THE ART CONGRESS.
THE first Congress of the National Association for the Advancement of Art and its Application to Industry, held in Liverpool in the beginning of December, was, after the manner of congresses, a conspicuous success. Hospitality was effusive, the conversaziones were brilliant, and the papers were, perhaps, on the whole, not much above the average of dulness. They were long enough to enable the chairman for the most part to dispense with dis- cussion, and it was always possible to avoid being bored by strolling from the scene of one oration to that of another.
The minor or mechanical arrangements were so eccentric that there was happy uncertainty as to time and place of meeting from hour to hour ; but this was fruitful in surprises, and really gave piquancy to the congress. The major arrangements were thoroughly admirable. The diplomatic skill with which the committee succeeded in securing so repre- sentative a gathering of artists of different schools deserves the very highest praise, for it resulted in the Congress being national, eclectic, and representa- tive in the utmost degree. Academician and anti- Academician, Philistine and Bohemian, Individualist and Socialist, had their say out, and if they did not listen to each other, and would not have agreed with each other had they done so, they enjoyed a fair field and the favour of serried ranks of manv bright and eager faces in fashionable bonnets.
The only order not strongly represented was the order of art critics ; so that although many old feuds had the Congress for a battle-ground, the feud between artist and critic, perhaps fortunately, did not trouble the air. A venerable archdeacon distinguished himself on two several occasions and infused much liveliness by wielding a not ineffective lance on a question of precedence between religion and art, and on the question whether or no, if people were permitted to look at pictures on Sunday, they would speedily be compelled to work on Simday. The venerable archdeacon thought that the sequence would be play — work. Therefore, to avoid the ultimate consequence — work, it is advisable to take your pleasures sadly at home, if you can, or go with- out them if you cannot, rather than tempt the greed of your employers by going to public places, and thus showing that you have remaining leisure enough and spirit enough to enjoy objects of art. Surely the argument from the Mosaic law is better than this, which is indeed a frightful satire, both upon the people and upon their employers.
There was clearly no designed conspiracy against the Royal Academy, and yet very many speakers devoted themselves to an attack upon it. While the attack was vigorous enough, it can only be said to have succeeded in the sense that practically no defence was offered. For the argiunents adanced by Mr. Alma Tadema, that the Royal Academy gives pen- sions to the widows of its members, and that it has in its Life Schools a number of free students, form, surely, no sufficient ground for its officially representing English art. But, seriously, why should we trouble about the Academy ? It is a body of com- fortable and inoffensive gentlemen, who are probably as able, as virtuous, and as unselfish as any similar number of men in the outside world. If the public suppose that because a man is an R.A. therefore he is an artist, the blame lies at the door of the public, and not at the door of the Royal Academy. Like many other institutions, it has grown old, and it has now arrived at an age when its continued existence is no longer a matter of any sei'ious importance. It is as little to be reckoned with in ai-t as the House of Lords is in politics, and may very well be left to pursue its august way tranquilly to collapse. If this be too severe, and if the Academy really has some life in it, then so much the better for it — it will live. Anyhow, alive or dead, it is a factor of trifling conse- quence. Literature contrives somehow to flourish without an Academy ; there was art in England before the Academy was ; there may be when the iVcademy has ceased to be.
If one were inclined to be captious, there were ample room for criticism in the proceedings of the Congress, from the address of the President, Sir Frederick Leigliton, onwards. Many of the papers were rather commonplace essays ; indeed none, save a very few, possessed even ordinarily good literary qualities. There were, nevertheless, some notable addresses. Mv. Holman Hunt, Mr. Walter Crane, Mr. William Morris, Mr. Alfred Gilbert, Mr. Patrick Geddes, Mr. Cobden Sanderson, may at least be mentioned as having read papers interesting as being the utterances of men of impressive individuality, and valuable for their hnninous suggestiveness.
A wail over the lack of public appreciation of art, and a demand for municipal and state encouragement of it, may be said to ha^e been reverberated from the President's address, and to have been the dominant note of the Congress. It were wortli while to inquire what is meant by appreciation of art, and how far the fine phrasing of Sir Frederick Leigliton
