call
the Thompson manner ; such as I have noted in his ren-
dering of the Stothards and throughout his Thurston-
work. This kind also may be seen in Plate I.

4 — Unexact, careless, dirty, "near-enough " rendering:
which passes as fac-simile only with as careless observers
or those who are utterly ignorant of engraving. Unar-
tistic, and without even mechanical correctness, such

FAC-SIMILE

41

work (as my reader will now perceive) is not really fac-
simile, the indispensable condition of which, whether
mechanical or artistic, is clearness of line, especially
where lines cross.

I have perhaps said enough to enable an intelligent
reader to know what engraving-in-fac-simile is. I pass
on to white-line work, the true and more distinctive
province of wood-engraving. In saying which I am
happily not contradicted by the Reviewers.

WHITE-LINE

WHITE-LINES in wood are produced — as the
Reviewer has informed us — by taking pieces of
wood out of a plain wood-surface, called a block by
wood-engravers, with a " graver," a tool used for that
purpose. You can, according to the size of the graver
and the energic force of your hand, take or cut out a
small piece or a large piece, and cut a short line or a
long line ; and wherever these pieces are taken out, be
they round or square or of shape most indescribable, be
they narrow or broad, or short or long, when you ink
the block (the effect the same on a plank) and press it
firmly upon paper, there will be white specks or lines, —
the rest of the impression, if you have ink and impres-
sion enough, being "strong" black. From my friend
the Nation Reviewer's attempt at explanation I gather or
deduce so much : and speaking as a practical engraver,
I may say the description is correct. I hope it is as

42

WHITE-LINE 43

intelligible as true. Plate II (the Crucifixion^ a copy of
a wood-cut, or metal plate engraved wood-fashion, by the
hand of the poet-painter William Blake) shows exactly
what " white-line " is.

It will at once be noticed that, though the black in this
engraving is not any stronger than the black in Plate I,
or than the black in the printed letters of this sentence,
yet there is much black. There would of course have
been less black if more of the wood had been cut away,
as in Plates III and IV ; still less had so much been cut
away as in Plate I : but in all these four engravings, and
though we call the first (Plate I) black-line (say fac-simile)
and the other three white-line, the process is one and the
same. In fact a wood-engraving (till Scrihner shall help
us with some nezv invention) is only pi'oducible by cut-
ting away wJiat you mean to be xvhite and leavijzg what
you intend to be black. So far the procedure is the very
reverse of what is known as engraving on steel or copper :
albeit it will easily be understood that the wood-method
can be followed on metal also, — not so conveniently,
metal being harder than wood. It is followed on steel
and copper and brass when for certain purposes the
metal is required. The English penny postage-stamp, a
very beiiutiful piece of work, was (if my recollection is
not at fault) engraved on metal by John Thompson,
the wood-engraver. Book-binders' ornamental tools, or

44 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

stamps, on metal — as they have to resist heat, are en-
graved in the same manner. To return to wood.

This cutting away of whites and leaving blacks being
the necessity of surface-printed wood-engraving, in what
consists the difference between fac-simile as already de-
scribed and "white line"? In this: — In the first the
engraver, as already said, having his lines laid down
by the pencil, pen, etc., has only to outline such lines
with his graver (of old his knife) and then to clear
away to sufficient depth (that the ink may not touch it)
the intervening wood. There may be scope in fac-
simile, as has been already shown, for artistic as well as
for mechanical treatment, but the engraver is still more
or less closely confined to certain lines. In what we
call white-line work the engraver has only a tinted, or
washed, drawing on the wood, with perhaps some pen-
ciling, part, it may be, rubbed in and part in lines,
chiefly with the purpose of better defining those portions
which the draughtsman did not consider sufficiently
made^out. Here the engraver is raised from being the
humble follower of the draughtsman into an equality
with him, having now to furnish the lines which shall
best represent the unlined drawing. That is to say, he
must draw with his graver. Bewick would not have
troubled himself to draw a feather line for line ; whether
he drew it with brush or pencil, he left the lines for his

WIIITE-I.INE 45

graver. It was a freiir method of working. And now
notice the result! Had he drawn line lor line, those
black lines (black when printed) had given him only a
poor imitation of a copper-plate. Almost the best fac-
simile must sutler in comparison. Perhaps even Be-
wick's best had done so. But when he drew in white-
line, he found out a new style altogether, and invented
engraving-on-'wood. The old style — the imitation of
copper — was not lost or abandoned; the engraver could
still use that when he would (though Bewick himself
paid little or no heed to it) : but the new method gave
him a power unknown before. With the use of this new
power engraving-on-wood became a distinct art.

Observe now that this method rules throughout the
engravings I give here as specimens — Plates II, III,
IV, and also in tlie cuts on pages 53, 81. Do not at
present mind about their merit as engravings. Be they
never so bad, they may serve to sufficiently explain what
I have to say. They are all in white-line : without any
admixture of fac-simile except what I shall presently
note in one of them.

The method employed in Plate II (the white line on
the black, which is all the engraving there is) is plain
enough. It is the same method carried out in the rest.

Notice next Plate III (the good grey poet, Walt Whit-
man) engraved from a tinted and slightly penciled draw-

46 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

ing by the late Edward Skill. In the lighter portions
of the beard some fac-simile lines will be seen (you will
find such in the lightest parts of most wood-engravings) ;
but with that exception all is white-line. The edges of
the beard and hair arc plainK- enough seen to be that;
and white cross lines on the forehead and elsewhere will
be easily discovered by unprofessional eyes : but the
whole cut (throughout, save the few lines of beard before
noted) is done in the same manner. It Is the white line
on which the engraver depended for iiis drawing, not at-
tending to or caring for or thinking of any particular
black line to be retained or given ; it was with the white
line that he drew and defined and endeavored to express
everything, whether the modeling of the features, the tex-
ture of the coat, or the mere color in the tint behind.

Now look at Plate IV" (from Bryant's Flood of Tears).
Drawn and engraved by me, it is very likely " feeble and
monotonous " ; but as the draughtsman I may know
whether my engraving reproduced the drawing. There
again (which is all I care to maintain at present) all is
white-line. The drawing was, like the Whitman, nearly
all tint, with only a few pencil outlines of the flowers.
The flowers, grass, trees, are all drawn in white-line by
the graver. The falling water is the same. So far will
be seen at once. But the engraver will also see that the
level water, the distance, and the sky, are cut in the same

Plate III.

Plate IV

WHITE-LINE

47

way. Dislike the design, wish it were more forcible or
definite (not aware that the dreamy indistinctness is in ac-
cordance with the poet's words), be quite certain that it
is very badly engraved, — all that as may please you,
gentle reader or Reviewer ! What I want you to see
now is that it is drawn with the graver, and to under-
stand that tliis is properly ivhite-line. The cut below,

48 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

as opposite to these, — though my Reviewer may not
see the difference and may think it no worse than my
chosen specimens of good engraving, — is given in
order that I may make this remark: — whether good
or bad, faihng or succeeding, the graver-work in my own
cuts is dra-jjii^ with intention and design ; the work
in this other is without design. It too is white-Hue
work, as all ivood-engraving except Jac-simile must
be: but the white lines here are not drawn. The prac-
tised engraver knew that certain closeness of line, or
largeness of wood, would produce certain color, and
availed himself oi that knowledge : but for the meaning
of each particular line he was without an artist's care :
so that he has only filled his spaces with cut or left lines ;
fiiirly keeping the general effect of the draughtsman, but
losing the form and meaning in which the value of the
drawing, what mav more properly be called the dra-w-
ijigt consisted.

In direct contrast to this, notice the cut at page 69, by
Charlton Nesbit, a pupil of Bewick, and the engraver
of much of the best work that passes under the name of
Bewick ; the best c??graver of the Bewick school, though
as an artist far inferior to his master and to Clennell.
Printed from an electrotype, the original block repeatedly
used and much worn, the fresh beauty of th"b block is
lost, the outer lines being battered to pieces : still it may

WHITE-LINE. 49

serve to illustrate my point. It is from a drawing by
Thurston, the figures perhaps drawn ahnost in fac-simile.
Compare it especially with Plate I. It will show you how
hard it is to classify. This by Ncsbit is — except of
course the mere outlines — all -luhltc-line xvot-k \ and yet
Plate I, which cannot be classed except as fac-simile, has
(as I noted before) work in it of the same Thompson-
like, Thurston-likc, white-line character. It is indeed
scarcely possible, except in purely mechanical work, to
avoid that " inconceivable" combination of the two styles.

With these remarks for your guidance, go now and
examine for yourself! Whether in Scribner or Harper^
in newspaper or book, the same laws and limitations
hold good. Lines engraved with design may be bad or
good, according to the artistic intelligence or the capacity
of the engraver; but lines engraved without design — that
is, meaningless lines — are certain marks of unartistic
engraving.

There is of course a question of degree.

How bold or how fine the lines should be in an engrav-
ing from a washed drawing is reserved for the judgment
of the engraver, depending in some respect on the jjur-
pose for which the engraving is to be used, and the care
to be given in printing it. There would be no advan-
tage in " fine" work where the printing had to be hur-
ried or without care and best materials. One would not
4

50 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

have the work in Harper's MontJily Magazine so bold as
that in the ^Vcckly Ne~jcspapei'. Yet the bolder work
might be, and sliould be, as artistic as the minuter and
less bold (called finer). Also it may be left entirely to
the engraver's judgment — overriding even the opinion
of an art-student — to decide what kind or kinds of line
may be most fitting to represent his subject. On such
points opinions and tastes may differ. But on one point
there is no room for variance of opinion : that every line
should sho"v design : "joithout which the work is not
ivork oj" Art.

And here to say something of variety and purpose of
line. Scribncr'^s Reviewer continually repeats the word
lcgitii?iatc as mine, and as representing my bigoted ad-
herence to some indefinite conventional system of line.
I have never anywhere used the word, having no respect
for its meaning. Nor have I ever (as the Boston Post
asserts) " taken the ground that there is only one way to
attain satisfactory results." An aitist has the right to
make any experiments. All roads are right that will
lead him to the Eternal City. Go your own way, my
boy ! Onh' when you find yourself on the direct road to
Jericho, with your back toward Rome, it may be well
to turn. The right to prove all things, only holding fast
to what is good (a right I have cared to exercise as
much as most men), shuts the word legitimate out of

WHITE-LINE 51

my vocabulary. There are however foolish experiments :
there is also the folly of repeating experiments already
tried and found worthless, or of persisting in what zvas
experiment till it becomes a 7iianner — of which in art
there is always a dangerous likelihood.

Something has to be said in defence of what is called
conventional. It is not enough to sneer at it as " sacred
common-place" while bowing down with trembling ado-
ration before the young Conceit that would rule in its
stead. Grammar is but conventional : based however
on certain laws of language, studied and known to some
extent, if not absolutely determined. The laws of poetry-
are conventional. Men may eccentrically escape from
them ; but it is not given to every one to invent a new
rhytiimic system. And so though I or any other en-
graver may be free to try any experiments in line, it
may not be certain, is not perhaps likely, that we shall
altogether supersede the collective results of the many
quite as clever experimenters whose rules — I will not
say laws — have been codihed for our restriction. The
traditions of an earlier time, the records of others' oj^in-
ions, have some worth in them whatever the acknowl-
edged right of individual conscience. It is not by ig-
noring the past that the world progresses.

Certain conventional lines in engraving, invented before
Timotheus Cole was, even before the fossil era of W. J.

52 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

Linton, and adopted because they were found to be ex-
pressive, may yet be valuable. A curved line will better
represent roundness than a straight line can ; a rough
line will help to distinguish a rough surface ; a perpen-
dicular line may not be so suitable for water as a hori-
zontal line, unless indeed it be falling water. I perhaps
would not cut Niagara Falls with a horizontal line ;
albeit, "sacredly common-place," "bigoted," and "conserv-
ative" as I am, I myself have tried some curious experi-
ments. If you were drawing waves with a pencil you
would naturally follow in some measure their flow^ and
form : that is if you had perceived so much. If you
were drawing with chalk or pencil a hand or face, you
would find yourself soon imitating the roundness of a
projecting part or hollow with corresponding curved
lines. Your mere thought of the form, your first attempt
at outlining it, dictates the after course ; and the law that
governs such almost instinctive action is at the base of
all good lining for engraving. The man who cannot see
the beauty and propriety of this harmonious identifica-
tion of work with its subject, who sees no beauty in
line, ay ! even in mere regularity and the pleasant accord-
ance of lines one with another, is not an artist, can never
become a first-rate engraver, and is as unfitted to give an
opinion on engraving as a man color-blind to judge of
painting.

WHITE-I.INE

53

Unfitted to judge it as engraving. A painter may be
a good painter and yet not educated in engraving. He
may be content to see his picture represented with a cer-
tain uncouth or bare literal fidelity, because either lie is
afraid of his engraver, or he is careless of the graces of
engraving, or he is not aware that anything better can
be done. He has a perfect right to say, " That satisfies
me ; " but is not therefore necessarily competent to judge
of the merits of " that " as an engraving. He does not
call a photograph art, however closely it may repeat his
work ; and he may mistake when he thinks the engraved
copy of his picture to be art instead of tolcrablv success-
ful mechanism.

We have already crossed the threshold of that vexa-
tious question — What is art in engraving, and how to
be known from what is only mechanical?

MECHANISM AND ART

SAYS the aesthetic young man of the Times, preparing
the way before hhnself or Dr. Holland for the repe-
tition in Sa-ibncr ol his Tunes argument — ''The proof
of the pudding is in the eating"; look at our cuts in
our June number, and see how decidedly they refute Mr.
Linton's criticism of the cuts in former numbers ! Ex-
ultingly he points to the later work, which he pronounces
excellent: because "we perceive at once" that one (Ved-
der's Marsyas) "was from a drawing"; another (Cha-
pu's Gratitude') "gives the feeling of bronze " ; a third
(Dubois' Charity) "tells us immediately that the original
was plaister or clay " ; and a fourth (from a pen-and-ink
sketch by St. Gaudens after Dubois' statue of Faith) is
" faithfully reproduced " so that it cannot be mistaken for
anything except pen-and-ink. This, says our young man,
authoritatively summing up, " is realism," and (rather

54

MECHANISM AND ART

55

inconsequently) '' idealism may be better on general prin-
ciples. But it is all very well to talk of the ideal en-
gravers. Where are they?" Also, " artists have an
unaccountable dislike to free translation." And further,
not quite complimentarily to the magazine he is paid to
praise, — " Why make such a pother over magazine
illustrations.? It is absurd to clamor about high art over
the wood-cuts of the monthly press. . . . The magazines
are mediums for experiments." lu corpore vili^ etc.
Swallow then your Scribncr '•'■ pudding," which is experi-
mental and not high art ; and be grateful for new " pro-
gressive " methods of reproducing clay and plaister, char-
coal and pen-and-ink !

What does the reader learn from this, which is a fair
statement of the Times argument.? On my honor as an
encrraver, I can get nothing out of it except the suspicion
that the young man was ignorantly — mixed. If it means
anything, it would seem to be this : that Scribfier must not
be looked to for high-art ; and that, owing to the unac-
countable dislike cf artists to free translation and the
paucity of ideal engravers, the make-shift of what he mis-
calls realism is to be put up with as the best we can get.
"Call you this backing of your friends?" If he means
so much — I find nothing else under his verbiage — he is
not of much service to his patrons. But let him go,
while we consider this " realism," which also he names

56 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

" impressionism," the best to be had now, when artists
have such dislikes and engravers are so scarce.

The Vedder (indeed a very excellent cut) might, for
all an engraver could tell (but your critic sees through
millstones), have been engraved from a photograph; the
" bronze " drapery on the figures in the Chapu is as like
glazed calico — brown calico — as bronze; the Charity
(I speak charital)lv) might have been cast in sugar in-
stead of plaister, or modeled in cheese instead of clay, —
being as like to any one material as to the other ; and the
St. Gaudens, — i'faith, having lost most of "the feeling"
of the original pen-and-ink by reduction, has had all re-
maining likeness cut out of it by the engraver. This is
" realism " or " impressionism." O tetnpora ! O mores !
O young man of the Times! O wonderful experimen-
tal realistic methods !

Yet let us for a moment suppose that my adverse
criticism is unjust : that bronze and clay and pencil and
charcoal and i:)en-and-ink are as accurately represented
as the 7>»?c5 assumes. What then? What is your first
object in looking at an engraving of a statue? Is it to
know that the particular original of the engraving was
the clay or marble, or a pen-and-ink sketch? Or is it
to obtain some idea of the beauty of the statue? If in
the engraving Jeanne d'Arc has a claw instead of a hand,
will you be better satisfied for being told that — "the

MECHANISM AND ART 57

engraving faitlit'ully reproduces tlie texture of the clay
in which the sculptor had niotleled " — not a claw, but
a hand? Is this realism? Do you care to have the feel-
ing of bronze if you get no feeling of the statue? Is this
"impressionism"? I take realism to mean sometb.ing
true, not a fLiIsehood. The impression I desire to have is
of the essential, not of an accident. What care I whether
the Marsyas was engraved from a drawing by Vcdder's
own hand, or from a drawing by some one else, or from
a photograph, if I have a trustworthy representation of
the picture? If Mr. Cole's cut contents me, shall I like
it better for being told that the critic "can perceive" it
is from a drawing; or would it be any more or less to
my liking if I could myself perceive that curious but un-
important phenomenon of critical apprehension? What
is it to me if I get a tolerable representation of Mr.
Dubois' Faith, whether Mr. St. Gaudens sketched it in
pen-and-ink, or somebody else in charcoal or guache?
You might as well expect me to be interested in the in-
formation that Mr. St. Gaudens wore an olive-colored
blouse and smoked so many cigars during his pen-and-
ink performance. Whether you call this realism or im-
pressionism, it is not Art.

But w^e have " secured entirely new efl'ects ! " " In
these has lived the charm of the engravings of Scribner's
Magazine" — I pause to say emphatically, I do not

58 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

choose Scribncrs Magazine as a target. With the
Scribner firm my relations have never been other than
friendly ; nor have I any imfriendly feelings now. My
first important work in this country was for them — Dr.
Holland's Kathriiia; and no one is more earnest than
myself in according to the author of Kathrina and his
coadjutors full credit for the enterprise and liberality which
have made the history of Scribner's Mojithly remarka-
ble among magazines. All this I gladly admit: but it
is no reason why I should not condemn editorial falla-
cies in art matters ; nor why I should refrain from point-
ing out — not "picking" out — the growing faults which,
to my thinking, are in the way of continued success.

I do not choose it as a target. It is not my fault that
in Scrib?zcr I found the Cole heads, that in Scribnei- I
now read the defence — say rather the indiscriminate
eulogy of this pretentious " realism." And when I con-
trasted certain cuts in Harper with others in Scribner^
it surely was not to pit the magazines against each other,
but because at the time of my writing I there most readily
found the contrast, a contrast which in the interest of Art
I had to notice. After which acknowledgment, I must
even go back to have another gird at Scribtter.

New effects have there been secured, chiefly by the aid
of photography : such as " the effect of a charcoal draw-
ing " — impossible to be produced "by what Mr. Linton

MECHANISM AND ART 59

regards as legitimate line-engraving;" "the reproduction
of a drawing in pencil" — the " raciness and character"
of which Mr. Linton's line would utterly have spoiled.
Another cut " tells the simple truth as it is in clay."
Then there is a picture in which " the attempt is made
to reproduce the effect of a work mostly done in washes."
This last a most remarkable novelty !

It all reads sadly like the patter of an amateur. Still,
for conscience' sake, to deal quite fairly, I turn back to
the February number, to see if I have not been mistak-
ing. Honestly, with hard endeavor I cannot see anything
like clay, or charcoal, or pencil, or washes, in the speci-
mens referred to. The pencil-likeness I may miss from
not knowing exactly in what the "raciness" of pencil
consists. But I have tried earnestly to see the declared
merits. I would not have minded seeing them : for it
wonld not have affected my argument that all these ac-
complishments would be worth next to nothing. Even
the great Wyatt-Eaton portraits, in which the Sun tells
me the "peculiar quality of crayon-work" was reproduced
by Mr. Cole with such " wonderful fidelity" — "and his
treatment of it was really marvelous," failed to impress
me as being particularly like crayon-work. They looked
to me more like bad lithographs, with a machine-iuled
tint behind some. I own however that Mr. Cole did full
justice to those " indifferently executed portraits" {Sun),

60 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

though with "more fine engraving" (not good because
fine) " than artistic effect, but that was tlie fault of the
artist, and not of the engraver" {Sun again). Wiiy
again "sit down upon" Mr. Cole.? Because already he
has been bettered by my prescription. At least he knows
now the nature of his malady ; and though he may yet for
a while, like Naaman, bow down in the house of Rimmon,
I think he may be cured of his leprosy and that it will not
cleave to him for ever. In his last portrait, of Whittier
i^Scribner^ August), is great improvement. There is good
lining on the face, and the face is not hairy. There is
indeed the same error of extreme fineness, in which I
suppose he is ordered to persist ; and this mars the clear-
ness of the engraving, giving it the appeai'ance of a
worn-out steel-plate instead of the " marvelous crayon-
work " of former heads. Any way, it is an improvement.
Notwithstanding his "noble simplicity," his "outlines,"
and his " purists," the Natiort Critic has some inkling of
the truth of my animadversions here : for " the opinions
of this join'nal in art-matters have always been based
upon the constant reiteration of the importance — the ne-
cessity of developing each art in its own native direction.
Thin iron cornices that simulate cut stone, lithography
that tries to pass for painting, nvood-cuts that ape the
graces of other arts, are all an offence to us, and are
to be characterized as not art at all in the true sense"

MECHANISM AND ART 61

Good for the Nation I Saul has actually slipped in among
the prophets. " Wood-cuts that ape the graces of other
arts," that imitate worn-out copper-plate and bad litho-
graphy (hardly to be considered graces), that ape the
graces of pencil and pen-and-ink, crayon and charcoal
and washed tints, not to speak of clay and bronze and
marble, " are to be characterized as not art at all in the
true se7ise.'' I am glad to get so mucli corroboration.

Yet another word. If you did secure these marvelous
effects which tell the critical studeitt '' of the truth as it
is in clay," or give him something else to be immediately
perceived by him, what good is it when the public cannot
see them.? Like that famous relic, the single hair of the
Saint which he wlio showed saw not, are the " marvel-
ous effects " of your show-man. The effects are not
there. A pencil-drawing cannot be reproduced to de-
ceive any one who knows what pencil-drawing is. The
beauty peculiar to it is in the greyness of its lines: in
your mock-pencil the lines are all black. You lighten
them by dotting: but the pencil does not make dotted
lines. The same witli charcoal or crayon. There is no
mistaking an engraving for either, except by a critical
art-student, the Reviewer who always sees what lie wants
to see. It is mainly through the interference of these
amateurs without understanding that the generally more
correct instinct of the uneducated is perverted.

62 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

The great mischief of all this clay and charcoal rub-
bish is that the public is taught to value the non-essential
more than the essential, and the young artist, finding a
readier market that way, gets to care chiefly for astonish-
ing the world with his " marvelous " puerilities. All
which is a symptom of decadence in Art, not a sign of
growth. Allowed the full merit of mechanical or merely
technical excellence, allowed also that these experiments
may be good schooling yor the hand^ what avails all that
if you lose sight even of what Art is? The Nation critic
thinks he sees in this idolatrous adoration of the Mechan-
ical a tendency '' to work back " to the worship of true
Art. There may be a tendency through falsehood to re-
action ; but meanwhile the working backwards is not
exactly progressive.

After all I may be wrong, blinded by age and preju-
dice to the worth of these peculiar specimens ; they may,
despite mv judgment to the contrar}', be very perfect im-
itations of rac}' pencil-work, and of that novel style of
drawing in washes, lying dormant all these eighty years
since Bewick. I surely dream when I suppose that I
have seen washed drawings even before they could be
photographed on the wood for the sake of 3'et closer
verisimilitude than could be had by putting them directly
on the wood. Let me wake up and accept the new phase
of realism, the worship of the Unessential. Whither

MECHANISM AND ART 63

leads it? Having settled that the clay is of more impor-
tance than the statue, and the charcoal than the drawing,
we proceed to represent — reproduce is the more definite
realistic word — an impression of the paper or other
material on which the artist made his drawing. The
photograph secures for us another new effect. The
artist had drawn upon a piece of grey paper. We re-
produce the appearance of grey paper by a square ot
fine tint behind a fac-simile drawing. With that is the
additional advantage that we can " engrave white paint."
Or the artist had nailed his paper up by the four cor-
ners ; and we engrave a " marvelously faithful " reproduc-
tion of the four nails, — more than that, even a turned-
down corner of the paper. Most interesting ! We frame
a cut with a broad border, to show that the original was
mounted ; or as the picture when photographed happened
to stand against a tree or on the artist's color-box, we
have tree and color-box, perhaps also an umbrella or ar-
tistic wide-awake, all reproduced, not with any relation
to the subject, but with a wonderful fidelity. For speci-
mens this time, see Harper's Monthly for August. That
is what the peculiar effects are leading us to in Art.
There is no Art but only Artifice — Trick in all of it.
Very pretty perhaps! There is no reason why your
magazine cuts (on the theory of the Times, that they are
not to be expected to furnish us with high art) should

64 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

not be made as jDretty, as graceful, as attractive, as mere-
tricious, as salable, as possible. There are more pleased
than displeased at this sort of girl-nonsense, b)' perhaps
a hundred to one ; and the publisher is not to be asked
to prefer Art to sale. But do not at the same time brag
of what you are doing for Art. Such things are not
Art : even by a Nation' s allowance.

The aim of Art is expression. Wood-engraving is Art
only when one begins to draw with the graver, cutting
a determinate line, knowing the purpose and value of
it, and with some intention of expression. Short of that
the best and most elaborate work is but meclianism.

For which reason white-line work is more artistic than
fac-simile. Thei"e is more scope for the graver.

There is the same thing in drawing or painting. The
artistic draughtsman has drawing in his every line ; the
less artistic, or he who cannot draw, fills in with mean-
ingless pencilings, or confusion. There is a kind of
mechanical painting too.

The aim of Art is expression : which does not mean
the display of the painter's or the engraver's eccentrici-
ties. In an engraving it means: — in the first place at-
tention to form and drawing; then the keeping of all
parts in proper relation to each other ; then color and
efl'ect ; then, with some care for harmonious direction of
lines, texture of substances ; last of all (whether as an

MECHANISM AND ART 65

artist you can think it worth while, or as a hired worlc-
man you are obUged to please your employer) the " im-
itations" of what has really nothing to do with your
engraving, — pencil, charcoal, lithography, etc. — all the
little monkey-tricks which may help to astonish the mul-
titude. The fault of the new mechanical school is that
it starts at the wrong end. For that I exclaim against
it. Bring, in pompous pi'ocession, with your wooden
aperies borne on velvet cushions before you, with bray-
ing of monthly, weekly, or daily trumpets, etc., your
little offerings of anise ! It is not that which offends me.
But when you block up the porch of the Temple to
proclaim that you have fulfilled the Law, — then, it may
be too indignantly, but moved by no personal feeling,
stirred only by an artist's zeal and justifiable wrath
against lies, I lift my voice in protest. Personal feel-
ing ! What docs it matter to me? Perfect yoin-selvcs
in mechanism ! I will admire your ability. Surely I
would not have you neglect that. Use multiple gra-
vers, or what you will ; cross lines, only sometimes con-
sider the direction ; try your most whimsical experi-
ments!— your hands and eyes will be trained thereby:
but do not forget that these successes arc not the object
of Art. Here is my quarrel with the "new school."

Which, let me also observe, may be " a grand inven-
tion," but is not original, — no, not even excepting the

66 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

multiple graver, an old explosion. All these experi-
ments (save that, for he was an artist) William Harvey
tried some fiftv years ago : excessive fineness, cross-
lining (but net without meaning or thought of beauty),
varieties of texture, etc. His great work, a copy of
Haydon's Dcntatus, his portrait of Johnson the printer
(in Johnson's Typographia) ^ show more wonderful work,
even as mechanism, than all that is now so marveled at
of the Cole and Cross-line series. The difference is in
the complacent content of the " new school " with merely
ignoble mechanism. Harvey was seeking what new
forces and appliances he could press into the service
of Art.

This however is not defining the difference between
Ari and Mechanism in the engraving itself. To begin
with a short definition: — mechanism is that which em-
ploys only the hands ; art needs brains as well as hands.
Art is expressive, mechanism inexpressive. Lines drawn
with a graver, iclth design^ have art in them, of however
poor a quality ; lines cut without a sense of drawing,
without any consciousness of meaning, are only mechan-
ical. Some sense of appropriateness of line will come
into the artist's mind, whether he be conventionally or
experimentally disposed, because he will cut nothing
without thought of what it is or means ; and so his work
will vary according to circumstances and according to his

MECHANISM AND ART

67

ability to be more or less expressive. It has been said
that a good engraver can make a good cut of an indiffer-
ent drawing. That is true : also a poor engraver can
make a good-looking cut of a good drawing. He need
only be moderately faithful to the color drawn, and though
his sky except from its position could not be distinguished
from the water or the ground, though he has but one
mechanical and most conventional line serving for every-
thing, the drawing will keep him in his place, and the
cut may look to the careless observer like fine work. In
truth the public cares for little more. The broad effect
satisfies ; and whoso knows nothing of what art is can-
not feel its want. Here is our difficulty. So long as
the public admire — and admiring buy — why should the
publisher or the engraver care to improve? Fortunately
the spur of competition touches the flanks of the most
satisfied.

Would you, dear and attentive reader! care to educate
yourself so as to know a good engraving from a poor
one, follow these simple rules! Do not be beguiled by
the first look and appearance of the cut before you !
Your premature satisfaction may be partly owing to the
pleasantness of the subject, and else to the cunning of
the draughtsman, who knew how to make a good and
effective drawmg which not even the engraver could de-
stroy. That nice engraving may be very badly engraved.

68 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

Examine it ! Do you find any marks of intelligence in
it? If a landscape, does the engraver appear to have
had any notion of the growth of a tree, the formation of
a mountain, the roundness and lightness of a cloud, etc.?
Or is it all one flat unvarying set of monotonous un-
meaning lines, so that the treatment of one part would
do just as well for any other part ? In the first case you
have an artist's work ; in the second a mechanic's. If
the engraving is a figure-subject, a portrait, a statue, you
will not be taken in by a pleasant and never so pretty
arrangement of lights and shadows (that again is due
to the draughtsman) ; but your eyes will inquire if the
engraver seemed to understand the drawing of the figure,
if he seemed to know anything of form, and how to ex-
press the same with line as well as liglit and shade.
Such things mark the artist. If you can find no trace
of this knowledge, if you find hands and feet, etc.,
badly drawn, perspective not attended to nor distances
kept, texture of materials everywhere alike, the lines in
unpleasant opposition : that is only mechanic's work.
These rules will not make you a judge of engraving.
Time and study are needed. But the thought so bred
in you will help you toward judgment ; and if some-
times you have the fortune to meet with works of ap-
proved worth which you can compare with what you
think good, the sight of what the best is will be new

MECHANISM AND ART

69

teaching; and yoii will learn in time. The one clue to
guide you out of the labyrinth of erroneous judgments is
the constant recollection of the meaning of expressive-
ness. As before said, expressive work is artistic, inex-
pressive is mechanical. My teaching can go no further.
And need I say again, even when you distrust your-
self, place no faith in anonymous Reviewers ! Distrust
of the Anonymous might be useful in other matters be-
side Engravinsf on Wood.

PHOTOGRAPHY ON WOOD

A CONSIDERABLE amount of ignorance is afloat
concerning the use of photography on wood, as
used instead of drawing. Its advantages, or disadvan-
tages, are so little known that it may be worth while
to give it some attention.

Savs that luminous art-meteor, the Si/ii : — " To pho-
tography on wood we owe the improved character of
our wood-engraving more than to any other cause."
And all we gain from it is set forth at length, as fol-
lows : —

" Of course this method (of photography) admits of
the reduction of a drawing to a block of any desired
size. Another advantage is that it enables the engraver
to have the original drawing always in front of him to
refer to, and that he is not at any time exposed to the
danger of going wrong in his effects, by reason of not
having something to refer to for the general effect that

70

PHOTOGRAIMIY ON WOOD 71

it was contemplated to attain. It also does away with
the possibility of the design being lost by an accident to
the surface of the block while the engraver is at work at
it, and it has the very salutary effect of making the en-
graver responsible to the artist for the etlect he attains.
Before photography upon wood was adopted an engraver
could say, when confronted with defects in his block,
'Well, what can I do.? Your artist drew it so.' Even
now, art-editors who give out drawings uport the wood
take the precaution to make ferrotypes or negatives of
them, so as to hold the engraver to account if his work
be unfaithful. It used to be that artists would go wild
over the engravings that were shown tlicm as represent-
ing what tiiey had put on the wood with such care. The
imperturbable engraver could always turn upon them
with placid irresponsibility and tell them their drawing
was at fault."

Further : — " As an engraver goes over the surface of
his block, he destroys the drawing by transforming it into
lines, whicli arc actually meaningless and invisible until
he blackens them with his lead pencil or ink-dabber.
He has to depend too much on his memory, and he
invariably loses, and incurs the danger of substituting his
own ideas for those of the artist. With tiic design pho-
tographed upon the wood, he has constantly before him
the artist's work, and is really elevated, in a measure, to

72 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

the position of an interpreter of it, or translator of it into
a new medium. It is in this sort of inspiration of the
eno-raver that the chief provocation to excellent woi'k
lies, because it conceals the mechanical aspect of his
function as much as possible, and brings him into
a more intimate and sympathetic relation with the
artist," etc.

And in Scribiier we find it written: — "From the
moment that Scribner began to avail itself of the art of
photographing pictures upon the wood a great develop-
ment took place."

From which we are to be led to infer that tlie use of
photography upon wood is almost if not quite an origi-
nal enterprise of those hardy discoverers. The Sun
writer seems implicitly to believe it. Far however is
that from being the truth, for photographs on the wood
instead of drawings, and photographs of drawings-on-
wood for the sake of reference and comparison with the
proof, have been in use for the last twenty years or
more. I have before me at this writing photographs
of Sir F. Leighton's illustrations to George Eliot's Ro-
mola in the early numbers of the Cornhill Magazine^ —
photographs taken from Leighton's own drawings on the
wood : with which I doubt not he compared my en-
gravings, although the blocks were never declined. I
have similar photographs of the drawings of Noel Paton,

PHOTOGRAPHY ON WOOD 73

Rossetti, and others, sent to mc in those days, by men
who chose my work, to prevent me from cutting " the
whole soul out of them." Photographs tipon the ivood
were in use also, but were always declined by me, as I
should decline tliem now. They do not suit my " me-
chanical function." Only in one instance, retaining the
photograph on the wood — a reduction of a drawing by
Dore, I copied the original drawing myself in prefer-
ence to cutting the photograph ; and my work was ap-
proved by the painter and not declined by the publisher.

Says the Sun: — "This method admits of the reduc-
tion of a drawing to a block of any desired size." Is
this would-be critic so utterly ignorant of the subject on
which he pretends to give instruction as not to know
that the poorest draughtsman is capable of correctlv re-
ducing a drawing to any desired size, without the aid
of photography? Yet he assumes here to be showing
the advantage of photography.

Says the Scribner \x\^\.x\\z\.o\., reinforcing his confrere:
"Drawing upon the limited surface of a block has al-
ways been regarded by artists as a cramped business;
the freest handling is not attainable that zvay." Is it
so indeed? Was Holbein cramped when he drew the
Day of Judgment on a block three inches by two ? Was
Bewick cramped when he drew pictures worthy of Ho-
garth, on his few inches of wood? Or was Clennell

74 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

cramped, or Thurston, or William Harvey, or Thomas
Landseer? Was the freest handling not attainable that
way by George Cruikshank, and Seymour (the precursor
of PiincJi)^ and Leech, and the Doyles, and Tenniel, and
Thomas, and Walker, and Gilbert? Did the greater
painters find free handling unattainable : Alaclise, and
Mulready, and Millais, and Noel Paton, and Leighton,
and Pickersgill? All these — I cannot at a moment
name all who drew directly upon the block — found no
difficulty in freest handling ; and all these hi line. And
in landscape — washed drawings, I can recall a few:
W. L. Leitch, Duncan, Dodgson, nearly all the water-
color men. In France need I cite more than Jacque
(known somewhat as an etcher, and tolerably free-hand-
ed), and Meissonier, and Grandville. and Tony Johannot,
and Gavarni, and Dore? Most of these names are very
likely not known to Scribner ; but one sitting in the
editorial chair, if onl}^ pro hdc vice., should have learned
his alphabet before giving lectures upon grammar. Surely
though, he must have thought of some American names
while announcing that impossibility of free handling
'• upon the limited surface of a block." Need I remind
him of Darley, and Eytinge, and Mrs. Foote, and Cole-
man, and Hennessy, and Homer, and Appleton Brown,
and Waud, and Woodward, and Moran? I do not ex-
haust the catalogue, naming only the first that come into

PHOTOGRAPHY ON WOOD

75

my mind. Must I name any more to disprove so much
of the assertion in Scribner — that the freest handling
is not attainable o?z the limited surface of a block?

Says the Sun: — "Another advantage (of the photo-
graph on the zvood) is that it enables the engraver to
have the original drawing in front of him to refer to."
Supposing this to happen occasionally, one may yet
^iik — What is the advantage? If the drawing on the
wood (say the copy of a picture) is by the hand of a
draughtsman, what is to prevent the same advantage of
having the original to refer to? Ah! says the 'cute Re-
viewer— " but the original itself might be on the wood."
Then the engraver could have a photograph of it always
" in front of him to refer to." The Scribner folks them-
selves could have told their Reviewer that. It is not
many weeks since they sent me photographs of two
drawings, the originals being on the wood. And truly,
as I supposed them sent for me to refer to, I had to
decide whether I should engrave the drawings as drawn,
or alter them to the likeness of the photographs — which
did not exactly render the drawings.

Then, following the course of the Sun, — having the
photograph " does away with the possibility of the design
being lost by an accident to the surface of the block while
the engraver is at work at it." He is hard put to it for
his " ad\ antages." I have engiaved and have known

76 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

engravers during fifty years, and I do not recollect such
an accident occurring. But it is well to provide for pos-
sibilities.

And then, continues he : — " As an engraver goes over
the surface of his block, he destroys the drawing by
transforming it into lines, which are actually meaning-
less and invisible until he blackens them with his lead
pencil or ink dabber." What wicked engraver's lad has
been laughing on this occasion ? A.^ the JVation particu-
larly observes, " it is not given to every man to be a
critic." Thiit was meant for me, not for his brother in
the Sii?z. But though not " a critic," I may, having
been brought up as an engraver, be qualified to speak
of the processes of engraving ; and I have to contradict
this writer upon every point in the sentence I have just
quoted. The engraver does not destroy the drawing by
transforming it into lines (though were it a fac-simile
drawing it would be of no consequence if he did). A
washed dra-joiug^ \\\ which alone he has to care for
effect, is as well seen on the engraved block, and on every
part of the block as he goes on with his " transforming,"
as it was before he touched it. You cannot indeed de-
strov the etlect if you would. Why lines should necessa-
rily be meaningless I do not understand ; but meaningless
or not, they are not invisible. And no one but a bung-
ling apprentice would think of blackening his block with

PHOTOGRAPHY ON WOOD 77

lead pencil at any time, or with the " ink dabber " till the
whole was finished. Certainly he has had liis lesson
from the errand-boy, who has led him astra}-. He goes
as wikl as his friends were in tlie habit of going before
the invention of photography held the placid -.md \n-iper-
turbable engraver to account — '-in the days of the wild
artist boys, a long time ago."

But now — happily escaping "the danger of substi-
tuting his own ideas," '* with the design photographed
upon the wood, he has constantly before him the artist's
work, and is really elevated, in a measure, to the posi-
tion of an interpreter, or translator of it into a new
medium. It is in this sort of inspiration of the engraver
that tlie chief provocation to excellent work lies, because
it conceals the mechanical aspect of his function as
much as possible, and brings him into a more intimate
and sympathetic relation with the artist." Prodigious 1
He is inspired by escaping the danger of ideas, loses
the aspect of his function, and so is provoked into excel-
lence and becomes intimate with the artist. This is
being elevated in a measure to the position of an inter-
preter, or translator of it into a new medium. It is bet-
ter than the working backwards to simplicity of our
friend in the Nation. And too funny to be treated se-
riously.

The real history of photography-on-vvood is as follows.

78 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

My friend is too young to know anything about it,
except from some otlier Reviewer's report, which I as-
sure him is not to be depended on. I will tell him what
I know. There were publishers in those days who found
photography on wood cheaper than drawing : also I will
not deny that some of them may have 'had strange mag-
gots in their heads, foolish notions of securing new ef-
fects, etc. There were also then as now artists, men of
name, whose works (or names) were wanted ; but of
these men some could not draw upon the wood. Stan-
field, for one, could not. And there were others who,
not drawing easily or well, disliked " the trouble," yet
were not content with copies by the usual draughtsmen.
So photography v^'as tried and, such reasons weighing
more than its own worth, little by little made its way.
Cheapness goes far. When the London Graphic was
started (was it before Scribner's Magazine?) this photo-
graphing of artists' drawings came into moi-e general
use. Some men who could draw saw the chance for
double pay, a price for the photographed copy from
their drawing and a price for the original sold elsewhere.
The publisher saved something ; so both were satisfied.
Draughtsmen were thrown over and engravers were sac-
rificed. That was their business. I never heard of either
draughtsman or engraver preferring a photograph. Here
is the whole story. And if we were to say that painters

PHOTOGRAPHY ON WOOD 79

cannot draw, nor draughtsmen copy, that would not be
much praise for the photographer.

So far from the photograph being a help to the en-
graver, it was at first a decided hindrance. The block
turned black with the nitrate of silver ; and the engraver
did destroy the photograph and render invisible his lines
upon the photograph even as he cut them. That was in-
deed workjng in tlie dark. That special difficulty has
been got over; but worse remains behind.

When Cruikshank or Darley drew upon the wood —
sa}' in fac-simile, with pencil or pen-and-ink, their lines
had some relation to the size of the block and the sub-
ject thereon drawn. When the artist whose great hand
is cramped b\' so small a space, dashes in his cartoon
with charcoal or crayon, to be reduced fOr the engraver,
all that thoughtfully proportionate relation of the draw-
ing to its purpose is lost sight of. See the so treated
St. Gaudens' "Faith" in Scribner (June, p. 173). It is
no longer a pen-and-ink drawing, but an overcrowded,
foolishly minute, muddy etching. W^hen Mary Hallock
Foote makes a drawing directly on the block, whether
of figures or landscape, the feeling of the drawing, dear
impressionists ! is better than any figure or landscape
reduction we could have from her enlarged work. There
is an art in drawing on wood (like that of criticism, not
given to every one), a special beauty in that which no

80 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

photograph can convey or furnish. We sliall not be
gainers when drawing on the wood is a lost art, and
photography universally substituted in its place : which
seems to be the aim of Scrrbiter.

But then " the truth of photography," " its absolute
correctness," especially in copies of pictures. In the first
place, it is never correct. It alters and destroys, and
misrepresents. In the next place, it gives, whether of
picture or portrait or out-door scene, details which caiz-
not be engraved. This in the lighter parts of the sub-
ject, which so lose breadth, unless the engraver takes
the liberty of throwing out what he considers unnecessary
or injurious to his effect (in which case what is the
special value of the photograph?) while in the darker
parts, even in the clearest of photographs, the details
are lost. With or without the photograph, unless the en-
o-raver is not to be interpreter and translator into the
new medium, it is his business to use his judgment, and
neither to servilely obey the painter who cannot draw
or is ignorant of how to render color in black and white
(some painters are), nor to servilely copy the photograph
— which never is a faithful copy of a picture. The
photograph does not give security to the painter; and it
does degrade and deteriorate the engraver, who, whether
idealist, or realist, or impressionist, should at least make
use of thought, of judgment and taste. If he does not,
or cannot, he is not an artist.

PHOTOGRAPHY ON WOOD 81

The very instance given l)v Scribner (Jiilv) of the
vahie of photography, given to convict jMr. Linton of
ignorance, proves my position. '' Cole's engraving of
Modjeska, which he praises" — writes the smart Re-
viewer— "was done from a photograph o)i the blocks
and could not have been so well done in any other wav."
To which dictu?n of the amateur critic the engraver re-
plies— From a drawing it would have been better cut
and might have escaped the faults it now has.

There are some things, of the mechanical sort, in
which photography is of use. But except as material
for reference, and to save time in mere hand-work, the
less the artist has to do with it the better. I speak as
an artist — as draughtsman and engraver : not as an Art-
Reviewer.

FURTHER HINTS

GOOD READER! having got so far in your learn-
ing, the rest must depend upon yourself. To know
what is good and what bad, and why it is so, like the
faculty for expressing the same intelligibly (which is the
art of the critic), is not indeed given to every one. But
with patience and diligent inquir}', though you may not
become a qualified Reviewer, you mav yet obtain such
knowledge as will not only prevent you from being im-
posed upon by Reviewers, but give you an interest and
pleasure in engravings such as only the student can
obtain.

It may help some little toward this if I string together
yet a few hints, in addition to those I have already
offered ; and even some of them it may not harm to em-
phasize by repetition.

And first, do not be sure because an engraving pleases
you that it must be a good engraving. A taking sub-

82

FURTIIEK HINTS 83

ject, well drawn, ma}' have been beyond the engraver's
power to spoil. Look into it, and try to find how^ much
of art is in the cutting !

Recollect, on the other hand, that a much inferior sub-
ject, of little interest in itself, and even not remarkable
for the j^leasantness or excellence of the drawing, may be
very well engraved.

If you want to judge of engraving'^ you must separate
in your mind the engraving from the drawing.

Still less will 3"ou allow yourself to be taken in bv the
prettiness of the draughtsman's arrangements. Give
him all the credit for that I It is his due. But do not
suppose because of that the engraving — the engraver's
part — is either better or worse. My hints are concern-
ing engraving : though the draughtsman must be brought
in sometimes.

Do not think that ever}' engraving must have both force
and delicacy, or that force is better than delicacy, or
delicacy better than force. That depends upon the
subject. When you find one, or both, in an engraving,
trv to see also the means by which they have been ob-
tained. Not that you may judge of the "legitimacy"
of the work (the end will justifv the means) : but
that you may learn whether the end has been reached
designedly or by accident. Accidental results are not
meritorious, and may generally be doubted.

84 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

Do not be cai-ried away captive by the fineness or the
boldness of an engraving ! Either quality is good in the
right place. Excessive fineness — very minute work —
is not necessary to constitute a Jine engraving : using
the word italicized in an artistic sense, as great or good.
The super-fineness, or the multiplicity of lines, indicates
no advance in art. The artist will not employ two lines
when one will serve his purpose as well, — or better.
Nor will he for any consideration consent to unmeaning
lines.

On this question of fineness I may be allowed to quote
from my Atlantic article. Though I yet may be misun-
derstood, I cannot write anything more to the purpose.

"It is altogether a inistake to suppose that a work
cannot be too fine, or that fineness (closeness and little-
ness of line) and refinement (finish) are anything like
synonymous terms. There is such a thing as propriety —
suitability not onXy to size but to subject — in the treat-
ment of ah engraving. (Fineness ma}' be out of charac-
ter with the subjecto) A work may be bold even to the
verge of coarseness, }et quite fine enough for its purpose.
. . . Also it may be finished and refined, however bold :
in which case to call it coarse simply because the lines
may be large and wide apart would be only misuse of
words. . . . Fineness as an artist's word is not the same
word as in the proverb — ' Fine feathers make fine birds.'

FURTHER HINTS 85

Fine (minute) lines will not make a fine (artistic) engrav-
ing. . . . An engraving is fine, that is good, so far as art,
as distinguished from mechanism, has been employed
upon it, is visible in the result: visible, I would say fur-
ther, even to the uneducated, if not already vitiated by the
words of misleading critics. The ari of ait engraving
is discoverable, even by the uninitiated, in the intention
of the lines. You may not have an artist's quickness
of perception, nor his maturer judgment ; but if you see
an engraving in which the parts, any of them taken sep-
arately, are unintelligible, you will rightly supjiose that
the engraver did not know what he was doing, or how
to do it. . . . Do not believe that such work is good for
anything, though you read the most impartial and un-
bought recommendations of many a newspaper. Art is
a designing power. If you can find no proof of that,
reject the work as bad.

" Every line of an engraving ought to have a meaning,
should be cut in the block with design. From a draw-
ing you can erase a false line ; from a metal plate you
can hammer out your faults : in wood there is no such
easy alteration. On paper or canvas you can rub in a
meaningless background, a formless void, which is all
you want; on steel or copper you can cross lines re-
peatedly so minutely that all which can be seen is as
vague as any rubbing-in : you cannot do this in wood.

86 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

To cut SO finely as to get only color is next to impossi-
ble, and so far as it can be done useless, for it will not
print. It is for this reason — that every line in wood-
engraving bears witness for or against you, that I have
spoken of white line as the true province of engraving-
on-wood."

The engraver — further repeating myself — " is an artist
only so yar as every line he ctcts has inte7ition of rep-r
rese7itii7g sotnethlng. In such work he is an artist in
exactly the same degree in which the translator of poetry
is a poet." [We do not hear of the imaccountable dis-
like of poets to free translation.] " No literal transla-
tion is artistic. The translator must be possessed by the
spirit of his original before he can speak in his own
language what had been said in the other tongue. Be-
tween literality, never correct " — mechanical exactness
(miscalled realism) in engraving — "and translation,
which do you prefer?

"... A copper (or steel) engraving which the engraver
absolutely draws with his own lines — no drawing at all
on the plate except his own — has the dignity of a poetic
translation. A wood-engraving from a washed drawing
has the same merit, is a translation of as much if not
greater difficulty, since (as before shown) every line is
unalterable. Copper (or steel) has its preeminences —
fineness and delicacy" (which it is foolish waste of time

FURTHER HINTS

87

to endeavor to rival). " There are brilliant and atmos-
pheric effects " (unknown to the Scr ib ner &c\-\oo\), '-above
all a freshness and painter-like touch peculiar to wood,
which on copper cannot be produced. Especially the
character of the painter (not as shown in brush-marks)
can be rendered in a way not approachable by copper.
These are indications of art in engraving, the results at
which an artist-engraver would aim,-a?«t/ by which alone,
according to the degree of his success, he must take rank
a77iong artists^

Out of this the Nation critic has somehow evolved a
theory, of which he gives me the credit, that '• an un-
touched block is the only medium for the artist-engraver,
and no one but him ought to touch it, whether with
pencil or brush in preliminary laying out of the work.'
All which is the height of absurdity, albeit it is possible
to engrave without a drawing, on a plain block as on a steel
plate. And " the most ambitious engravers we have " —
the Sun says — "do their work as nearly as possible in
the same way." Were this last statement true it might
of itself disi)ose of the arguments in favor of photo-
graphy— no longer needed on the wood. However, the
information from the Sun, like the theory of the Nation,
is erroneous.

Photography is better than no drawing at all. It is
better than an incorrect drawing. That is the best you

50 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

can say of photography : though the assertion in Scrib-
ner of the incompetence of American draughtsmen were
really true.

Do not be too exacting as regards distinction of ma-
terial in an engraving of a few inches square ; but if
you cannot distinguish water from grass, sky from stone
walls, calico from bronze, or a hair-mat from a philoso-
pher's cheek, you may be right in doubting the engrav-
er's perception of differences ; the perception of the ad-
miring Reviewer also. You have no occasion to inquire
further as to whether the Reviewer was paid by the
newspaper or by the " house."

It is quite certain that all the approving notices of
magazines and other artistic work are not written by
direct order of the publishers.

Also, you should not take for granted that objections
to a certain style of work must necessarily be the petu-
lant expressions of exasperated or disappointed engrav-
ers ; and you may further admit that a critic, even if he
has had experience in engraving, may not be altogether
mistaking in his censures, though he cannot make his
reasons clear to Reviewers who have had no experience,
who know nothing of the subject in dispute, and whose
acquaintance with the art of which that subject is part
may be nil.

On one ground however you may make common cause

FURTHER HINTS 89

with such Reviewers, and abstain from further informa-
tion : in the words of the poet —

" Where ignorance is bliss "
(even when not paid for standing in the Sun)
" 'Tis folly to be wise."

Some last words of personal apology may not be out
of place. Have I dealt too harshly or too hardly with
my Reviewers? Not more hardly, I will maintain, than
the unqualified ignorance in relation to engraving be-
trayed by some and the unhesitating mendacity of others
as regards myself have earned, — and required, were it
only that the readers of the anonymous might be on
their guard. Personal resentment — I have none. I
suppose these men must write to live, though I may
not be sufficiently impressed with the necessity of such
living.

Of those artists and engravers whose works I have
"assailed with violence " or " passed with contemptuous
silence " (for it seems I am not permitted to be right
either way) I ask a brotherly pardon. I have not sought
to wound the tenderest susceptibility. If I have "picked
holes," it has been only in order to sow some seeds of
truth ; if I have hit any awkwardly, it has been in the
perhaps too great eagerness of an innocent desire to en-

90 HINTS ON WOOD ENGRAVING

force sound principles. There is really no venom in my
rattle, no spite in my most indignant and splenetic vitu-
peration. Only with "conscience and tender heart"
(that is not borrowed from my Reviewers) I have said
what to me seemed — and seems — important to the in-
terest of Art, — which also is the higher interest of
artists. Toward Mr. Cole or Mr. Evans, Mr. Eaton or
Mr. Kelly, or any of the unnamed whose works I have
canvassed with an artist's freedom, I can say with all
sincerity I have no ill-feeling. Nevertheless I had a
right to criticize what challenged criticism. I w-ould
speak as frankly and as harshly of the works of my
dearest friends. Could my Reviewers, with their hands
upon their hollownesses, say as much, I would forgive their
ugliest blows and all their offensiveness, even as I hope
to be forgiven for my own.

To Messrs. Scribner, much as their name has been
called in question, I do not feel that apology is needed,
certainly not beyond what I have elsewhere been glad to
say. They should be glad of any plain speaking. I do
not imagine that my worst words will injure them, or my
best be of any very beneficial consequence. If they can
learn anything from what I have written and so improve
their already very creditable and (notwithstanding all mis-
takes) deservedly popular magazine, so much the better
for their subscribers. I do not reckon on a considerable

FURTHER HINTS

91

number of copies to be sold through me. Did I attach
such influence to my writing I should claim the publish-
ers' gratitude instead of an editor's ill-temper.

It yet may be that a few new subscribers will be at-
tracted for the sake of proving the value of my Hints.
To' these and what other public may honor me with so
much attention, I ofler beforehand the expression of a
hope that they may profit by my instruction. And now,
O weary Reader I farewell! My task — not altogether
pleasant — is finished; and I have but to sit down and
patiently await the scalping-knives of the Pursuers.

POSTSCRIPT.

SINCE my work was at press I liave had a visit from
Mr. Cole. Without revolver ! Nor did hard or un-
friendly words pass between us. I think he was satisfied
with the welcome he received ; and for myself, I was
pleased to become acquainted with him, and also with
some proofs of his later work which he brought for my
acceptance. He did not hold that I had abused him
" like an artistic pickpocket " ; " was not offended " at
my strictures in the Atlantic; and critic and criticized
agreed in their judgments to an extent that might have
astonished a listening Reviewer.

What I have written of him, being honest, may yet
stand. I do not recall my words ; but I am glad to know
that there is no fear of his misunderstanding.

W. J. L.

THE LIBRARY
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

Santa Barbara

'm

THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE
STAMPED BELOW.

•1 im

RET

h''%<^

P

Series 9482