This is a modern-English version of The Analysis of Beauty: Written with a view of fixing the fluctuating ideas of taste, originally written by Hogarth, William. It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling, and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.

Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.

titlepage

THE

ANALYSIS

OF

BEAUTY.

Written with a view of fixing the fluctuating Ideas of

FLAVOR.

BY WILLIAM HOGARTH.

So vary'd he, and of his tortuous train
Curl'd many a wanton wreath, in sight of Eve
To lure her eye.——             Milton.

He was so varied, and from his twisting tail
Curled many a playful wreath, in sight of Eve
To catch her eye.——             Milton.

variety
LONDON:
Printed by J. REEVES for the AUTHOR,
And Sold by him at his House in Leicester Fields.
MDCCLIII.

PREFACE.

If a preface was ever necessary, it may very likely be thought so to the following work; the title of which (in the proposals publish'd some time since) hath much amused, and raised the expectation of the curious, though not without a mixture of doubt, that its purport could ever be satisfactorily answered. For though beauty is seen and confessed by all, yet, from the many fruitless attempts to account for the cause of its being so, enquiries on this head have almost been given up; and the subject generally thought to be a matter of too high and too delicate a nature to admit of any true or intelligible discussion. Something therefore introductory ought to be said at the presenting a work with a face so entirely new; especially as it will naturally encounter with, and perhaps may overthrow, several long received and thorough establish'd opinions: and since controversies may arise how far, and after what manner this subject hath hitherto been consider'd and treated, it will also be proper to lay before the reader, what may be gathered concerning it, from the works of the ancient and modern writers and painters.

If a preface was ever needed, it might very well be considered essential for the following work; the title of which (in the proposals published some time ago) has intrigued and raised the expectations of the curious, though not without some doubt about whether its purpose can ever be satisfactorily addressed. For although everyone recognizes and acknowledges beauty, the numerous unsuccessful attempts to explain why it exists have led to a near abandonment of inquiries on this topic; the subject is generally viewed as too profound and too sensitive to allow for any true or clear discussion. Therefore, something introductory should be stated when presenting a work that looks entirely different; especially since it will likely challenge, and possibly overturn, several long-held and well-established opinions. Moreover, as debates may arise about how this subject has been viewed and treated thus far, it is also appropriate to present to the reader what can be gathered about it from the works of ancient and modern writers and painters.

It is no wonder this subject should have so long been thought inexplicable, since the nature of many parts of it cannot possibly come within the reach of mere men of letters; otherwise those ingenious gentlemen[Pg iv] who have lately published treatises upon it (and who have written much more learnedly than can be expected from one who never took up the pen before) would not so soon have been bewilder'd in their accounts of it, and obliged so suddenly to turn into the broad, and more beaten path of moral beauty; in order to extricate themselves out of the difficulties they seem to have met with in this: and withal forced for the same reasons to amuse their readers with amazing (but often misapplied) encomiums on deceased painters and their performances; wherein they are continually discoursing of effects instead of developing causes; and after many prettinesses, in very pleasing language, do fairly set you down just where they first took you up; honestly confessing that as to grace, the main point in question, they do not even pretend to know any thing of the matter. And indeed how should they? when it actually requires a practical knowledge of the whole art of painting (sculpture alone not being sufficient) and that too to some degree of eminence, in order to enable any one to pursue the chain of this enquiry through all its parts: which I hope will be made to appear in the following work.

It’s no surprise that this topic has been considered so hard to understand for so long, since many aspects of it are beyond the grasp of mere academics; otherwise, those clever individuals[Pg iv] who have recently published essays on it (and who have written in a much more scholarly way than one might expect from someone who has never written before) wouldn’t have quickly found themselves confused in their explanations and forced to divert into the more familiar territory of moral beauty to escape the challenges they faced. They were also compelled, for the same reasons, to entertain their audience with impressive (but often misplaced) praises of deceased artists and their work; constantly talking about effects instead of exploring causes, and despite their many charming expressions in very appealing language, they leave you exactly where they first picked you up, honestly admitting that regarding gracefulness, the main issue at hand, they don't even claim to have any understanding of it. And really, how could they? It actually requires extensive practical knowledge of the entire art of painting (sculpture alone is not enough) to some significant degree, in order for anyone to follow the thread of this inquiry through all its components: which I hope will be demonstrated in the following work.

It will then naturally be asked, why the best painters within these two centuries, who by their works appear to have excelled in grace and beauty, should have been so silent in an affair of such seeming importance to the imitative arts and their own honour? to which I answer,[Pg v] that it is probable, they arrived at that excellence in their works, by the mere dint of imitating with great exactness the beauties of nature, and by often copying and retaining strong ideas of graceful antique statues; which might sufficiently serve their purposes as painters, without their troubling themselves with a farther enquiry into the particular causes of the effects before them. It is not indeed a little strange, that the great Leonardo da Vinci (amongst the many philosophical precepts which he hath at random laid down in his treatise on painting) should not have given the least hint of any thing tending to a system of this kind; especially, as he was cotemporary with Michael Angelo, who is said to have discover'd a certain principle in the trunk only of an antique statue, (well known from this circumstance by the name of Michael Angelo's Torso, or Back, fig. 54 p. I) which principle gave his works a grandeur of gusto equal to the best antiques. Relative to which tradition, Lomazzo who wrote about painting at the same time, hath this remarkable passage, vol. I. book I.

It will then naturally be asked why the best painters of the last two centuries, who through their works seem to excel in grace and beauty, have been so quiet on a matter that appears crucial to the imitative arts and their own reputation? To this, I respond,[Pg v] that it’s likely they achieved excellence in their work simply by closely imitating the beauty of nature and by frequently copying and remembering the powerful images of elegant ancient statues; this may have been enough for them as painters, without needing to delve deeper into the specific reasons behind the effects they observed. It is indeed rather strange that the great Leonardo da Vinci, among the many philosophical ideas he casually presented in his treatise on painting, did not provide even a hint towards a system of this nature; especially since he was contemporary with Michelangelo, who is said to have discovered a particular principle in just the trunk of an ancient statue (well-known from being called Michelangelo's Torso, or Back, fig. 54 p. I), which principle infused his works with a level of grandeur and style equal to the finest antiques. In relation to this, Lomazzo, who wrote about painting around the same time, has this significant passage, vol. I. book I.

54

"And because in this place there falleth out a certaine precept of Michael Angelo much for our purpose, I wil not conceale it, leaving the farther interpretation and vnderstanding thereof to the iudicious reader. It is reported then that Michael Angelo vpon a time gaue this observation to the Painter Marcus de Sciena his scholler; that he should alwaies make a figure Pyramidall, Serpentlike, and multiplied by one[Pg vi] two and three. In which precept (in mine opinion) the whole mysterie of the arte consisteth. For the greatest grace and life that a picture can haue, is, that it expresse Motion: which the Painters call the spirite of a picture: Nowe there is no forme so fitte to expresse this motion, as that of the flame of fire, which according to Aristotle and the other Philosophers, is an elemente most actiue of all others: because the forme of the flame thereof is most apt for motion: for it hath a Conus or sharpe pointe wherewith it seemeth to divide the aire, that so it may ascende to his proper sphere. So that a picture having this forme will bee most beautifull."[1]

"And because there's a certain principle from Michael Angelo that's very relevant here, I won’t hold it back, leaving further interpretation and understanding to the thoughtful reader. It's said that Michael Angelo once shared this observation with his student, the painter Marcus de Sciena: that he should always create a figure that is pyramid-shaped, serpent-like, and multiplied by one, two, and three[Pg vi]. In my view, the whole essence of the art lies in this principle. The greatest grace and life a painting can have is to express Motion, which painters refer to as the spirit of a painting. Now, there’s no form better suited to express this motion than that of a flame, which, according to Aristotle and other philosophers, is the most active of all elements. The shape of the flame is particularly conducive to motion; it has a Conus or sharp point that seems to divide the air as it rises to its proper sphere. Therefore, a painting that adopts this form will be the most beautiful."[1]

[1] See Haydock's translation printed at Oxford, 1598.

[1] Check out Haydock's translation published in Oxford, 1598.

Many writers since Lomazzo have in the same words recommended the observing this rule also; without comprehending the meaning of it: for unless it were known systematically, the whole business of grace could not be understood.

Many writers since Lomazzo have recommended following this rule, often using the same words, without really understanding what it means. Because if it’s not understood systematically, the entire concept of grace can’t be grasped.

Du Fresnoy, in his art of painting, says "large flowing, gliding outlines which are in waves, give not only a grace to the part, but to the whole body; as we see in the Antinous, and in many other of the antique figures: a fine figure and its parts ought always to have a serpent-like and flaming form: naturally[Pg vii] those sort of lines have I know not what of life and seeming motion in them, which very much resembles the activity of the flame and of the serpent." Now if he had understood what he had said, he could not, speaking of grace, have expressed himself in the following contradictory manner.—"But to say the truth, this is a difficult undertaking, and a rare present, which the artist rather receives from the hand of heaven than from his own industry and studies[2]." But De Piles, in his lives of the painters, is still more contradictory, where he says, "that a painter can only have it (meaning grace) from nature, and doth not know that he hath it, nor in what degree, nor how he communicates it to his works: and that grace and beauty are two different things; beauty pleases by the rules, and grace without them."

Du Fresnoy, in his art of painting, says "large, flowing, gliding outlines that ripple give not only grace to individual parts but also to the whole figure; as we can see in the Antinous and many other ancient sculptures: a great figure and its components should always have a serpent-like and vibrant shape: naturally[Pg vii] those kinds of lines possess an indescribable vitality and seeming motion that closely resemble the energy of fire and the movement of a serpent." Now, if he truly understood what he was saying, he wouldn't have expressed himself in such a contradictory way when discussing grace.—"But to be honest, this is a challenging task and a rare gift, which the artist receives more from the hand of heaven than from his own effort and studies[2]." However, De Piles, in his lives of the painters, is even more contradictory when he says that "a painter can only obtain it (referring to grace) from nature, and does not realize he has it, nor to what extent, nor how he conveys it through his work: and that grace and beauty are two separate things; beauty pleases by the rules, while grace does so without them."

[2] See Dryden's translation of his latin poem on Painting, verse 28, and the remarks on these very lines, page 155, which run thus, "It is difficult to say what this grace of painting is, it is to be conceiv'd, and understood much more easy than to be expressed by words; it proceeds from the illuminations of an excellent mind, (but not to be acquired) by which we give a certain turn to things, which makes them pleasing."

[2] See Dryden's translation of his Latin poem on Painting, verse 28, and the comments on these specific lines, page 155, which state, "It’s hard to define what this grace of painting is; it’s easier to conceive and understand than to express in words. It comes from the insights of an exceptional mind, (but it can't be gained) through which we give a specific twist to things, making them appealing."

All the English writers on this subject have echo'd these passages; hence Je ne sçai quoi, is become a fashionable phrase for grace.

All the English writers on this topic have repeated these passages; therefore, Je ne sçai quoi has become a trendy phrase for elegance.

By this it is plain, that this precept which Michael Angelo deliver'd so long ago in an oracle-like manner, hath remain'd mysterious down to this time, for ought that has appear'd to the contrary. The wonder that it should do so will in some measure lessen when we come to consider that it must all along have appeared as full[Pg viii] of contradiction as the most obscure quibble ever deliver'd at Delphos, because, winding lines are as often the cause of deformity as of grace, the solution of which, in this place, would be an anticipation of what the reader will find at large in the body of the work.

It's clear that this advice from Michelangelo, given in a mysterious way so long ago, has remained enigmatic up to now, despite all that's happened since. The surprise that this is true will lessen somewhat when we consider that it must have always seemed as contradictory as the most confusing riddles spoken at Delphi, because, winding lines can often cause both ugliness and beauty. Explaining this here would spoil what the reader will discover in detail later in the main text.

fig between 22 and 105

There are also strong prejudices in favour of straight lines, as constituting true beauty in the human form, where they never should appear. A middling connoisseur thinks no profile has beauty without a very straight nose, and if the forehead be continued straight with it, he thinks it is still more sublime. I have seen miserable scratches with the pen, sell at a considerable rate for only having in them a side face or two, like that between fig. 22, and fig. 105, plate I, which was made, and any one might do the same, with the eyes shut. The common notion that a person should be straight as an arrow, and perfectly erect is of this kind. If a dancing-master were to see his scholar in the easy and gracefully-turned attitude of the Antinous (fig. 6, plate I,) he would cry shame on him, and tell him he looked as crooked as a ram's horn, and bid him hold up his head as he himself did. See fig. 7, plate I.

There are also strong biases in favor of straight lines as representing true beauty in the human form, even where they shouldn't exist. An average expert believes that no profile is beautiful without a very straight nose, and if the forehead continues straight along with it, he thinks it looks even more impressive. I've seen terrible scribbles sell for a good price just because they included a side profile or two, like the ones between fig. 22 and fig. 105, plate I, which anyone could replicate with their eyes closed. The common idea that a person should be straight as an arrow and perfectly upright is part of this. If a dance teacher saw his student in the relaxed and gracefully curved pose of the Antinous (fig. 6, plate I), he would scold him, saying he looked as crooked as a ram's horn, and tell him to hold his head up just like he did. See fig. 7, plate I.

figs 6 and 7

The painters, in like manner, by their works, seem to be no less divided upon the subject than the authors. The French, except such as have imitated the antique, or the Italian school, seem to have studiously avoided the serpentine line in all their pictures, especially Anthony Coypel, history painter, and Rigaud, principal portrait painter to Lewis the 14th.

The painters, similarly, appear to be just as divided on the topic as the writers. The French, except for those who have drawn inspiration from the classics or the Italian style, seem to have carefully steered clear of the serpentine line in all their works, particularly Anthony Coypel, a history painter, and Rigaud, the main portrait painter for Louis XIV.

Rubens, whose manner of designing was quite original, made use of a large flowing line as a principle, which runs through all his works, and gives a noble spirit to them; but he did not seem to be acquainted with what we call the precise line; which hereafter we shall be very particular upon, and which gives the delicacy we see in the best Italian masters; but he rather charged his contours in general with too bold and S-like swellings.

Rubens, who had a very unique style of design, used a large, flowing line as a central feature in all his works, which adds a noble spirit to them. However, he didn't seem to understand what we now refer to as the precise line; we will discuss this in detail later, as it provides the delicacy seen in the best Italian masters. Instead, he tended to give his outlines a bold look with too many S-like curves.

Raphael, from a straight and stiff manner, on a sudden changed his taste of lines at sight of Michael Angelo's works, and the antique statues; and so fond was he of the serpentine line, that he carried it into a ridiculous excess, particularly in his draperies: though his great observance of nature suffer'd him not long to continue in this mistake.

Raphael, who initially had a straight and rigid style, suddenly changed his preference for lines when he saw Michelangelo's works and the ancient statues. He became so enamored with the serpentine line that he took it to an absurd extreme, especially in his draperies. However, his keen observation of nature didn’t allow him to stay in this error for long.

Peter de Cortone form'd a fine manner in his draperies of this line.

Peter de Cortone developed a great style in the way he draped fabrics in this genre.

We see this principle no where better understood than in some pictures of Corregio, particularly his Juno and Ixion: yet the proportions of his figures are sometimes such as might be corrected by a common sign painter.

We see this principle understood no better than in some paintings by Correggio, especially his Juno and Ixion: however, the proportions of his figures are sometimes off in a way that could be corrected by a typical sign painter.

Whilst Albert Durer, who drew mathematically, never so much as deviated into grace, which he must sometimes have done in copying the life, if he had not been fetter'd with his own impracticable rules of proportion.

While Albert Durer, who drew with mathematical precision, never really strayed into grace, he must have occasionally done so when capturing life, if he hadn't been constrained by his own unrealistic rules of proportion.

But that which may have puzzled this matter most, may be, that Vandyke, one of the best portrait painters in most respects ever known, plainly appears not to have had a thought of this kind. For there seems not to be the least grace in his pictures more than what the life chanced to bring before him. There is a print of the Dutchess of Wharton (fig. 52, plate II,) engraved by Van Gunst, from a true picture by him, which is thoroughly divested of every elegance. Now, had he known this line as a principle, he could no more have drawn all the parts of this picture so contrary to it, than Mr. Addison could have wrote a whole spectator in false grammar; unless it were done on purpose. However, on account of his other great excellencies, painters chuse to stile this want of grace in his attitudes, &c. simplicity, and indeed they do often very justly merit that epithet.

But what might be most confusing about this is that Vandyke, regarded as one of the best portrait painters ever, really didn’t seem to think this way at all. His portraits appear to lack grace beyond what life presented to him. There’s a print of the Duchess of Wharton (fig. 52, plate II), engraved by Van Gunst, from an original painting by him, which completely lacks elegance. If he had understood this idea as a principle, he wouldn't have been able to create parts of this portrait that are so inconsistent with it, just like Mr. Addison couldn't have written an entire Spectator in incorrect grammar unless he did it on purpose. However, because of his other great strengths, painters choose to describe this lack of grace in his poses, etc. as simplicity, and indeed, they often deserve that label.

52

Nor have the painters of the present times been less uncertain and contradictory to each other, than the masters already mentioned, whatever they may pretend to the contrary: of this I had a mind to be certain, and therefore, in the year 1745, published a frontispiece to my engraved works, in which I drew a serpentine line lying on a painter's pallet, with these words under it, the line of beauty. The bait soon took; and no Egyptian hierogliphic ever amused more than it did for a time, painters and sculptors came to me to know the[Pg xi] meaning of it, being as much puzzled with it as other people, till it came to have some explanation; then indeed, but not till then, some found it out to be an old acquaintance of theirs, tho' the account they could give of its properties was very near as satisfactory as that which a day-labourer who constantly uses the leaver, could give of that machine as a mechanical power.

Nor have today's painters been any less uncertain and contradictory with each other than the masters I mentioned earlier, no matter what they claim otherwise. To confirm this, I published a frontispiece for my engraved works in 1745, featuring a serpentine line on a painter's palette, with the words the line of beauty beneath it. The idea quickly caught on; no Egyptian hieroglyph ever intrigued people more than this did for a while. Painters and sculptors came to me to ask about the[Pg xi] meaning of it, just as confused as everyone else, until it finally got some explanation. Only then did a few realize it was something they already knew, but their understanding of its properties was nearly as vague as that of a laborer who frequently uses a lever but cannot explain how it works as a mechanical power.

Others, as common face painters and copiers of pictures, denied that there could be such a rule either in art or nature, and asserted it was all stuff and madness; but no wonder that these gentlemen should not be ready in comprehending a thing they have little or no business with. For though the picture copier may sometimes to a common eye seem to vye with the original he copies, the artist himself requires no more ability, genius, or knowledge of nature, than a journeyman-weaver at the goblins, who in working after a piece of painting, bit by bit, scarcely knows what he is about, whether he is weaving a man or a horse, yet at last almost insensibly turns out of his loom a fine piece of tapestry, representing, it may be, one of Alexander's battles painted by Le Brun.

Others, like typical face painters and copyists, denied that there could be any real rule in either art or nature, claiming it was all nonsense and madness; but it's no surprise that these individuals struggle to understand something they know little about. For while the picture copier might sometimes seem to compete with the original to the average person, the artist requires no more skill, talent, or knowledge of nature than a journeyman weaver in a workshop, who, while working on a painting piece by piece, hardly understands what they're doing, whether it's a man or a horse they're weaving. Yet in the end, they almost unknowingly produce a beautiful tapestry that might depict one of Alexander's battles as painted by Le Brun.

As the above-mention'd print thus involved me in frequent disputes by explaining the qualities of the line, I was extremely glad to find it (which I had conceiv'd as only part of a system in my mind) so well[Pg xii] supported by the above precept of Michael Angelo: which was first pointed out to me by Dr. Kennedy, a learned antiquarian and connoisseur, of whom I afterwards purchased the translation, from which I have taken several passages to my purpose.

As the aforementioned print got me into frequent arguments about the qualities of the line, I was really pleased to discover it (which I had thought was just part of a larger system in my mind) so well[Pg xii] supported by the earlier teaching of Michael Angelo: which was first highlighted to me by Dr. Kennedy, a knowledgeable antiquarian and expert, from whom I later bought the translation, from which I have taken several parts for my own use.

Let us now endeavour to discover what light antiquity throws upon the subject in question.

Let’s now try to find out what insights ancient times offer on this topic.

Egypt first, and afterward Greece, have manifested by their works their great skill in arts and sciences, and among the rest painting, and sculpture, all which are thought to have issued from their great schools of philosophy. Pythagoras, Socrates, and Aristotle, seem to have pointed out the right road in nature for the study of the painters and sculptors of those times (which they in all probability afterwards followed through those nicer paths that their particular professions required them to pursue) as may be reasonably collected from the answers given by Socrates to Aristippus his disciple, and Parrhasius the painter, concerning fitness, the first fundamental law in nature with regard to beauty.

Egypt first, and then Greece, have shown their impressive skills in arts and sciences through their works, including painting and sculpture, which are believed to have originated from their influential schools of philosophy. Pythagoras, Socrates, and Aristotle seem to have indicated the right direction in nature for the study of painters and sculptors of their time (whom they likely influenced to follow the more intricate paths needed for their specific professions) as can be reasonably inferred from Socrates' responses to his disciple Aristippus and the painter Parrhasius about fitness, the first fundamental law of nature concerning beauty.

I am in some measure saved the trouble of collecting an historical account of these arts among the ancients, by accidentally meeting with a preface to a tract, call'd the Beau Ideal: this treatise[3] was written by Lambert Hermanson Ten Kate, in French, and translated into English by James Christopher le Blon; who in that preface says, speaking of the Author, "His superior[Pg xiii] knowledge that I am now publishing, is the product of the Analogy of the ancient Greeks; or the true key for finding all harmonious proportions in painting, sculpture, architecture, musick, &c. brought home to Greece by Pythagoras. For after this great philosopher had travell'd into Phoenicia, Egypt and Chaldea, where he convers'd with the learned; he return'd into Greece about Anno Mundi 3484. Before the christian æra 520, and brought with him many excellent discoveries and improvements for the good of his countrymen, among which the Analogy was one of the most considerable and useful.

I'm somewhat relieved of the effort to gather a historical account of these arts from ancient times because I stumbled upon a preface to a document called the Beau Ideal: this treatise[3] was written by Lambert Hermanson Ten Kate in French and translated into English by James Christopher le Blon. In that preface, he mentions the Author, saying, "His superior[Pg xiii] knowledge that I am now publishing is the result of the Analogy of the ancient Greeks; or the true key for finding all harmonious proportions in painting, sculpture, architecture, music, etc., brought to Greece by Pythagoras. After this great philosopher traveled to Phoenicia, Egypt, and Chaldea, where he engaged with the learned, he returned to Greece around Anno Mundi 3484, before the Christian era, 520, bringing with him many excellent discoveries and improvements for the benefit of his countrymen, among which the Analogy was one of the most important and useful."

[3] Publish'd in 1732, and sold by A. Millar.

[3] Published in 1732, and sold by A. Millar.

"After him the Grecians, by the help of this Analogy, began (and not before) to excel other nations in sciences and arts; for whereas before this time they represented their Divinities in plain human figures, the Grecians now began to enter into the Beau Ideal; and Pamphilus, (who flourish'd A. M. 3641, before the christian æra 363, who taught, that no man could excel in painting without mathematicks) the scholar of Pausias and master of Apelles, was the first who artfully apply'd the said Analogy to the art of painting; as much about the same time the sculpturers, the architects, &c. began to apply it to their several arts, without which science, the Grecians had remain'd as ignorant as their forefathers.

"After him, the Greeks, thanks to this analogy, began (and not before) to surpass other nations in sciences and arts. Whereas previously they depicted their Divinities in simple human forms, the Greeks started to create the ideal of beauty. Pamphilus, who thrived around 3641 A.M., before the Christian era 363, taught that no one could truly excel in painting without knowledge of mathematics. He was a student of Pausias and the teacher of Apelles, and he was the first to skillfully apply this analogy to painting. Around the same time, sculptors, architects, and others began to use it in their various crafts. Without this knowledge, the Greeks would have remained as uninformed as their ancestors."

"They carried on their improvements in drawing, painting, architecture, sculpture, &c. till they became the wonders of the world; especially after the Asiaticks and Egyptians (who had formerly been the teachers of the Grecians) had, in process of time and by the havock of war, lost all the excellency in sciences and arts; for which all other nations were afterwards obliged to the Grecians, without being able so much as to imitate them.

"They continued to advance their skills in drawing, painting, architecture, sculpture, and more until they became the wonders of the world, especially after the Asians and Egyptians (who had once taught the Greeks) lost all their expertise in sciences and arts due to the ravages of war. As a result, all other nations became indebted to the Greeks, unable even to imitate them."

"For when the Romans had conquered Greece and Asia, and had brought to Rome the best paintings and the finest artists, we don't find they discovered the great key of knowledge, the Analogy I am now speaking of, but their best performances were conducted by Grecian artists, who it seems cared not to communicate their secret of the Analogy; because either they intended to be necessary at Rome, by keeping the secret among themselves, or else the Romans, who principally affected universal dominion, were not curious enough to search after the secret, not knowing the importance of it, nor understanding that, without it, they could never attain to the excellency of the Grecians: though nevertheless it must be owned that the Romans used well the proportions, which the Grecians long before had reduced to certain fixed rules according to their ancient Analogy; and the Romans could arrive at the happy use of the[Pg xv] proportions, without comprehending the Analogy itself."

"For when the Romans conquered Greece and Asia and brought the best paintings and top artists to Rome, they didn’t discover the great key to knowledge—the Analogy I’m referring to now. Instead, their best works were produced by Greek artists, who didn’t seem to want to share their secret of the Analogy. This may have been because they wanted to remain essential in Rome by keeping the secret among themselves, or it could be that the Romans, who mainly aimed for universal dominance, weren’t curious enough to seek out the secret, not realizing its significance and not understanding that without it, they could never reach the excellence of the Greeks. However, it must be acknowledged that the Romans effectively used the proportions that the Greeks had long established as fixed rules based on their ancient Analogy; and the Romans were able to use these proportions effectively without truly grasping the Analogy itself."

This account agrees with what is constantly observed in Italy, where the Greek, and Roman work, both in medals and statues, are as distinguishable as the characters of the two languages.

This account aligns with what is consistently seen in Italy, where Greek and Roman art, both in coins and statues, are as recognizable as the characters of the two languages.

As the preface had thus been of service to me, I was in hopes from the title of the book (and the assurance of the translator, that the author had by his great learning discovered the secret of the ancients) to have met with something there that might have assisted, or confirmed the scheme I had in hand; but was much disappointed in finding nothing of that sort, and no explanation, or even after-mention of what at first agreeably alarmed me, the word Analogy. I have given the reader a specimen, in his own words, how far the author has discovered this grand secret of the ancients, or great key of knowledge, as the translator calls it.

As the preface had been helpful to me, I hoped that from the title of the book (and the translator's assurance that the author, through his extensive knowledge, had uncovered the secrets of the ancients) I would find something that could assist or confirm the project I was working on. However, I was greatly disappointed to find nothing of that sort and no explanation, or even a mention afterward, of what had initially intrigued me, the word Analogy. I've provided the reader a sample, in his own words, of how far the author has uncovered this grand secret of the ancients, or great key of knowledge, as the translator refers to it.

"The sublime part that I so much esteem, and of which I have begun to speak, is a real Je ne sçai quoi, or an unaccountable something to most people, and it is the most important part to all the connoisseurs, I shall call it an harmonious propriety, which is a touching or moving unity, or a pathetick agreement or concord, not only of each member to its body, but also of each part to the member of which it is a part: It is also an infinite variety of parts, however[Pg xvi] conformable, with respect to each different subject, so that all the attitude, and all the adjustment of the draperies of each figure ought to answer or correspond to the subject chosen. Briefly, it is a true decorum, a bienseance or a congruent disposition of ideas, as well for the face and stature, as for the attitudes. A bright genius, in my opinion, who aspires to excel in the ideal, should propose this to himself, as what has been the principal study of the most famous artists. 'Tis in this part that the great masters cannot be imitated or copied but by themselves, or by those that are advanced in the knowledge of the ideal, and who are as knowing as those masters in the rules or laws of the pittoresque and poetical nature, altho' inferior to the masters in the high spirit of invention."

"The sublime aspect that I hold in high regard, and which I've started to discuss, is a real je ne sais quoi, or an indescribable something for most people, yet it’s the most crucial element for all connoisseurs. I’ll refer to it as harmonious propriety, which embodies a touching or moving unity, or a poignant agreement or concord, not just between each element and its whole, but also within each part and the whole it belongs to: It is also an infinite variety of parts, though[Pg xvi] each remains aligned with the different themes. Therefore, all the poses and the way the drapery of each figure is arranged should reflect or correspond to the chosen subject. In short, it represents true decorum, propriety, or a fitting arrangement of ideas, applicable to both the face and stature, as well as the gestures. In my view, a brilliant talent who aims to excel in the ideal should set this as their goal, as it has been the main focus of the most renowned artists. It’s in this aspect that great masters can only be imitated or replicated by themselves, or by those who have advanced understanding of the ideal, and who know as much as those masters do about the rules or laws governing the picturesque and poetic nature, even if they fall short of the masters in their creative spirit."

The words in this quotation "It is also an infinite variety of parts," seem at first to have some meaning in them, but it is entirely destroy'd by the rest of the paragraph, and all the other pages are filled, according to custom, with descriptions of pictures.

The words in this quotation "It is also an infinite variety of parts," might initially seem meaningful, but that gets completely lost in the rest of the paragraph, and all the other pages are filled, as usual, with descriptions of pictures.

Now, as every one has a right to conjecture what this discovery of the ancients might be, it shall be my business to shew it was a key to the thorough knowledge of variety both in form, and movement. Shakespear, who had the deepest penetration into nature, has sum'd up all the charms of beauty in two words,[Pg xvii] infinite variety; where, speaking of Cleopatra's power over Anthony, he says,

Now, since everyone has the right to guess what this ancient discovery might be, it's my job to show that it was a key to fully understanding variety in both form and movement. Shakespeare, who had the deepest insight into nature, summed up all the charms of beauty in two words,[Pg xvii] endless variety; when talking about Cleopatra's power over Anthony, he says,

——Nor custom stale
Her infinite variety:—— Act 2. Scene 3.

——Nor stale custom
Her endless variety:—— Act 2. Scene 3.

It has been ever observed, that the ancients made their doctrines mysterious to the vulgar, and kept them secret from those who were not of their particular sects, and societies, by means of symbols, and hieroglyphics. Lomazzo says, chap. 29, book 1. "The Grecians in imitation of antiquity searched out the truly renowned proportion, wherein the exact perfection of most exquisite beauty and sweetness appeareth; dedicating the same in a triangular glass unto Venus the goddess of divine beauty, from whence all the beauty of inferior things is derived."

It has always been noted that ancient people made their teachings mysterious to the public and kept them hidden from those not part of their specific sects and groups, using symbols and hieroglyphics. Lomazzo states in chapter 29, book 1, "The Greeks, following the example of the ancients, discovered the truly celebrated proportion where the perfect blend of exquisite beauty and harmony is found; dedicating it in a triangular glass to Venus, the goddess of divine beauty, from whom all the beauty of lesser things comes."

If we suppose this passage to be authentic, may we not also imagine it probable, that the symbol in the triangular glass, might be similar to the line Michael Angelo recommended; especially, if it can be proved, that the triangular form of the glass, and the serpentine line itself, are the two most expressive figures that can be thought of to signify not only beauty and grace, but the whole order of form.

If we assume this passage is genuine, can we not also consider it likely that the symbol in the triangular glass might be similar to the line Michael Angelo suggested? Especially if it's proven that the triangular shape of the glass and the curvy line itself are the two most expressive shapes that can represent not just beauty and grace, but the entire order of form.

There is a circumstance in the account Pliny gives of Apelles's visit to Protogenes, which strengthens this supposition. I hope I may have leave to repeat the story. Apelles having heard of the fame of Protogenes, went[Pg xviii] to Rhodes to pay him a visit, but not finding him at home asked for a board, on which he drew a line, telling the servant maid, that line would signify to her master who had been to see him; we are not clearly told what sort of a line it was that could so particularly signify one of the first of his profession: if it was only a stroke (tho' as fine as a hair as Pliny seems to think) it could not possibly, by any means, denote the abilities of a great painter. But if we suppose it to be a line of some extraordinary quality, such as the serpentine line will appear to be, Apelles could not have left a more satisfactory signature of the complement he had paid him. Protogenes when he came home took the hint, and drew a finer or rather more expressive line within it, to shew Apelles if he came again, that he understood his meaning. He, soon returning, was well-pleased with the answer Protogenes had left for him, by which he was convinced that fame had done him justice, and so correcting the line again, perhaps by making it more precisely elegant, he took his leave. The story thus may be reconcil'd to common sense, which, as it has been generally receiv'd, could never be understood but as a ridiculous tale.

There’s a situation in Pliny’s story about Apelles visiting Protogenes that supports this idea. I hope I can share the story. Apelles, having heard about Protogenes's reputation, went to Rhodes to visit him, but when he found that Protogenes wasn’t home, he asked for a board and drew a line on it, telling the maid that this line would indicate to her master who had come to see him. We're not clearly told what kind of line it was that could uniquely identify one of the top artists; if it was just a simple stroke (even if as fine as a hair, as Pliny suggests), it definitely wouldn’t represent the skills of a great painter. But if we assume it was an extraordinary line, like a serpentine line, then Apelles couldn't have left a more fitting signature to acknowledge the compliment he had paid. When Protogenes returned home, he took the hint and drew a finer or rather more expressive line inside it to show Apelles, should he come back, that he understood his message. Apelles soon returned and was pleased with the response Protogenes had left him, feeling that his reputation was justified. He then corrected the line again, possibly making it even more elegant, and took his leave. This story can be interpreted in a sensible way, while in general it has often been viewed as a ridiculous tale.

fig over fig 4 pl I

Let us add to this, that there is scarce an Egyptian, Greek, or Roman deity, but hath a twisted serpent, twisted cornucopia, or some symbol winding in this manner to accompany it. The two small heads (over the[Pg xix] busto of the Hercules, fig. 4, in plate I) of the goddess Isis, one crowned with a globe between two horns, the other with a lily[4], are of this kind. Harpocrates, the god of silence, is still more remarkably so, having a large twisted horn growing out of the side of his head, one cornucopia in his hand, and another at his feet, with his finger placed on his lips, indicating secrecy: (see Montfaucon's antiquities) and it is as remarkable, that the deities of barbarous and gothic nations never had, nor have to this day, any of these elegant forms belonging to them. How absolutely void of these turns are the pagods of China, and what a mean taste runs through most of their attempts in painting and sculpture, notwithstanding they finish with such excessive neatness; the whole nation in these matters seem to have but one eye: this mischief naturally follows from the prejudices they imbibe by copying one anothers works, which the ancients seem seldom to have done.

Let’s add that there is hardly an Egyptian, Greek, or Roman deity without a twisted serpent, a curved cornucopia, or some symbol winding in a similar way. The two small heads (over the[Pg xix]bust of Hercules, fig. 4, in plate I) of the goddess Isis, one crowned with a globe between two horns and the other with a lily[4], are examples of this. Harpocrates, the god of silence, is even more notable, having a large twisted horn growing from the side of his head, one cornucopia in his hand, and another at his feet, with his finger on his lips, indicating secrecy (see Montfaucon's antiquities). It’s also noteworthy that the deities of barbaric and Gothic nations have never had, nor do they have today, any of these elegant forms. The pagodas of China are completely devoid of these twists, and there is a lack of taste in most of their painting and sculpture attempts, even though they exhibit excessive neatness; the entire nation seems to have only one perspective in these matters. This issue likely arises from the biases they develop by copying each other’s work, a practice the ancients seem to have rarely engaged in.

[4] The leaves of this flower as they grow, twist themselves various ways in a pleasing manner, as may be better seen by figure 43, in plate I, but there is a curious little flower called the Autumn Syclamen, fig. 47, the leaves of which elegantly twist one way only.

[4] The leaves of this flower twist in different directions as they grow, creating a pleasing appearance, which can be better appreciated in figure 43, in plate I. However, there's an interesting little flower called the Autumn Syclamen, shown in fig. 47, whose leaves twist elegantly in just one direction.

figs 43 and 47

Upon the whole, it is evident, that the ancients studied these arts very differently from the moderns: Lomazzo seems to be partly aware of this, by what he says in the division of his work, page 9, "There is a two-folde proceeding in all artes and sciences: the one is called the order of nature, and the other of[Pg xx] teaching. Nature proceedeth ordinarily, beginning with the unperfect, as the particulars, and ending with the perfect, as the universals. Now if in searching out the nature of things, our understanding shall proceede after that order, by which they are brought forth by nature, doubtlesse it will be the most absolute and ready method that can bee imagined. For we beginne to know things by their first and immediate principles, &c. and this is not only mine opinion but Aristotles also," yet, mistaking Aristotle's meaning, and absolutely deviating from his advice, he afterwards says, "all which if we could comprehend within our understanding, we should be most wise; but it is impossible," and after having given some dark reasons why he thinks so, he tells you "he resolves to follow the order of teaching," which all the writers on painting have in like manner since done.

Overall, it's clear that the ancients approached these arts very differently from how we do today. Lomazzo seems to partially recognize this in what he says in the division of his work, page 9: "There is a twofold approach in all arts and sciences: one is called the order of nature, and the other of teaching. Nature typically starts with the imperfect, like particulars, and ends with the perfect, like universals. If we investigate the nature of things using the order in which they are brought forth by nature, it will undoubtedly be the most thorough and effective method imaginable. We begin to understand things through their first and immediate principles, etc., and this isn't just my opinion but Aristotle's as well." Yet, misinterpreting Aristotle's meaning and completely straying from his advice, he later states, "if we could comprehend all of this within our understanding, we would be very wise; but it is impossible." After providing some unclear reasons for his belief, he concludes that "he intends to follow the order of teaching," which all writers on painting have similarly done since.

Had I observed the foregoing passage, before I undertook this essay, it probably would have put me to a stand, and deterred me from venturing upon what Lomazzo calls an impossible task: but observing in the foremention'd controversies that the torrent generally ran against me; and that several of my opponents had turn'd my arguments into ridicule, yet were daily availing themselves of their use, and venting them even to my face as their own; I began to wish the publication of something on this subject; and accordingly applied[Pg xxi] myself to several of my friends, whom I thought capable of taking up the pen for me, offering to furnish them with materials by word of mouth: but finding this method not practicable, from the difficulty of one man's expressing the ideas of another, especially on a subject which he was either unacquainted with, or was new in its kind, I was therefore reduced to an attempt of finding such words as would best answer my own ideas, being now too far engaged to drop the design. Hereupon, having digested the matter as well as I could, and thrown it into the form of a book, I submitted it to the judgment of such friends whose sincerity and abilities I could best rely on, determining on their approbation or dislike to publish or destroy it: but their favourable opinion of the manuscript being publicly known, it gave such a credit to the undertaking, as soon changed the countenances of those, who had a better opinion of my pencil, than my pen, and turn'd their sneers into expectation: especially when the same friends had kindly made me an offer of conducting the work through the press. And here I must acknowledge myself particularly indebted to one gentleman for his corrections and amendment of at least a third part of the wording. Through his absence and avocations, several sheets went to the press without any assistance, and the rest had the occasional inspection of one or two other friends. If any inaccuracies shall be found in[Pg xxii] the writing, I shall readily acknowledge them all my own, and am, I confess, under no great concern about them, provided the matter in general may be found useful and answerable in the application of it to truth and nature; in which material points, if the reader shall think fit to rectify any mistakes, it will give me a sensible pleasure, and be doing great honour to the work.

Had I seen the previous passage before starting this essay, it might have stopped me and discouraged me from taking on what Lomazzo describes as an impossible task. However, noticing that the debates generally went against me and that several of my opponents had mocked my arguments yet were still using them daily—even presenting them to my face as their own—I started wanting to publish something on this topic. So, I reached out to a few friends who I thought could help write for me, offering to share my ideas in person. But I found that approach impractical, considering it's tough for one person to express another's ideas, especially on a subject that was unfamiliar or new. Thus, I was left with no choice but to try and find the words that best captured my thoughts, being too invested to abandon the project. After organizing the material as best as I could and putting it into book form, I shared it with friends whose honesty and skills I trusted, deciding to publish or trash it based on their approval or disapproval. However, their positive feedback about the manuscript became public knowledge, which gave credibility to the effort and changed the attitude of those who preferred my drawings over my writing, shifting their scoffs into anticipation—especially when those same friends kindly offered to help me through the publishing process. I must especially thank one gentleman for correcting and improving at least a third of the text. Due to his absence and other commitments, several sections went to press without assistance, and the rest were checked by one or two other friends. If there are any inaccuracies in the writing, I will fully own them and honestly, I'm not too worried as long as the content is generally useful and aligns with truth and nature. If the reader chooses to correct any errors in these important areas, it will genuinely please me and honor the work greatly.


For the more easy finding the figures referred to in the two prints belonging to this work, the references are for the most part placed in the margin. Fig. T p. I signifies the top of plate I. L p. I the left side. R p. I the right side. B. p. I. the bottom. And where a figure is referred to in the middle of either print, it is only mark'd thus, fig. p. I or fig. p. II.

To make it easier to find the figures mentioned in the two prints related to this work, the references are mostly placed in the margin. Fig. T p. I indicates the top of plate I. L p. I refers to the left side. R p. I indicates the right side. B. p. I denotes the bottom. And when a figure is referenced in the middle of either print, it's simply marked as fig. p. I or fig. p. II.

[Transcriber's note: In this digital edition, these marginal references have been incorporated into the text within square brackets, e.g. [fig. 1 T p. I]. The two prints were not originally bound into the book; they are reproduced in their entirety below. Reproductions of the individual figures have also been incorporated into the text at the appropriate points.]

[Transcriber's note: In this digital edition, the marginal references have been incorporated into the text within square brackets, e.g. [fig. 1 T p. I]. The two prints were not originally included in the book; they are fully reproduced below. Individual reproductions of the figures have also been included in the text at the relevant points.]

PLATE I

PLATE I

PLATE I

PLATE II

PLATE II

PLATE 2


CONTENTS.

page
PREFACE.iii
ADVERTISEMENT. The plates and figures.xxii
Corrections.xxiv
INTRODUCTION. The use and advantage of considering
solid objects as only thin shells composed of lines,
like the outer-coat of an onion
.
CHAPTER 1. Of Fitness,13
CHAPTER 2. Of Diversity,16
CHAPTER 3. Of Consistency, Routine, or
Balance,
18
CHAPTER 4. Of Simplicity. or Uniqueness,21
CHAPTER 5. Of Complexity,24
CHAPTER 6. Of Amount,29
CHAPTER 7. Of Lines,37
CHAPTER 8. Of what sort of parts and how pleasing
Shapes
are composed,
39
CHAPTER 9. Of Compositions with the Wavy Line,48
CHAPTER X. Of Compositions with the Serpentine Line,50
CHAPTER 11. Of Ratio,.67
CHAPTER 12. Of Light and Shade, and the manner
in which objects are explained to the eye by them,
93
CHAPTER 13. Of Creation with regard to Light,
Shade,
and Colors,
106
CHAPTER 14. Of Coloring,113
CHAPTER 15. Of the Face. 1. In the highest taste, and
the reverse
. 2. As to character and expression. 3. Of
the manner in which the lines of the Face alter from
infancy upwards, and shew the different Ages,
122
CHAPTER 16. Of Mindset,135
CHAPTER 17. Of Action. 1. A new method of acquiring
an easy and graceful movement of the hand and
arms
. 2. Of the head, &c. 3. Of dancing, particularly
the minuet
. 4. Of country-dancing, and, lastly, of stage-action.
138
Prints Publish'd by W. Hogarth.
Stats referr'd to in the Book.

ERRATA.

[Transcriber's note: Hogarth's corrections are now incorporated within the text.]

[Transcriber's note: Hogarth's corrections are now included in the text.]


INTRODUCTION.

I now offer to the public a short essay, accompanied with two explanatory prints, in which I shall endeavour to shew what the principles are in nature, by which we are directed to call the forms of some bodies beautiful, others ugly; some graceful, and others the reverse; by considering more minutely than has hitherto been done, the nature of those lines, and their different combinations, which serve to raise in the mind the ideas of all the variety of forms imaginable. At first, perhaps, the whole design, as well as the prints, may seem rather intended to trifle and confound, than to entertain and inform: but I am persuaded that when the examples in nature, referr'd to in this essay, are duly consider'd and examined upon the principles laid down in it, it will be thought worthy of a careful and attentive perusal: and the prints themselves too will, I make no doubt, be examined as attentively, when it is found, that almost every figure in them (how odly soever they may seem to be group'd together) is referr'd to singly in the essay, in order to assist the[Pg 2] reader's imagination, when the original examples in art, or nature, are not themselves before him.

I’m now sharing a short essay with the public, along with two explanatory prints, where I will try to show the principles in nature that guide us in labeling some forms as beautiful and others as ugly, some as graceful and others the opposite. I will explore in greater detail than before the nature of those lines and their various combinations that evoke the many imaginable forms in our minds. At first, the entire concept and the prints might seem designed more to confuse than to entertain or inform. However, I believe that once the examples from nature discussed in this essay are carefully considered and examined based on the principles outlined, it will be seen as deserving of thoughtful attention. I’m also confident that the prints will be closely examined once it’s clear that nearly every figure in them (no matter how oddly they might be grouped together) is individually referenced in the essay to help the reader's imagination when the original examples in art or nature aren’t available.

And in this light I hope my prints will be consider'd, and that the figures referr'd to in them will never be imagined to be placed there by me as examples themselves, of beauty or grace, but only to point out to the reader what sorts of objects he is to look for and examine in nature, or in the works of the greatest masters. My figures, therefore, are to be consider'd in the same light, with those a mathematician makes with his pen, which may convey the idea of his demonstration, tho' not a line in them is either perfectly straight, or of that peculiar curvature he is treating of. Nay, so far was I from aiming at grace, that I purposely chose to be least accurate, where most beauty might be expected, that no stress might be laid on the figures to the prejudice of the work itself. For I must confess, I have but little hopes of having a favourable attention given to my design in general, by those who have already had a more fashionable introduction into the mysteries of the arts of painting, and sculpture. Much less do I expect, or in truth desire, the countenance of that set of people, who have an interest in exploding any kind of doctrine, that may teach us to see with our own eyes.

And with this in mind, I hope my prints will be viewed thoughtfully, and that the figures referenced in them won't be seen as examples of beauty or grace created by me, but rather as a guide for the reader to identify and study the kinds of objects found in nature or in the works of the greatest masters. So, my figures should be regarded in the same way as the ones a mathematician draws with his pen; they may express the idea of his demonstration, even if not a single line is perfectly straight or matches the specific curve he’s discussing. In fact, I was so far from aiming at grace that I intentionally chose to be less precise where the most beauty could be anticipated, ensuring no emphasis was placed on the figures at the expense of the work itself. I must admit, I don’t have much hope for my design to receive positive attention from those who have already enjoyed a more stylish introduction to the mysteries of painting and sculpture. Even less do I expect, or genuinely desire, the approval of those who are invested in dismissing any doctrine that might teach us to see with our own eyes.

It may be needless to observe, that some of the last-mention'd, are not only the dependents on, but often the only instructors and leaders of the former; but in[Pg 3] what light they are so consider'd abroad, may be partly seen by [Fig. 1 T p. I] a burlesque representation of them, taken from a print publish'd by Mr. Pond, design'd by Cavr. Ghezzi at Rome.

It might be unnecessary to point out that some of the recently mentioned individuals are not just dependent on the earlier ones, but often act as their only teachers and guides; however, in[Pg 3] the way they are viewed abroad can be partly illustrated by [Fig. 1 T p. I], a humorous depiction of them taken from a print published by Mr. Pond, designed by Cavr. Ghezzi in Rome.

1

To those, then, whose judgments are unprejudiced, this little work is submitted with most pleasure; because it is from such that I have hitherto received the most obligations, and now have reason to expect most candour.

To those whose judgments are fair, I present this small work with great pleasure; because it is from people like you that I have received the most support so far, and I now have reason to hope for the most understanding.

Therefore I would fain have such of my readers be assured, that however they may have been aw'd, and over-born by pompous terms of art, hard names, and the parade of seemingly magnificent collections of pictures and statues; they are in a much fairer way, ladies, as well as gentlemen, of gaining a perfect knowledge of the elegant and beautiful in artificial, as well as natural forms, by considering them in a systematical, but at the same time familiar way, than those who have been prepossess'd by dogmatic rules, taken from the performances of art only: nay, I will venture to say, sooner, and more rationally, than even a tolerable painter, who has imbibed the same prejudices.

So, I want my readers to feel reassured that, no matter how intimidated they might have been by fancy jargon, complicated terms, and the show of impressive collections of art and sculptures, they have a much better chance—both ladies and gentlemen—of truly understanding what’s elegant and beautiful in both artificial and natural forms by looking at them in a systematic yet relaxed way. This is better than those who have been swayed by strict rules taken only from artistic works. In fact, I’d say they’ll achieve this understanding sooner and in a more logical way than even a decent painter who has absorbed the same biases.

The more prevailing the notion may be, that painters and connoisseurs are the only competent judges of things of this sort; the more it becomes necessary to clear up and confirm, as much as possible, what has only been asserted in the foregoing paragraph: that no one may be deterr'd, by the want of such previous knowledge, from entring into this enquiry.

The more common the belief that only painters and experts can judge things like this, the more important it becomes to clarify and confirm, as much as possible, what was stated in the previous paragraph: that no one should be discouraged by a lack of prior knowledge from participating in this discussion.

The reason why gentlemen, who have been inquisitive after knowledge in pictures, have their eyes less qualified for our purpose, than others, is because their thoughts have been entirely and continually employ'd and incumber'd with considering and retaining the various manners in which pictures are painted, the histories, names, and characters of the masters, together with many other little circumstances belonging to the mechanical part of the art; and little or no time has been given for perfecting the ideas they ought to have in their minds, of the objects themselves in nature: for by having thus espoused and adopted their first notions from nothing but imitations, and becoming too often as bigotted to their faults, as their beauties, they at length, in a manner, totally neglect, or at least disregard the works of nature, merely because they do not tally with what their minds are so strongly prepossess'd with.

The reason why gentlemen, who have been curious about knowledge in pictures, are less suited for our purpose than others is that their thoughts have been completely and constantly occupied with considering and remembering the various styles in which pictures are painted, the stories, names, and personalities of the artists, along with many other details related to the technical side of the art; as a result, they have given little or no time to develop the ideas they should have in their minds about the objects themselves in nature. By adopting their initial ideas purely from imitations and becoming too attached to both the flaws and the strengths, they end up, in a way, completely neglecting or at least disregarding the works of nature simply because they don’t align with what they are so strongly biased towards in their minds.

Were not this a true state of the case, many a reputed capital picture, that now adorns the cabinets of the curious in all countries, would long ago have been committed to the flames: nor would it have been possible for the Venus and Cupid, represented by the figure [under Fig. 49 T p. I], to have made its way into the principal apartment of a palace.

Were this not the true situation, many well-known masterpieces that now decorate the collections of curious people in every country would have been burned long ago; nor would the Venus and Cupid, shown by the figure [under Fig. 49 T p. I], have found its place in the main room of a palace.

fig. under 49 pl.I

It is also evident that the painter's eye may not be a bit better fitted to receive these new impressions, who is in like manner too much captivated with the works of art; for he also is apt to pursue the shadow, and drop[Pg 5] the substance. This mistake happens chiefly to those who go to Rome for the accomplishment of their studies; as they naturally will, without the utmost care, take the infectious turn of the connoisseur, instead of the painter: and in proportion as they turn by those means bad proficients in their own arts, they become the more considerable in that of a connoisseur. As a confirmation of this seeming paradox, it has ever been observ'd at all auctions of pictures, that the very worst painters sit as the most profound judges, and are trusted only, I suppose, on account of their disinterestedness.

It’s clear that a painter might not be any better at taking in new impressions if they are too caught up in the art itself; they often chase the illusion and ignore the reality. This mistake mostly affects those who go to Rome to further their studies, as they tend to adopt the mindset of a connoisseur instead of that of a painter, which can make them poor practitioners of their own craft while they become more significant as connoisseurs. To illustrate this seeming contradiction, it has always been observed at art auctions that the worst painters often position themselves as the most insightful judges and are trusted, I suppose, solely because of their disinterestedness.

I apprehend a good deal of this will look more like resentment, and a design to invalidate the objections of such as are not likely to set the faults of this work in the most favourable light; than merely for the encouragement, as was said above, of such of my readers, as are neither painters, nor connoisseurs: and I will be ingenuous enough to confess something of this may be true; but, at the same time, I cannot allow that this alone would have been a sufficient motive to have made me risk giving offence to any; had not another consideration, besides that already alledg'd, of more consequence to the purpose in hand, made it necessary. I mean the setting forth, in the strongest colours, the alterations objects seemingly undergo through the prepossessions and prejudices contracted by the mind.——Fallacies, strongly to be guarded against by such as would learn to see objects truly!

I understand that a lot of this might come off as resentment and an attempt to dismiss the criticisms from those who are unlikely to view the flaws of this work in a positive light; rather than just seeking the encouragement, as mentioned earlier, of my readers who aren’t artists or experts. I’ll be honest enough to admit that some of this might be true; however, I can’t say that this alone would have been a sufficient reason for me to risk offending anyone, if it weren’t for another important factor, aside from what I've already mentioned, that made it necessary. I mean highlighting, in the strongest terms, how things appear to change based on the biases and prejudices formed by the mind. — These are pitfalls that must be carefully avoided by anyone who wants to see things as they really are!

Altho' the instances already given are pretty flagrant, yet it is certainly true, (as a farther confirmation of this, and for the consolation of those, who may be a little piqued at what has been said) that painters of every condition are stronger instances of the almost unavoidable power of prejudice, than any people whatever.

Although the examples given are quite obvious, it is certainly true (as further proof of this and for the comfort of those who may be a bit offended by what has been said) that painters from all backgrounds are stronger examples of the almost unavoidable influence of prejudice than any other group.

What are all the manners, as they are call'd, of even the greatest masters, which are known to differ so much from one another, and all of them from nature, but so many strong proofs of their inviolable attachment to falshood, converted into establish'd truth in their own eyes, by self-opinion? Rubens would, in all probability, have been as much disgusted at the dry manner of Poussin, as Poussin was at the extravagant of Rubens. The prejudices of inferior proficients in favour of the imperfections of their own performances, is still more amazing.——Their eyes are so quick in discerning the faults of others, at the same time they are so totally blind to their own! Indeed it would be well for us all, if one of Gulliver's flappers could be placed at our elbows to remind us at every stroke how much prejudice and self-opinion perverts our sight.

What are all the styles, as they are called, of even the greatest artists, which are known to differ so much from one another, and all of them from nature, but so many strong proofs of their unwavering attachment to falsehood, turned into established truth in their own eyes by self-opinion? Rubens would likely have been just as disgusted by Poussin's dry style as Poussin was by Rubens's extravagant one. The biases of lesser artists in favor of the flaws in their own work are even more surprising. Their eyes are so quick to notice the mistakes of others, yet they are completely blind to their own! Indeed, it would be great for us all if one of Gulliver's flappers could be placed at our sides to remind us with every nudge how much prejudice and self-opinion distort our vision.

From what has been said, I hope it appears that those, who have no bias of any kind, either from their own practice, or the lessons of others, are fittest to examine into the truth of the principles laid down in the following pages. But as every one may not have had an opportunity of being sufficiently acquainted with the[Pg 7] instances, that have been given: I will offer one of a familiar kind, which may be a hint for their observing a thousand more. How gradually does the eye grow reconciled even to a disagreeable dress, as it becomes more and more the fashion, and how soon return to its dislike of it, when it is left off, and a new one has taken possession of the mind?—so vague is taste, when it has no solid principles for its foundation!

From what I've shared, I hope it's clear that those without any bias—whether from their own experience or from others' teachings—are best suited to explore the truth of the principles laid out in the following pages. However, since not everyone may have had the opportunity to become fully familiar with the [Pg 7] examples given, I'll provide a more relatable one that might spark their observation of countless others. Notice how gradually our eyes can adapt to even an unappealing style as it becomes trendy, and how quickly we revert to disliking it as soon as it's out of fashion and replaced by something new in our minds. Taste is so unclear when it lacks a solid foundation!

Notwithstanding I have told you my design of considering minutely the variety of lines, which serve to raise the ideas of bodies in the mind, and which are undoubtedly to be consider'd as drawn on the surfaces only of solid or opake bodies: yet the endeavouring to conceive, as accurate an idea as is possible, of the inside of those surfaces, if I may be allow'd the expression, will be a great assistance to us in the pursuance of our present enquiry.

Notwithstanding, I've mentioned my plan to closely examine the different lines that help to shape our mental images of objects, which should definitely be viewed as being drawn only on the surfaces of solid or opaque bodies. However, trying to develop as clear an idea as possible of the inside of those surfaces, if I may use that term, will greatly aid us in our current investigation.

In order to my being well understood, let every object under our consideration, be imagined to have its inward contents scoop'd out so nicely, as to have nothing of it left but a thin shell, exactly corresponding both in its inner and outer surface, to the shape of the object itself: and let us likewise suppose this thin shell to be made up of very fine threads, closely connected together, and equally perceptible, whether the eye is supposed to observe them from without, or within; and we shall find the ideas of the two surfaces of this shell will naturally coincide. The very word, shell, makes us seem to see both surfaces alike.

To make sure I'm clearly understood, let’s imagine that every object we’re discussing has been hollowed out perfectly, leaving just a thin shell that matches the shape of the object on both the inside and outside. Let’s also picture this thin shell being made of very fine threads that are tightly woven together, and that can be seen just as clearly whether we look at them from the outside or the inside. We’ll find that the concepts of the two surfaces of this shell naturally align. Just the word "shell" makes us feel like we can see both surfaces in the same way.

The use of this conceit, as it may be call'd by some, will be seen to be very great, in the process of this work: and the oftner we think of objects in this shell-like manner, we shall facilitate and strengthen our conception of any particular part of the surface of an object we are viewing, by acquiring thereby a more perfect knowledge of the whole, to which it belongs: because the imagination will naturally enter into the vacant space within this shell, and there at once, as from a center, view the whole form within, and mark the opposite corresponding parts so strongly, as to retain the idea of the whole, and make us masters of the meaning of every view of the object, as we walk round it, and view it from without.

The use of this idea, as some might call it, will prove to be very significant in the course of this work. The more we think about objects in this shell-like way, the easier and clearer our understanding of any specific part of the surface of an object will become. This is because we will gain a better overall understanding of the entire object it belongs to. The imagination will naturally fill in the empty space inside this shell, allowing us to view the whole shape from a central point and clearly identify the opposite corresponding parts. This will help us retain the concept of the whole and make us fully grasp the meaning behind each perspective of the object as we move around it and observe it from the outside.

Thus the most perfect idea we can possibly acquire of a sphere, is by conceiving an infinite number of straight rays of equal lengths, issuing from the center, as from the eye, spreading every way alike; and circumscribed or wound about at their other extremities with close connected circular threads, or lines, forming a true spherical shell.

Thus, the best idea we can get of a sphere is by imagining an infinite number of straight rays of equal length, coming from the center, like from an eye, spreading out in every direction equally; and surrounded at their other ends with tightly connected circular threads or lines, creating a true spherical shell.

But in the common way of taking the view of any opake object, that part of its surface, which fronts the eye, is apt to occupy the mind alone, and the opposite, nay even every other part of it whatever, is left unthought of at that time: and the least motion we make to reconnoitre any other side of the object, confounds our first idea, for want of the connexion of the two[Pg 9] ideas, which the complete knowledge of the whole would naturally have given us, if we had considered it in the other way before.

But when we look at any opaque object, the part of its surface that faces us tends to capture our attention, while the opposite side—and even every other part—is usually ignored at that moment. Even the slightest movement we make to check out another side of the object can confuse our initial impression, because we lack the connection between the two ideas that a full understanding of the whole would have provided if we had viewed it differently before.[Pg 9]

Another advantage of considering objects thus merely as shells composed of lines, is, that by these means we obtain the true and full idea of what is call'd the out-lines of a figure, which has been confin'd within too narrow limits, by taking it only from drawings on paper; for in the example of the sphere given above, every one of the imaginary circular threads has a right to be consider'd as an out-line of the sphere, as well as those which divide the half, that is seen, from that which is not seen; and if the eye be supposed to move regularly round it, these threads will each of them as regularly succeed one another in the office of out-lines, (in the narrow and limited sense of the word:) and the instant any one of these threads, during this motion of the eye, comes into sight on one side, its opposite thread is lost, and disappears on the other. He who will thus take the pains of acquiring perfect ideas of the distances, bearings, and oppositions of several material points and lines in the surfaces of even the most irregular figures, will gradually arrive at the knack of recalling them into his mind when the objects themselves are not before him: and they will be as strong and perfect as those of the most plain and regular forms, such as cubes and spheres; and will be of infinite service to those who invent and draw from fancy, as well as enable those to be more correct who draw from the life.

Another advantage of viewing objects simply as outlines made up of lines is that we get a clearer and more complete idea of what's called the outlines of a figure, which has been limited by only considering drawings on paper. Take the sphere example mentioned earlier; each of the imaginary circular threads can be seen as an outline of the sphere, just like those that separate the visible half from the hidden half. If we imagine the eye moving smoothly around it, each of these threads will take turns serving as outlines (in the strict sense of the term). The moment one of these threads comes into view on one side, its opposite thread will vanish from the other side. Anyone who makes the effort to fully understand the distances, angles, and oppositions of various material points and lines on the surfaces of even the most irregular shapes will gradually develop the ability to recall them mentally when the objects aren't in front of them. These mental images will be as vivid and accurate as those of simpler and more regular shapes, like cubes and spheres, and will be incredibly helpful for those who create and draw from imagination, as well as for those who aim to be more precise in drawing from real life.

In this manner, therefore, I would desire the reader to assist his imagination as much as possible, in considering every object, as if his eye were placed within it. As straight lines are easily conceiv'd, the difficulty of following this method in the most simple and regular forms will be less than may be first imagined; and its use in the more compounded will be greater: as will be more fully shewn when we come to speak of composition.

In this way, I would like the reader to use their imagination as much as possible, thinking of every object as if their eye were inside it. Since straight lines are easy to picture, it will be less challenging to apply this method to the simplest and most regular shapes than you might initially think, and it will be even more useful for more complex forms, as we will explain further when we discuss composition.

But as [Fig. 2 L p. I] may be of singular use to young designers in the study of the human form, the most complex and beautiful of all, in shewing them a mechanical way of gaining the opposite points in its surface, which never can be seen in one and the same view; it will be proper to explain the design of it in this place, as it may at the same time add some weight to what has been already said.

But as [Fig. 2 L p. I] may be especially useful to young designers studying the human form, which is the most complex and beautiful of all, by showing them a mechanical way to achieve the different perspectives on its surface that can never be captured in a single view; it’s appropriate to explain the design here, as it may also reinforce what has already been discussed.

2

It represents the trunk of a figure cast in soft wax, with one wire pass'd perpendicularly through its center, another perpendicularly to the first, going in before and coming out in the middle of the back, and as many more as may be thought necessary, parallel to and at equal distances from these, and each other; as is mark'd by the several dots in the figure.—Let these wires be so loose as to be taken out at pleasure, but not before all the parts of them, which appear out of the wax, are carefully painted close up to the wax, of a different colour from those, that lie within it. By these means[Pg 11] the horizontal and perpendicular contents of these parts of the body (by which I mean the distances of opposite points in the surface of these parts) through which the wires have pass'd, may be exactly known and compared with each other; and the little holes, where the wires have pierced the wax, remaining on its surface, will mark out the corresponding opposite points on the external muscles of the body; as well as assist and guide us to a readier conception of all the intervening parts. These points may be mark'd upon a marble figure with calibers properly used.

It represents the trunk of a figure made from soft wax, with one wire threaded vertically through its center, another wire running perpendicularly to the first, going in from the front and coming out in the middle of the back, along with as many more as needed, all parallel to and evenly spaced from each other; as indicated by the various dots in the figure. — Let these wires be loose enough to remove as needed, but not before all the parts that stick out of the wax are carefully painted right up to the wax in a different color from those that are inside it. This way[Pg 11] the horizontal and vertical dimensions of these body parts (meaning the distances between opposite points on the surface) where the wires have passed can be accurately known and compared with one another; and the small holes where the wires have gone through the wax will mark the corresponding opposite points on the outer muscles of the body, and also help us better understand all the parts in between. These points can be marked on a marble figure using calipers properly.

The known method, many years made use of, for the more exactly and expeditiously reducing drawings from large pictures, for engravings; or for enlarging designs, for painting cielings and cupolas, (by striking lines perpendicular to each other, so as to make an equal number of squares on the paper design'd for the copy, that hath been first made on the original; by which means, the situation of every part of the picture is mechanically seen, and easily transferred) may truly be said to be somewhat of the same kind with what has been here proposed, but that one is done upon a flat surface, the other upon a solid; and that the new scheme differs in its application, and may be of a much more useful and extensive nature than the old one.

The well-known method that has been used for many years to more accurately and quickly reduce drawings from large images for engravings, or to enlarge designs for painting ceilings and domes (by drawing perpendicular lines to create an equal number of squares on the paper designated for the copy, which is first made on the original; this allows for a mechanical view of each part of the picture that can be easily transferred) can be considered somewhat similar to the method proposed here. However, one is applied on a flat surface while the other is on a solid surface, and the new method differs in its application and may be significantly more useful and extensive than the old one.

But it is time now to have done with the introduction: and I shall proceed to consider the fundamental principles, which are generally allowed to give[Pg 12] elegance and beauty, when duly blended together, to compositions of all kinds whatever; and point out to my readers, the particular force of each, in those compositions in nature and art, which seem most to please and entertain the eye, and give that grace and beauty, which is the subject of this enquiry. The principles I mean, are fitness, variety, uniformity, simplicity, intricacy and quantity;——all which co-operate in the production of beauty, mutually correcting and restraining each other occasionally.

But it’s time to wrap up the introduction, and I will now discuss the fundamental principles that are generally recognized as contributing[Pg 12] elegance and beauty when properly combined in all kinds of compositions. I will highlight for my readers the specific impact of each principle in those creations in nature and art that seem to please and entertain the eye, providing the grace and beauty that is the focus of this inquiry. The principles I’m referring to are fitness, variety, uniformity, simplicity, intricacy, and amount;——all of which work together to create beauty, occasionally correcting and balancing each other.


CHAPTER I.

Of health and wellness.

Fitness of the parts to the design for which every individual thing is form'd, either by art or nature, is first to be consider'd, as it is of the greatest consequence to the beauty of the whole. This is so evident, that even the sense of seeing, the great inlet of beauty, is itself so strongly bias'd by it, that if the mind, on account of this kind of value in a form, esteem it beautiful, tho' on all other considerations it be not so; the eye grows insensible of its want of beauty, and even begins to be pleas'd, especially after it has been a considerable time acquainted with it.

The suitability of each part to the design for which it was created, either by human skill or nature, should be the first consideration, as it greatly impacts the beauty of the whole. This is so clear that even our sense of sight, the main source of beauty, is heavily influenced by it. If our mind finds a form beautiful because of this kind of value, even if it isn’t beautiful in other ways, our eyes can become blind to its lack of beauty and may even start to appreciate it, especially after we’ve been familiar with it for a while.

It is well known on the other hand, that forms of great elegance often disgust the eye by being improperly applied. Thus, twisted columns are undoubtedly ornamental; but as they convey an idea of weakness, they always displease, when they are improperly made use of as supports to any thing that is bulky, or appears heavy.

It’s well known that highly decorative designs can often be off-putting when used incorrectly. For example, twisted columns are certainly beautiful, but because they give a sense of weakness, they are always unappealing when used to support anything large or heavy.

The bulks and proportions of objects are govern'd by fitness and propriety. It is this that has establish'd the size and proportion of chairs, tables, and all sorts of utensils and furniture. It is this that has fix'd the dimensions of pillars, arches, &c. for the support of great weight, and so regulated all the orders in architecture, as well as the sizes of windows and doors, &c. Thus though a building were ever so large, the steps of the stairs, the seats in the windows must be continued of their usual heights, or they would lose their beauty with their fitness: and in ship-building the dimensions of every part are confin'd and regulated by fitness for sailing. When a vessel sails well, the sailors always call her a beauty; the two ideas have such a connexion!

The size and proportions of objects are determined by suitability and appropriateness. This is what has established the dimensions of chairs, tables, and all kinds of utensils and furniture. This also determines the sizes of pillars, arches, etc., for supporting heavy weights, and regulates all aspects of architecture, including the sizes of windows and doors, etc. So, even if a building is very large, the steps of the stairs and the seats in the windows must maintain their usual heights, or they would lose their beauty along with their suitability. In shipbuilding, the sizes of every part are constrained and regulated by their sailing performance. When a ship sails well, the sailors often refer to her as a beauty; the two concepts are closely linked!

The general dimensions of the parts of the human body are adapted thus to the uses they are design'd for. The trunk is the most capacious on account of the quantity of its contents, and the thigh is larger than the leg, because it has both the leg and foot to move, the leg only the foot, &c.

The general sizes of the parts of the human body are suited to the purposes they are meant for. The torso is the largest due to the volume of its contents, and the thigh is bigger than the leg because it has to move both the leg and the foot, while the leg only moves the foot, etc.

Fitness of parts also constitutes and distinguishes in a great measure the characteristics of objects; as for example, the race-horse differs as much in quality, or character, from the war-horse, as to its figure, as the Hercules from the Mercury.

Fitness of parts also makes up and significantly distinguishes the characteristics of objects; for example, a racehorse differs in quality and character from a warhorse in terms of its form, just like Hercules differs from Mercury.

The race-horse, having all its parts of such dimensions as best fit the purposes of speed, acquires on that account a consistent character of one sort of beauty. To illustrate this, suppose the beautiful head and gracefully-turn'd neck of the war-horse were placed on the shoulders of the race-horse, instead of his own aukward straight one: it would disgust, and deform, instead of adding beauty; because the judgment would condemn it as unfit.

The racehorse, with all its features designed for speed, develops a unique kind of beauty. For example, if the lovely head and elegantly curved neck of a warhorse were put on the racehorse's awkward, straight body, it would look repulsive and distorted rather than beautiful because it would be judged as unsuitable.

3

The Hercules, by Glicon [Fig. 3 p. I], hath all its parts finely fitted for the purposes of the utmost strength, the texture of the human form will bear. The back, breast and shoulders have huge bones, and muscles adequate to the supposed active strength of its upper parts; but as less strength was required for the lower parts, the judicious sculptor, contrary to all modern rule of enlarging every part in proportion, lessen'd the size of the muscles gradually down towards the feet; and for the same reason made the neck larger in circumference than any part of the head [Fig. 4 p. I]; otherwise the figure would have been burden'd with an unnecessary weight, which would have been a draw-back from his strength, and in consequence of that, from its characteristic beauty.

The Hercules, by Glicon [Fig. 3 p. I], has all its parts expertly designed for maximum strength that the human body can accommodate. The back, chest, and shoulders feature large bones and muscles sufficient for the presumed active strength of its upper body; however, since less strength was needed for the lower body, the skilled sculptor, going against the modern trend of proportionately enlarging every part, gradually reduced the size of the muscles down towards the feet. For the same reason, he made the neck thicker than any part of the head [Fig. 4 p. I]; otherwise, the statue would have been weighed down with unnecessary mass, hindering its strength and, consequently, its inherent beauty.

4

These seeming faults, which shew the superior anatomical knowledge as well as judgment of the ancients, are not to be found in the leaden imitations of it near Hyde-park. These saturnine genius's imagin'd they knew how to correct such apparent disproportions.

These apparent flaws, which demonstrate the superior understanding of anatomy and judgment of the ancients, are not present in the metal copies near Hyde Park. These gloomy artists thought they knew how to fix these obvious disproportions.

These few examples may be sufficient to give an idea of what I mean (and would have understood) by the beauty of fitness, or propriety.

These few examples may be enough to give an idea of what I mean (and would have understood) by the beauty of fitness or appropriateness.


CHAPTER II.

Of Diversity.

How great a share variety has in producing beauty may be seen in the ornamental part of nature.

How significant a role variety plays in creating beauty can be observed in the decorative aspects of nature.

The shapes and colours of plants, flowers, leaves, the paintings in butterflies wings, shells, &c. seem of little other intended use, than that of entertaining the eye with the pleasure of variety.

The shapes and colors of plants, flowers, leaves, the designs on butterflies' wings, shells, etc., seem to serve little purpose other than to entertain the eye with the joy of variety.

All the senses delight in it, and equally are averse to sameness. The ear is as much offended with one even continued note, as the eye is with being fix'd to a point, or to the view of a dead wall.

All the senses enjoy it, and are just as turned off by monotony. The ear is just as annoyed by a single, unchanging note as the eye is by staring at the same spot or a blank wall.

Yet when the eye is glutted with a succession of variety, it finds relief in a certain degree of sameness; and even plain space becomes agreeable, and properly introduced, and contrasted with variety, adds to it more variety.

Yet when the eye has had too much variety, it finds comfort in a bit of consistency; even plain space becomes enjoyable, and when it’s properly placed and contrasted with variety, it actually enhances that variety even more.

I mean here, and every where indeed, a composed variety; for variety uncomposed, and without design, is confusion and deformity.

I mean here, and everywhere really, a well-thought-out variety; because random variety, without intention, is chaos and ugliness.

Observe, that a gradual lessening is a kind of varying that gives beauty. The pyramid diminishing from its basis to its point, and the scroll or voluta, gradually lessening to its center, are beautiful forms. So also objects that only seem to do so, though in fact they do not, have equal beauty: thus perspective views, and particularly those of buildings, are always pleasing to the eye.

Notice that a gradual reduction is a type of variation that adds beauty. A pyramid shrinking from its base to its peak, and a scroll or volute, gradually tapering to its center, are beautiful shapes. Similarly, objects that appear to do this, even if they don't actually, have the same level of beauty: for instance, perspective views, especially those of buildings, are always pleasing to the eye.

The little ship, between figure 47 and 88 [p. I], suppos'd moving along the shore even with the eye, might have its top and bottom bounded by two lines at equal distances all the way, as A; but if the ship puts out to sea, these lines at top and bottom would seem to vary and meet each other by degrees, as B, in the point C, which is in the line where the sky and water meets, call'd the horizon. Thus much of the manner of perspectives adding beauty, by seemingly varying otherwise unvaried forms, I thought, might be acceptable to those, who have not learnt perspective.

The small ship, between figure 47 and 88 [p. I], supposed to be moving along the shore just within sight, could have its top and bottom defined by two lines that are evenly spaced all the way, like A; but if the ship sails out to sea, these lines at the top and bottom would appear to change and converge gradually, like B, at point C, where the sky meets the water, known as the horizon. I believed that this explanation of perspective, which adds beauty by seemingly changing otherwise unchanging shapes, might be appreciated by those who haven't studied perspective.

Fig between 47 and 88 pl. I

CHAPTER III.

Of Consistency, Routine, or Balance.

It may be imagined that the greatest part of the effects of beauty results from the symmetry of parts in the object, which is beautiful: but I am very well persuaded, this prevailing notion will soon appear to have little or no foundation.

It might be thought that most of the appeal of beauty comes from the symmetry of its parts in the beautiful object; however, I am convinced that this common belief will soon prove to have little or no basis.

It may indeed have properties of greater consequence, such as propriety, fitness, and use; and yet but little serve the purposes of pleasing the eye, merely on the score of beauty.

It might actually have more important qualities, like appropriateness, suitability, and functionality; but it hardly fulfills the aim of pleasing the eye just based on its beauty.

We have, indeed, in our nature a love of imitation from our infancy, and the eye is often entertained, as well as surprised, with mimicry, and delighted with the exactness of counterparts: but then this always gives way to its superior love of variety, and soon grows tiresom.

We definitely have a tendency to imitate from a young age, and our eyes are often entertained and amazed by mimicry, enjoying how closely things can resemble each other. However, this fascination eventually gives way to our greater love for variety, and we quickly become bored with it.

If the uniformity of figures, parts, or lines were truly the chief cause of beauty, the more exactly uniform their appearances were kept, the more pleasure the eye would receive: but this is so far from being the case, that when the mind has been once satisfied, that the parts answer one another, with so exact an uniformity, as to preserve to the whole the character of fitness to stand, to move, to sink, to swim, to fly, &c. without losing the balance: the eye is rejoiced to see the object[Pg 19] turn'd, and shifted, so as to vary these uniform appearances.

If the uniformity of shapes, parts, or lines were really the main reason for beauty, then the more precisely uniform they appeared, the more pleasure the eye would get. However, that's not the case at all. Once the mind feels satisfied that the parts relate to each other with such perfect uniformity that they keep the whole balanced—able to stand, move, sink, swim, fly, etc.—the eye is actually delighted to see the object[Pg 19] turned and adjusted to create variations in those uniform appearances.

Thus the profile of most objects, as well as faces, are rather more pleasing than their full fronts.

Thus, the outline of most objects, as well as faces, is often more pleasing than their full fronts.

Whence it is clear, the pleasure does not arise from seeing the exact resemblance, which one side bears the other, but from the knowledge that they do so on account of fitness, with design, and for use. For when the head of a fine woman is turn'd a little to one side, which takes off from the exact similarity of the two halves of the face, and somewhat reclining, so varying still more from the straight and parallel lines of a formal front face: it is always look'd upon as most pleasing. This is accordingly said to be a graceful air of the head.

It’s clear that pleasure doesn’t come from seeing an exact likeness between two sides, but from knowing that they resemble each other because they’re designed that way and serve a purpose. When the head of a beautiful woman is slightly turned to one side, which interrupts the exact symmetry of her face and makes it lean a bit, deviating from the straight and parallel lines of a typical frontal view, it’s always seen as very attractive. This is known as a graceful tilt of the head.

It is a constant rule in composition in painting to avoid regularity. When we view a building, or any other object in life, we have it in our power, by shifting the ground, to take that view of it which pleases us best; and in consequence of this, the painter if he is left to his choice, takes it on the angle rather than in front, as most agreeable to the eye; because the regularity of the lines is taken away by their running into perspective, without losing the idea of fitness: and when he is of necessity obliged to give the front of a building, with all its equalities and parallelisms, he generally breaks (as it is term'd) such disagreeable appearances, by throwing a tree before it, or the shadow of an[Pg 20] imaginary cloud, or some other object that may answer the same purpose of adding variety, which is the same with taking away uniformity.

It’s a fundamental rule in art to avoid regularity. When we look at a building or any object in real life, we can change our position to see it in a way that we find most appealing. As a result, if a painter has the option, they tend to depict it from an angle rather than straight on, as it’s more visually pleasing. This approach disrupts the regularity of the lines by drawing them into perspective while still maintaining a sense of balance. When a painter has to show the front of a building, with all its symmetry and parallel lines, they usually break up those unappealing aspects by placing a tree in front of it, or the shadow of a made-up cloud, or any other object that adds variety, which essentially removes uniformity.

If uniform objects were agreeable, why is there such care taken to contrast, and vary all the limbs of a statue?

If uniform objects were appealing, why is so much effort put into contrasting and varying all the parts of a statue?

figs 72 , 7 and 6

The picture of Henry the Eighth [Fig. 72 p. II], would be preferable to the finely contrasted figures of Guido or Correggio; and the Antinous's easy sway [Fig. 6 p. I], must submit to the stiff and straight figure of the dancing-master [Fig. 7 p. I]; and the uniform out-lines of the muscles in the figure [Fig. 55 p. I] taken from Albert Durer's book of proportions, would have more taste in them than those in the famous part of an antique figure [Fig. 54 p. I] from which Michael Angelo acquired so much of his skill in grace.

The image of Henry the Eighth [Fig. 72 p. II] would be more appealing than the finely detailed figures by Guido or Correggio; and Antinous's relaxed pose [Fig. 6 p. I] has to give way to the rigid and upright stance of the dancing master [Fig. 7 p. I]; and the uniform outlines of the muscles in the figure [Fig. 55 p. I] taken from Albert Durer's book of proportions, would show more taste than those in the well-known part of an ancient figure [Fig. 54 p. I] from which Michelangelo learned much of his grace.

figs 55 and 54

In short, whatever appears to be fit, and proper to answer great purposes, ever satisfies the mind, and pleases on that account. Uniformity is of this kind. We find it necessary, in some degree, to give the idea of rest and motion, without the possibility of falling. But when any such purposes can be as well effected by more irregular parts, the eye is always better pleased on the account of variety.

In short, anything that seems suitable and appropriate to achieve significant goals tends to satisfy the mind and brings pleasure for that reason. Uniformity falls into this category. We find it necessary, to some extent, to create a sense of stillness and movement without the risk of tipping over. However, when similar goals can be achieved with more varied components, the eye is generally more satisfied because of that variety.

How pleasingly is the idea of firmness in standing convey'd to the eye by the three elegant claws of a table, the three feet of a tea-lamp, or the celebrated tripod of the ancients?

How pleasantly is the concept of stability shown to the eye by the three elegant claws of a table, the three feet of a tea lamp, or the famous tripod of the ancients?

Thus you see regularity, uniformity, or symmetry, please only as they serve to give the idea of fitness.

Thus you see consistency, uniformity, or symmetry, only as they help convey the idea of suitability.


CHAPTER IV.

Of Simplicity, or Uniqueness.

Simplicity, without variety, is wholly insipid, and at best does only not displease; but when variety is join'd to it, then it pleases, because it enhances the pleasure of variety, by giving the eye the power of enjoying it with ease.

Simplicity, on its own, is completely dull and, at best, only mildly acceptable; but when you add variety to it, it becomes enjoyable, as it boosts the pleasure of variety by allowing the eye to appreciate it effortlessly.

There is no object composed of straight lines, that has so much variety, with so few parts, as the pyramid: and it is its constantly varying from its base gradually upwards in every situation of the eye, (without giving the idea of sameness, as the eye moves round it) that has made it been esteem'd in all ages, in preference to the cone, which in all views appears nearly the same, being varied only by light and shade.

There’s no shape made up of straight lines that has as much variety with so few components as the pyramid. Its continual change from the base up in every angle of vision, without giving the impression of uniformity as the viewer moves around it, has caused it to be valued throughout history over the cone, which looks almost the same from every perspective, with variation only in light and shadow.

Steeples, monuments, and most compositions in painting and sculpture, are kept within the form of the cone or pyramid, as the most eligible boundary on account of their simplicity and variety. For the same reason equestrian statues please more than the single figures.

Steeples, monuments, and most works in painting and sculpture are designed in the shape of a cone or pyramid, as these shapes offer an ideal balance of simplicity and variety. For the same reason, equestrian statues are more appealing than solo figures.

The authors (for there were three concern'd in the work) of as fine a group of figures in sculpture, as ever was made, either by ancients or moderns, (I mean Laocoon and his two sons) chose to be guilty of the absurdity of making the sons of half the father's size, tho'[Pg 22] they have every other mark of being design'd for men, rather than not bring their composition within the boundary of a pyramid [Fig. 9 T p. I]. Thus if a judicious workman were employ'd to make a case of wood, for preserving it from the injuries of the weather, or for the convenience of carriage; he would soon find by his eye, the whole composition would readily fit and be easily pack'd up, in one of a pyramidal form.

The authors (since there were three involved in the work) created a remarkable group of sculptures, perhaps the finest ever made by either ancient or modern artists, featuring Laocoon and his two sons. They made the questionable choice to depict the sons as half the father's size, even though they show every other sign of being designed as men, just to keep their composition within the shape of a pyramid. If a skilled craftsman were tasked with building a wooden case to protect it from the elements or for easier transport, he would quickly see that the entire design would easily fit and be neatly packed in a pyramidal form.

9

Steeples, &c. have generally been varied from the cone, to take off from their too great simplicity, and instead of their circular bases, polygons of different, but even numbers of sides, have been substituted, I suppose for the sake of uniformity. These forms however may be said to have been chosen by the architect, with a view to the cone, as the whole compositions might be bounded by it.

Steeples, etc. have usually been changed from the cone shape to reduce their excessive simplicity, and instead of their circular bases, polygons with different but even numbers of sides have been used, I guess for the sake of consistency. However, these forms can be said to have been selected by the architect with the cone in mind, as the entire compositions could be defined by it.

Yet, in my mind, odd numbers have the advantage over the even ones, as variety is more pleasing than uniformity, where the same end is answer'd by both; as in this case, where both polygons may be circumscrib'd by the same circle, or in other words, both compositions bounded by the same cone.

Yet, in my opinion, odd numbers have the edge over even ones, since variety is more appealing than uniformity, even when both lead to the same outcome; as in this case, where both polygons can be circumscribed by the same circle, or in other words, both shapes are contained within the same cone.

And I can't help observing, that nature in all her works of fancy, if I may be allow'd the expression, where it seems immaterial whether even or odd numbers of divisions were prefer'd, most frequently employs the odd; as for example, in the indenting of leaves, flowers, blossoms, &c.

And I can't help noticing that nature, in all her creative works, if I may use that term, often uses odd numbers rather than even ones, even when it doesn't really matter. For instance, look at the way leaves, flowers, blossoms, etc., are arranged.

The oval also, on account of its variety with simplicity, is as much to be prefer'd to the circle, as the triangle to the square, or the pyramid to the cube; and this figure lessen'd at one end, like the egg, thereby being more varied, is singled out by the author of all variety, to bound the features of a beautiful face.

The oval, due to its mix of variety and simplicity, is just as preferable to the circle as the triangle is to the square, or the pyramid is to the cube; and this shape, tapered at one end like an egg, is more varied and is chosen by the creator of all variety to define the features of a beautiful face.

10
10

When the oval has a little more of the cone added to it than the egg has, it becomes more distinctly a compound of those two most simple varied figures. This is the shape of the pine-apple [Fig. 10 T p. I], which nature has particularly distinguish'd by bestowing ornaments of rich mosaic upon it, composed of contrasted serpentine lines, and the pips [Fig. 11 T p. I], as the gardiners call them, are still varied by two cavities and one round eminence in each.

When the oval has a bit more of the cone added to it than the egg does, it becomes more clearly a blend of those two simple shapes. This is the shape of the pineapple [Fig. 10 T p. I], which nature has specifically highlighted by adorning it with rich mosaic patterns made up of contrasting wave-like lines, and the bumps [Fig. 11 T p. I], as the gardeners call them, are still varied by two indentations and one round bump on each.

11
11

Could a more elegant simple form than this have been found; it is probable that judicious architect, Sir Christopher Wren, would not have chosen the pine-apples for the two terminations of the sides of the front of St. Paul's: and perhaps the globe and cross, tho' a finely varied figure, which terminates the dome, would not have had the preference of situation, if a religious motive had not been the occasion.

Could a simpler, more elegant form than this have been found? It's likely that the clever architect, Sir Christopher Wren, would not have picked the pineapples for the two ends of the front of St. Paul's. And maybe the globe and cross, though a beautifully varied figure that sits atop the dome, wouldn't have been chosen for that spot if it weren't for a religious reason.

Thus we see simplicity gives beauty even to variety, as it makes it more easily understood, and should be ever studied in the works of art, as it serves to prevent perplexity in forms of elegance; as will be shewn in the next chapter.

Thus we see that simplicity brings beauty to even diverse elements, making them easier to understand. It should always be a focus in artistic works, as it helps avoid confusion in elegant forms, as will be shown in the next chapter.


CHAPTER V.

Of Complexity.

The active mind is ever bent to be employ'd. Pursuing is the business of our lives; and even abstracted from any other view, gives pleasure. Every arising difficulty, that for a while attends and interrupts the pursuit, gives a sort of spring to the mind, enhances the pleasure, and makes what would else be toil and labour, become sport and recreation.

The active mind is always eager to be engaged. Pursuing goals is what our lives are all about, and even when removed from any other perspective, it brings joy. Every challenge that briefly interrupts our pursuit gives a boost to the mind, increases pleasure, and transforms what would otherwise be hard work into fun and relaxation.

Wherein would consist the joys of hunting, shooting, fishing, and many other favourite diversions, without the frequent turns and difficulties, and disappointments, that are daily met with in the pursuit?—how joyless does the sportsman return when the hare has not had fair play? how lively, and in spirits, even when an old cunning one has baffled, and out-run the dogs!

Where would the joys of hunting, shooting, fishing, and many other favorite pastimes be without the constant challenges, setbacks, and disappointments faced every day in the pursuit?—how gloomy does the hunter feel when the hare hasn't had a fair chance? How lively and upbeat they are, even when an old, clever one has outsmarted and outrun the dogs!

This love of pursuit, merely as pursuit, is implanted in our natures, and design'd, no doubt, for necessary, and useful purposes. Animals have it evidently by instinct. The hound dislikes the game he so eagerly pursues; and even cats will risk the losing of their prey to chase it over again. It is a pleasing labour of the mind to solve the most difficult problems; allegories and riddles, trifling as they are, afford the mind amusement: and with what delight does it follow the well-connected thread of a play, or novel, which ever increases[Pg 25] as the plot thickens, and ends most pleas'd, when that is most distinctly unravell'd?

This love of the chase, just for the sake of chasing, is built into our nature and is clearly meant for important and practical reasons. Animals show it clearly through instinct. The dog doesn’t actually enjoy the game it chases so eagerly, and even cats will risk losing their catch just to chase it again. It’s satisfying to the mind to tackle the toughest problems; even puzzles and riddles, silly as they may seem, entertain us. And how pleasurable it is to follow the well-woven story of a play or novel, which only gets more engaging as the plot develops, leaving us most satisfied when everything is clearly resolved.

The eye hath this sort of enjoyment in winding walks, and serpentine rivers, and all sorts of objects, whose forms, as we shall see hereafter, are composed principally of what, I call, the waving and serpentine lines.

The eye gets pleasure from winding paths, curvy rivers, and all kinds of objects, whose shapes, as we will discuss later, are mainly made up of what I call the waving and serpentine lines.

Intricacy in form, therefore, I shall define to be that peculiarity in the lines, which compose it, that leads the eye a wanton kind of chace, and from the pleasure that gives the mind, intitles it to the name of beautiful: and it may be justly said, that the cause of the idea of grace more immediately resides in this principle, than in the other five, except variety; which indeed includes this, and all the others.

Intricacy in form, then, I will define as the uniqueness in the lines that make it up, which draws the eye on a playful chase, and from the pleasure it brings the mind, deserves the title of beautiful: it can rightly be said that the idea of grace is more closely tied to this principle than to the other five, except for variety; which indeed encompasses this one and all the others.

That this observation may appear to have a real foundation in nature, every help will be requir'd, which the reader himself can call to his assistance, as well as what will here be suggested to him.

That this observation might seem to have a solid basis in nature, every bit of help will be needed, both from what the reader can draw on themselves and what will be suggested here.

To set this matter in somewhat a clearer light, the familiar instance of a common jack, with a circular fly, may serve our purpose better than a more elegant form: preparatory to which, let the figure [Fig. 14 T p. I] be consider'd, which represents the eye, at a common reading distance viewing a row of letters, but fix'd with most attention to the middle letter A.

To clarify this matter a bit more, the well-known example of a common jack with a circular fly might work better for us than a fancier version: to start, let's consider the figure [Fig. 14 T p. I], which shows the eye, at a typical reading distance, looking at a row of letters but focused most intently on the middle letter A.

14

Now as we read, a ray may be supposed to be drawn from the center of the eye to that letter it looks at first,[Pg 26] and to move successively with it from letter to letter, the whole length of the line: but if the eye stops at any particular letter, A, to observe it more than the rest, these other letters will grow more and more imperfect to the sight, the farther they are situated on either side of A, as is express'd in the figure: and when we endeavour to see all the letters in a line equally perfect at one view, as it were, this imaginary ray must course it to and fro with great celerity. Thus though the eye, strictly speaking, can only pay due attention to these letters in succession, yet the amazing ease and swiftness, with which it performs this task, enables us to see considerable spaces with sufficient satisfaction at one sudden view.

As we read, imagine a line connecting the center of the eye to the first letter we look at,[Pg 26] and that it moves quickly from letter to letter across the line. However, if the eye pauses on a specific letter, A, to focus on it more than the others, the letters on either side of A will appear less clear the further they are from it, as shown in the figure. When we try to see all the letters in a line clearly at once, this imaginary line must move back and forth quickly. So, even though the eye can really only focus on these letters one at a time, its incredible speed and ease in doing so allow us to perceive significant areas of text with enough clarity at a glance.

Hence, we shall always suppose some such principal ray moving along with the eye, and tracing out the parts of every form, we mean to examine in the most perfect manner: and when we would follow with exactness the course any body takes, that is in motion, this ray is always to be supposed to move with the body.

Hence, we will always assume that a main ray travels along with the eye, outlining the parts of every shape we plan to examine in the most accurate way possible. And when we want to closely follow the path of an object in motion, this ray is always imagined to move with the object.

In this manner of attending to forms, they will be found, whether at rest, or in motion, to give movement to this imaginary ray; or, more properly speaking, to the eye itself, affecting it thereby more or less pleasingly, according to their different shapes and motions. Thus, for example, in the instance of the jack, whether the eye (with this imaginary ray) moves slowly down the[Pg 27] line, to which the weight is fix'd, or attends to the slow motion of the weight itself, the mind is equally fatigu'd: and whether it swiftly courses round the circular rim of the flyer, when the jack stands; or nimbly follows one point in its circularity whilst it is whirling about, we are almost equally made giddy by it. But our sensation differs much from either of these unpleasant ones, when we observe the curling worm, into which the worm-wheel is fixt [Fig. 15 L p. I]: for this is always pleasing, either at rest or in motion, and whether that motion is slow or quick.

In this way of paying attention to shapes, they will be found, whether at rest or in motion, to give movement to this imaginary ray; or, more accurately, to the eye itself, making it thereby more or less pleasing, depending on their different shapes and motions. For example, when it comes to the jack, whether the eye (with this imaginary ray) moves slowly down the[Pg 27] line where the weight is fixed, or focuses on the slow motion of the weight itself, the mind gets equally tired. And whether it quickly traces around the circular edge of the flyer while the jack is standing still, or swiftly follows one point as it spins around, we almost feel equally dizzy from it. However, our sensation is very different from these unpleasant experiences when we watch the curling worm, into which the worm-wheel is fixed [Fig. 15 L p. I]: because this is always enjoyable, whether it is still or moving, and regardless of whether that motion is slow or fast.

That it is accounted so, when it is at rest, appears by the ribbon, twisted round a stick (represented on one side of this figure) which has been a long-establish'd ornament in the carvings of frames, chimney-pieces, and door-cases; and call'd by the carvers, the stick and ribbon ornament: and when the stick, through the middle is omitted, it is call'd the ribbon edge; both to be seen in almost every house of fashion.

That it's considered this way when it's at rest is shown by the ribbon twisted around a stick (depicted on one side of this figure), which has long been a common decoration in the carvings of frames, mantelpieces, and doorways. Carvers refer to it as the stick and ribbon ornament; if the stick in the middle is left out, it's called the ribbon edge; both can be found in nearly every stylish home.

But the pleasure it gives the eye is still more lively when in motion. I never can forget my frequent strong attention to it, when I was very young, and that its beguiling movement gave me the same kind of sensation then, which I since have felt at seeing a country-dance; tho' perhaps the latter might be somewhat more engaging; particularly when my eye eagerly pursued a favourite dancer, through all the windings of the figure, who then was bewitching to the sight, as the imaginary[Pg 28] ray, we were speaking of, was dancing with her all the time.

But the pleasure it brings to the eye is even more vibrant when in motion. I can never forget how often I was captivated by it when I was very young, and its enchanting movement gave me a similar feeling to what I later experienced watching a country dance; although the latter might have been a bit more appealing, especially when my eyes eagerly followed a favorite dancer through all the twists and turns of the dance, who was as mesmerizing to watch as the imaginary[Pg 28] ray we were talking about, dancing with her the whole time.

This single example might be sufficient to explain what I mean by the beauty of a composed intricacy of form; and how it may be said, with propriety, to lead the eye a kind of chace.

This single example might be enough to explain what I mean by the beauty of a composed intricacy of form; and how it can be appropriately said to lead the eye on a kind of chase.

But the hair of the head is another very obvious instance, which, being design'd chiefly as an ornament, proves more or less so, according to the form it naturally takes, or is put into by art. The most amiable in itself is the flowing curl; and the many waving and contrasted turns of naturally intermingling locks ravish the eye with the pleasure of the pursuit, especially when they are put in motion by a gentle breeze. The poet knows it, as well as the painter, and has described the wanton ringlets waving in the wind.

But hair is another very clear example, which, being primarily meant as decoration, shows its beauty depending on its natural shape or how it's styled. The most appealing style is the loose curl, and the many waves and contrasting twists of naturally blended hair captivate the eye with the joy of the chase, especially when a gentle breeze sets them in motion. Both poets and painters understand this and have depicted the playful ringlets dancing in the wind.

And yet to shew how excess ought to be avoided in intricacy, as well as in every other principle, the very same head of hair, wisp'd, and matted together, would make the most disagreeable figure; because the eye would be perplex'd, and at a fault, and unable to trace such a confused number of uncomposed and entangled lines; and yet notwithstanding this, the present fashion the ladies have gone into, of wearing a part of the hair of their heads braided together from behind, like intertwisted serpents, arising thickest from the bottom, lessening as it is brought forward, and naturally conforming[Pg 29] to the shape of the rest of the hair it is pin'd over, is extremely picturesque. Their thus interlacing the hair in distinct varied quantities is an artful way of preserving as much of intricacy, as is beautiful.

And yet, to show how we should avoid excess in complexity, just like in any other principle, the same head of hair that’s all tangled and matted together would look really unappealing; because the eye would get confused, struggle to make sense of all those chaotic and tangled lines. Still, despite this, the current trend where ladies are styling a portion of their hair braided from the back, resembling intertwined snakes, thickest at the bottom and gradually getting thinner as it comes to the front, naturally fitting the shape of the rest of the hair it’s pinned over, is actually quite beautiful. Their way of interlacing the hair in distinct and varied amounts is a clever method of maintaining as much complexity as is aesthetically pleasing.


CHAPTER VI.

Of Amount.

Forms of magnitude, although ill-shaped, will however, on account of their vastness, draw our attention and raise our admiration.

Forms of size, even if not well-designed, will still grab our attention and inspire our admiration due to their enormity.

Huge shapeless rocks have a pleasing kind of horror in them, and the wide ocean awes us with its vast contents; but when forms of beauty are presented to the eye in large quantities, the pleasure increases on the mind, and horror is soften'd into reverence.

Huge, formless rocks have a strangely attractive kind of terror in them, and the wide ocean amazes us with its immense expanse; but when we see beautiful shapes in large numbers, our enjoyment grows, and fear transforms into respect.

How solemn and pleasing are groves of high grown trees, great churches, and palaces? has not even a single spreading oak, grown to maturity, acquir'd the character of the venerable oak?

How serious and enjoyable are groves of tall trees, grand churches, and palaces? Hasn't even a single mature oak tree earned the status of a majestic oak?

Windsor castle is a noble instance of the effect of quantity. The hugeness of its few distinct parts strikes the eye with uncommon grandeur at a distance, as well as nigh. It is quantity, with simplicity, which makes it one of the finest objects in the kingdom, tho' void of any regular order of architecture.

Windsor Castle is a prime example of the impact of size. The enormity of its few distinct features impresses the viewer with remarkable grandeur, both from afar and up close. It is the combination of size and simplicity that makes it one of the most beautiful sights in the kingdom, even though it lacks any formal architectural order.

The Façade of the old Louvre at Paris is also remarkable for its quantity. This fragment is allow'd to be the finest piece of building in France, tho' there are many equal, if not superior, to it in all other respects, except that of quantity.

The façade of the old Louvre in Paris is also impressive because of its size. This section is regarded as the finest piece of architecture in France, although there are many that are equal to, if not better than, it in every other aspect, except for size.

Who does not feel a pleasure when he pictures in his mind the immense buildings which once adorn'd the lower Egypt, by imagining the whole complete, and ornamented with colossal statues?

Who doesn't feel joy when imagining the massive buildings that once decorated Lower Egypt, envisioning the entire scene complete and adorned with gigantic statues?

Elephants and whales please us with their unwieldy greatness. Even large personages, merely for being so, command respect: nay, quantity is an addition to the person which often supplies a deficiency in his figure.

Elephants and whales impress us with their massive size. Even large individuals, just because they are big, earn respect; indeed, being large can enhance a person's presence, often making up for shortcomings in their appearance.

The robes of state are always made large and full, because they give a grandeur of appearance, suitable to the offices of the greatest distinction. The judge's robes have an awful dignity given them by the quantity of their contents, and when the train is held up, there is a noble waving line descending from the shoulders of the judge to the hand of his train-bearer. So when the train is gently thrown aside, it generally falls into a great variety of folds, which again employ the eye, and fix its attention.

The ceremonial robes are always designed to be large and flowing, as they create a grand appearance fitting for the highest offices. The judge's robes have an impressive dignity due to their fullness, and when the train is lifted, it forms a beautiful curve that drapes from the judge's shoulders to the hand of the person carrying it. When the train is casually set aside, it typically falls into a rich array of folds that capture the eye and hold its attention.

The grandeur of the Eastern dress, which so far surpasses the European, depends as much on quantity as on costliness.

The magnificence of Eastern clothing, which far exceeds that of European styles, relies on both the amount and the expense involved.

In a word, it is quantity which adds greatness to grace. But then excess is to be avoided, or quantity will become clumsy, heavy, or ridiculous.

In short, it's the amount that adds greatness to elegance. But we need to avoid going overboard, or that amount will turn awkward, heavy, or silly.

The full-bottom wig, like the lion's mane, hath something noble in it, and adds not only dignity, but sagacity to the countenance [fig. 16 p. I]: but were it to be worn as large again, it would become a burlesque; or were an improper person to put it on, it would then too be ridiculous.

The full-bottom wig, similar to a lion's mane, has a noble quality and adds not only dignity but also wisdom to the face [fig. 16 p. I]; however, if it were worn any larger, it would turn into a joke, or if the wrong person wore it, it would look silly.

When improper, or incompatible excesses meet, they always excite laughter; more especially when the forms of those excesses are inelegant, that is, when they are composed of unvaried lines.

When inappropriate or incompatible excesses come together, they always provoke laughter; especially when the forms of those excesses are clumsy, meaning they consist of unchanging lines.

17 and 18

For example, the figure refer'd to in the margin [Fig. 17 p. I], represents a fat grown face of a man, with an infant's cap on, and the rest of the child's dress stuff'd, and so well placed under his chin, as to seem to belong to that face. This is a contrivance I have seen at Bartholomew-fair, and always occasion'd a roar of laughter. The next [Fig. 18 p. I] is of the same kind, a child with a man's wig and cap on. In these you see the ideas of youth and age jumbled together, in forms without beauty.

For example, the figure referred to in the margin [Fig. 17 p. I] shows a chubby adult man's face wearing a baby’s cap, with the rest of the child's outfit stuffed and positioned under his chin to make it look like it belongs to that face. I’ve seen this trick at Bartholomew Fair, and it always got a big laugh. The next one [Fig. 18 p. I] is similar, featuring a child wearing a man’s wig and cap. In these, you can see the concepts of youth and age mixed together in unattractive forms.

19

So a Roman general [Fig. 19 p. I], dress'd by a modern tailor and peruke-maker, for tragedy, is a comic figure.——The dresses of the times are mix'd, and the lines which compose them are straight or only round.

So a Roman general [Fig. 19 p. I], dressed by a modern tailor and wig maker, for a tragedy, is a comical figure. The outfits of the era are a mix, and the lines that make them up are straight or only slightly curved.

Dancing-masters, representing deities, in their grand ballets on the stage, are no less ridiculous. See the Jupiter [Fig. 20 p. I].

Dancing masters, portraying gods, in their grand ballets on stage, are just as absurd. Check out the Jupiter [Fig. 20 p. I].

20

Nevertheless custom and fashion will, in length of time, reconcile almost every absurdity whatever, to the eye, or make it over-look'd.

Nevertheless, over time, customs and trends will adapt to almost any absurdity, making it acceptable to the eye or causing it to be overlooked.

It is from the same joining of opposite ideas that makes us laugh at the owl and the ass, for under their aukward forms, they seem to be gravely musing and meditating, as if they had the sense of human beings.

It’s from the same clash of opposing ideas that makes us laugh at the owl and the donkey, because beneath their clumsy appearances, they seem to be thoughtfully pondering, as if they had the intellect of humans.

A monkey too whose figure, as well as most of his actions, so odly resembles the human, is also very comical; and he becomes more so when a coat is put on him, as he then becomes a greater burlesque on the man.

A monkey whose shape and many of his actions oddly resemble those of humans is also very funny; he becomes even funnier when he’s dressed in a coat, as he then becomes an even bigger parody of a man.

There is something extremely odd and comical in the rough shock dog. The ideas here connected are the inelegant and inanimate figure of a thrum mop, or muff, and that of a sensible, friendly animal; which is as much a burlesque of the dog, as the monkey when his coat is on, is of the man.

There’s something really weird and funny about the rough shock dog. The ideas linked here are the clumsy and lifeless figure of a thrum mop, or muff, and that of a sensible, friendly animal; which is as much a parody of the dog, as the monkey in his coat is of a man.

What can it be but this inelegance of the figure, join'd with impropriety, that makes a whole audience burst into laughter, when they see the miller's sack, in Dr. Faustus, jumping across the stage? was a well-shap'd vase to do the same, it would equally surprise, but not make every body laugh, because the elegance of the form would prevent it.

What else could it be but the awkwardness of the figure, combined with the inappropriate timing, that causes the entire audience to burst into laughter when they see the miller's sack in Dr. Faustus jumping across the stage? If a well-shaped vase were to do the same, it would equally surprise everyone, but it wouldn't make everyone laugh, because the elegance of its form would hold that back.

For when the forms, thus join'd together, are each of them elegant, and composed of agreeable lines, they will be so far from making us laugh, that they will become entertaining to the imagination, as well as pleasing to the eye. The sphinx and siren have been admired and accounted ornamental in all ages. The[Pg 33] former represents strength and beauty join'd; the latter, beauty and swiftness, in pleasing and graceful forms.

For when the combined forms are both elegant and made up of pleasing lines, they won’t just make us laugh; instead, they will captivate our imagination and be pleasing to look at. The sphinx and siren have been admired and considered beautiful throughout history. The[Pg 33] former symbolizes strength and beauty together; the latter symbolizes beauty and speed in charming and graceful shapes.

The griffin, a modern hieroglyphic, signifying strength and swiftness, united in the two noble forms of the lion and eagle, is a grand object. So the antique centaur hath a savage greatness as well as beauty.

The griffin, a modern symbol representing strength and speed, combines the noble forms of the lion and eagle, creating a magnificent figure. Similarly, the ancient centaur embodies both wild grandeur and beauty.

These may be said to be monsters, it's true, but then they convey such noble ideas, and have such elegance in their forms as greatly compensates for their being unnaturally join'd together.

These might be called monsters, that's true, but they express such noble ideas and have such elegance in their shapes that it more than makes up for their unnatural compositions.

I shall mention but one more instance of this sort, and that the most extraordinary of all, which is an infant's head of about two years old, with a pair of duck's-wings placed under its chin, supposed always to be flying about, and singing psalms [Fig. 22 R p. I].

I will mention just one more example of this kind, and it is the most extraordinary of all: a two-year-old baby's head with a pair of duck wings positioned under its chin, believed to always be flying around and singing psalms [Fig. 22 R p. I].

22

A painter's representation of heaven would be nothing without swarms of these little inconsistent objects, flying about, or perching on the clouds; and yet there is something so agreeable in their form, that the eye is reconciled and overlooks the absurdity, and we find them in the carving and painting of almost every church. St. Paul's is full of them.

A painter's depiction of heaven would be incomplete without swarms of these little random objects, flitting around or sitting on the clouds; yet there’s something so pleasing about their shape that our eyes accept it and ignore the absurdity, and we see them in the sculpture and painting of almost every church. St. Paul’s is filled with them.


As the foregoing principles are the very ground work of what is to follow; we will, in order to make them the more familiar to us, just speak of them in the way they are daily put in practice, and may be seen, in every[Pg 34] dress that is worn; and we shall find not only that ladies of fashion, but that women of every rank, who are said to dress prettily, have known their force, without considering them as principles.

As the principles mentioned earlier are the foundation for what's to come, we'll discuss them in the way they are commonly practiced and can be observed in every[Pg 34] outfit worn. We'll see that not only fashionable women but also women of all backgrounds who are considered to dress nicely have understood their importance, even if they haven't thought of them as fundamental principles.


I. Fitness is first considered by them, as knowing that their dresses should be useful, commodious, and fitted to their different ages; or rich, airy, and loose, agreeable to the character they would give out to the public by their dress.

I. They prioritize fitness, understanding that their clothing should be practical, comfortable, and suitable for their different ages; or luxurious, lightweight, and relaxed, reflecting the image they want to present to the public through their attire.


II. Uniformity is chiefly complied with in dress on account of fitness, and seems to be extended not much farther than dressing both arms alike, and having the shoes of the same colour. For when any part of dress has not the excuse of fitness or propriety for its uniformity of parts, the ladies always call it formal.

II. Uniformity in clothing is mainly followed because it fits well and doesn't usually go beyond matching both arms and wearing shoes of the same color. When any part of an outfit lacks the reason of being suitable or appropriate for its consistency, women often label it as formal.

For which reason, when they are at liberty to make what shapes they please in ornamenting their persons, those of the best taste choose the irregular as the more engaging: for example, no two patches are ever chosen of the same size, or placed at the same height; nor a single one in the middle of a feature, unless it be to hide a blemish. So a single feather, flower, or jewel is generally placed on one side of the head; or if ever put in front, it is turn'd awry to avoid formality.

For this reason, when people have the freedom to choose how to decorate themselves, those with the best taste prefer the irregular, as it looks more interesting. For example, no two patches are ever selected to be the same size or at the same height, and no patch is placed directly in the center of a feature unless it's to cover a flaw. Similarly, a single feather, flower, or jewel is usually placed on one side of the head, or if it’s ever positioned at the front, it’s done at an angle to avoid looking too formal.

It was once the fashion to have two curls of equal size, stuck at the same height close upon the forehead, which[Pg 35] probably took its rise from seeing the pretty effect of curls falling loosely over the face.

It used to be trendy to have two evenly sized curls positioned at the same height right on the forehead, which[Pg 35] likely came from the appealing look of curls hanging loosely around the face.

A lock of hair falling thus cross the temples, and by that means breaking the regularity of the oval, has an effect too alluring to be strictly decent, as is very well known to the loose and lowest class of women: but being pair'd in so stiff a manner, as they formerly were, they lost the desired effect, and ill deserv'd the name of favourites.

A lock of hair falling across the temples, breaking the smooth line of the oval face, has an effect that's too tempting to be entirely proper, as is well known among the more promiscuous women. But when styled so rigidly, as they used to be, they lost that desired allure and didn't deserve to be called favorites.


III. Variety in dress, both as to colour and form, is the constant study of the young and gay——But then,

III. The young and lively are always focused on variety in clothing, both in color and style——But then,


IV. That taudriness may not destroy the proper effect of variety, simplicity is call'd in to restrain its superfluities, and is often very artfully made use of to set native beauty off to more advantage. I have not known any set of people, that have more excell'd in this principle of simplicity, or plainness, than the Quakers.

IV. To prevent tackiness from ruining the intended impact of variety, simplicity is used to limit its excesses and is often cleverly employed to enhance natural beauty. I haven't encountered any group of people who have excelled more in this principle of simplicity or plainness than the Quakers.


V. Quantity, or fulness in dress has ever been a darling principle; so that sometimes those parts of dress, which would properly admit of being extended to a great degree, have been carried into such strange excesses, that in the reign of Queen Elizabeth a law was made to put a stop to the growth of ruffs: nor is the enormous size of the hoops at present, a less sufficient proof of the extraordinary[Pg 36] love of quantity in dress, beyond that of convenience or elegance.

V. The amount, or fullness, in clothing has always been a favorite principle; sometimes, the features of clothing that could easily be exaggerated have been taken to such bizarre extremes that during Queen Elizabeth's reign, a law was enacted to curb the growth of ruffs. The oversized hoops we see today are just as clear evidence of this unusual obsession with quantity in clothing, exceeding even considerations of comfort or style.[Pg 36]


VI. The beauty of intricacy lies in contriving winding shapes, such as the antique lappets belonging to the head of the sphinx [Fig. 21 p. I], or as the modern lappet when it is brought before. Every part of dress, that will admit of the application of this principle, has an air (as it is term'd) given to it thereby; and altho' it requires dexterity and a taste to execute these windings well, we find them daily practised with success.

VI. The beauty of complexity comes from creating twisting shapes, like the traditional lappets seen on the head of the sphinx [Fig. 21 p. I], or the modern lappet when it's showcased. Every piece of clothing that can incorporate this principle has a unique flair (as it's called) as a result; and although it takes skill and taste to execute these twists effectively, we see them being successfully used every day.

21

This principle also recommends modesty in dress, to keep up our expectations, and not suffer them to be too soon gratified. Therefore the body and limbs should all be cover'd, and little more than certain hints be given of them thro' the cloathing.

This principle also suggests modesty in clothing to maintain our expectations and not let them be fulfilled too quickly. Therefore, the body and limbs should be covered, revealing only subtle hints of them through the clothing.

The face indeed will bear a constant view, yet always entertain and keep our curiosity awake, without the assistance either of a mask, or veil; because vast variety of changing circumstances keeps the eye and the mind in constant play, in following the numberless turns of expression it is capable of. How soon does a face that wants expression grow insipid, tho' it be ever so pretty?—The rest of the body, not having these advantages in common with the face, would soon satiate the eye, were it to be as constantly exposed, nor would it have more effect than a marble statue. But when it is artfully cloath'd and decorated, the mind at every turn resumes[Pg 37] its imaginary pursuits concerning it. Thus, if I may be allow'd a simile, the angler chooses not to see the fish he angles for, until it is fairly caught.

The face definitely has a constant look, but it always keeps our curiosity engaged, without needing a mask or veil. This is because the wide variety of changing circumstances constantly stimulates our eyes and minds as we follow the countless expressions it can have. How quickly does a face that lacks expression become bland, even if it’s very pretty? The rest of the body, not having these same advantages as the face, would quickly tire the eye if it were constantly on display, and it would have no more impact than a marble statue. However, when the body is skillfully dressed and adorned, the mind continually rekindles its imaginative thoughts about it at every turn. So, if I may use a metaphor, an angler chooses not to see the fish he’s trying to catch until it’s successfully hooked.


CHAPTER VII.

Of Lines.

It may be remember'd that in the introduction, the reader is desired to consider the surfaces of objects as so many shells of lines, closely connected together, which idea of them it will now be proper to call to mind, for the better comprehending not only this, but all the following chapters on composition.

It should be remembered that in the introduction, the reader is asked to think of the surfaces of objects as layers of lines that are tightly connected. This idea will be useful to keep in mind to better understand not just this chapter, but all the upcoming chapters on composition.

The constant use made of lines by mathematicians, as well as painters, in describing things upon paper, hath establish'd a conception of them, as if actually existing on the real forms themselves. This likewise we suppose, and shall set out with saying in general—That the straight line, and the circular line, together with their different combinations, and variations, &c. bound, and circumscribe all visible objects whatsoever, thereby producing such endless variety of forms, as lays us under the necessity of dividing, and distinguishing them into general classes; leaving the intervening mixtures of appearances to the reader's own farther observation.

The constant use of lines by mathematicians and artists to describe things on paper has created an idea that these lines actually represent the real forms themselves. We also believe, and will start by saying in general—that the straight line and the circular line, along with their various combinations and variations, define and outline all visible objects. This results in an endless variety of forms, which forces us to categorize and distinguish them into general classes, leaving the mixed appearances for the reader to observe further.

First, [Fig. 23 T p. I] objects composed of straight lines only, as the cube, or of circular lines, as the sphere, or of both together, as cylinders and cones, &c.

First, [Fig. 23 T p. I] objects made up of only straight lines, like the cube, or of circular lines, like the sphere, or a combination of both, like cylinders and cones, etc.

23

Secondly, [Fig. 24 T p. I] those composed of straight lines, circular lines, and of lines partly straight, and partly circular, as the capitals of columns, and vases, &c.

Secondly, [Fig. 24 T p. I] those made up of straight lines, curved lines, and lines that are both straight and curved, like the tops of columns, vases, etc.

24

Thirdly, [Fig. 25 T p. I] those composed of all the former together with an addition of the waving line, which is a line more productive of beauty than any of the former, as in flowers, and other forms of the ornamental kind: for which reason we shall call it the line of beauty.

Thirdly, [Fig. 25 T p. I] those made up of all the previous elements along with the addition of the wavy line, which is more beautiful than any of the earlier ones, like in flowers and other decorative shapes: for this reason, we will call it the line of beauty.

25

Fourthly, [Fig. 26 T p. I] those composed of all the former together with the serpentine line, as the human form, which line hath the power of super-adding grace to beauty. Note, forms of most grace have least of the straight line in them.

Fourthly, [Fig. 26 T p. I] those made up of all the previous ones along with the curved line, like the human body, which adds elegance to beauty. Keep in mind that the most graceful shapes have the least amount of straight lines in them.

26

It is to be observed, that straight lines vary only in length, and therefore are least ornamental.

It should be noted that straight lines differ only in length, which is why they are the least decorative.

That curved lines as they can be varied in their degrees of curvature as well as in their lengths, begin on that account to be ornamental.

That curved lines can vary in their degrees of curvature and lengths, which makes them decorative.

That straight and curv'd lines join'd, being a compound line, vary more than curves alone, and so become somewhat more ornamental.

That straight and curved lines combined create a complex line that varies more than curves alone, making it somewhat more decorative.

That the waving line, or line of beauty, varying still more, being composed of two curves contrasted, becomes still more ornamental and pleasing, insomuch that the hand takes a lively movement in making it with pen or pencil.

That the waving line, or line of beauty, continues to vary, made up of two contrasting curves, becomes even more decorative and enjoyable, so much so that your hand moves with energy when creating it with a pen or pencil.

And that the serpentine line, by its waving and winding at the same time different ways, leads the eye in a[Pg 39] pleasing manner along the continuity of its variety, if I may be allowed the expression; and which by its twisting so many different ways, may be said to inclose (tho' but a single line) varied contents; and therefore all its variety cannot be express'd on paper by one continued line, without the assistance of the imagination, or the help of a figure; see [Fig. 26 T p. I] where that sort of proportion'd, winding line, which will hereafter be call'd the precise serpentine line, or line of grace, is represented by a fine wire, properly twisted round the elegant and varied figure of a cone.

And that the winding line, with its curves and twists in different directions, guides the eye in a[Pg 39] pleasing way along the continuity of its variety, if I may say so; and by twisting in so many different directions, it can be said to contain (even though it’s just a single line) diverse elements; thus, all its variety can't be fully expressed on paper with one continuous line, without relying on imagination or the aid of a figure; see [Fig. 26 T p. I] where that type of proportioned, winding line, which will be referred to later as the precise serpentine line, or line of grace, is illustrated by a fine wire, neatly twisted around the elegant and varied shape of a cone.


CHAPTER VIII.

Of what sort of Components, and how pleasing layouts are composed.

Thus far having endeavoured to open as large an idea as possible of the power of variety, by having partly shewn that those lines which have most variety in themselves, contribute most towards the production of beauty; we will next shew how lines may be put together, so as to make pleasing figures or compositions.

Thus far, we have tried to present a broad understanding of the power of variety, having shown that lines with the most variety contribute significantly to beauty. Next, we will demonstrate how lines can be arranged to create appealing shapes or compositions.

In order to be as clear as possible, we will give a few examples of the most familiar and easy sort, and let them serve as a clue to be pursued in the imagination: I say in the imagination chiefly, for the following method is not meant always to be put in practice, or follow'd in every case, for indeed that could hardly be,[Pg 40] and in some it would be ridiculously losing time if it could——Yet there may be cases where it may be necessary to follow this method minutely; as for example, in architecture.

To be as clear as possible, we'll provide a few examples of the most familiar and straightforward types, and let them serve as a guide for your imagination. I'm saying "imagination" specifically because this method isn’t meant to be applied in every situation, as that would be impractical,[Pg 40] and in some cases, it would be completely wasting time if it were possible. Still, there may be situations where it’s necessary to follow this method closely, like in architecture.

I am thoroughly convinc'd in myself, however it may startle some, that a completely new and harmonious order of architecture in all its parts, might be produced by the following method of composing, but hardly with certainty without it; and this I am the more apt to believe, as upon the strictest examination, those four orders of the ancients, which are so well established for beauty and true proportion, perfectly agree with the scheme we shall now lay down.

I am completely convinced, even if it surprises some, that we could create a totally new and harmonious style of architecture in all its aspects using the following method of composition, but it’s unlikely we could do so successfully without it. I'm even more inclined to believe this because, upon close examination, the four classical orders that are well recognized for their beauty and proper proportions align perfectly with the plan we are about to present.

This way of composing pleasing forms, is to be accomplished by making choice of variety of lines, as to their shapes and dimensions; and then again by varying their situations with each other, by all the different ways that can be conceived: and at the same time (if a solid figure be the subject of the composition) the contents or space that is to be inclosed within those lines, must be duly consider'd and vary'd too, as much as possible, with propriety. In a word, it may be said, the art of composing well is the art of varying well. It is not expected that this should at first be perfectly comprehended, yet I believe it will be made sufficiently clear by the help of the examples following.

This approach to creating pleasing designs involves choosing a variety of lines based on their shapes and sizes. Additionally, their positions in relation to one another can be altered in countless ways. If the subject is a solid figure, the area enclosed by those lines should also be thoughtfully considered and varied as much as possible, while still being appropriate. In short, the skill of good composition is essentially the skill of effective variation. It may not be fully understood right away, but I believe it will become clearer with the examples that follow.

29

The figure [Fig. 29 T p. I], represents the simple and pleasing figure of a bell; this shell, as we may call it, is composed of[Pg 41] waving lines, encompassing, or bounding within it, the varied space marked with dotted lines: here you see the variety of the space within is equal to the beauty of its form without, and if the space, or contents, were to be more varied, the outward form would have still more beauty.

The figure [Fig. 29 T p. I] shows a simple and attractive bell shape; this shell, as we might call it, is made up of[Pg 41] flowing lines that enclose or define the diverse area marked with dotted lines: here you can see that the variety of the inner space matches the beauty of its outer form, and if the space or contents were more diverse, the outside shape would be even more beautiful.

figs 30, 31 and 32

As a proof, see a composition of more parts, and a way by which those parts may be put together by a certain method of varying: i. e. how the one half of the socket of the candlestick A [Fig. 30 T p. I], may be varied as the other half B. Let a convenient and fit height be first given for a candlestick, as [Fig. 31 T p. I], then let the necessary size of the socket be determined, as at (a) [Fig. 32] after which, in order to give it a better form, let every distance or length of divisions differ from the length of the socket, as also vary in their distances from each other, as is seen by the points on the line under the socket (a); that is let any two points, signifying distance, be plac'd farthest from any other two near points, observing always that there should be one distance or part larger than all the rest; and you will readily see that variety could not be so complete without it.—In like manner, let the horizontal distances (always keeping within the bounds of fitness) be varied both as to distances and situations, as on the opposite side of the same figure (b); then unite and join all the several distances into a complete shell, by applying several parts of curves and straight lines; varying them also by making them of different sizes, as (c): and apply them as at (d) in the same figure, and you have[Pg 42] the candlestick [Fig. 33 T p. I], and with still more variations on the other side. If you divide the candlestick into many more parts, it will appear crouded, as [Fig. 34 T p. I] it will want distinctness of form on a near view, and lose the effect of variety at a distance: this the eye will easily distinguish on removing pretty far from it.

As proof, consider a design made up of multiple components and a method for assembling those parts in a specific way: for example, how one half of the candlestick socket A [Fig. 30 T p. I] can be altered just like the other half B. First, choose an appropriate height for the candlestick, as shown in [Fig. 31 T p. I]. Then, determine the required size of the socket, as indicated at (a) [Fig. 32]. To enhance its shape, ensure that every distance or length of the divisions differs from the socket length, and also vary the spacing between them, as seen by the points on the line beneath the socket (a). That is, place any two points, indicating distance, the farthest apart from another two points that are closer together, while making sure that one distance is larger than all the others. You'll quickly see that such variety wouldn't be complete without it. Similarly, vary the horizontal distances while staying within reasonable limits, adjusting both their lengths and positions, as shown on the opposite side of the same figure (b). Then, combine all the different distances into a cohesive whole by using a mix of curves and straight lines, also varying them by size, as shown in (c). Apply them as in (d) in the same figure, and you have[Pg 42] the candlestick [Fig. 33 T p. I], with even more variations on the other side. If you break the candlestick into many additional parts, it will appear cluttered, as in [Fig. 34 T p. I]; it will lack a clear form when viewed up close and will diminish the perceived variety from a distance, which the eye will easily recognize when stepping back.

 fgs 33 and 34

Simplicity in composition, or distinctness of parts, is ever to be attended to, as it is one part of beauty, as has been already said: but that what I mean by distinctness of parts in this place, may be better understood, it will be proper to explain it by an example.

Simplicity in composition, or clarity of parts, should always be considered, as it is an aspect of beauty, as mentioned before. To clarify what I mean by clarity of parts in this context, it would be helpful to illustrate it with an example.

When you would compose an object of a great variety of parts, let several of those parts be distinguish'd by themselves, by their remarkable difference from the next adjoining, so as to make each of them, as it were, one well-shap'd quantity or part, as is marked by the dotted lines in figure [35 T p. I] (these are like what they call passages in music, and in writing paragraphs) by which means, not only the whole, but even every part, will be better understood by the eye: for confusion will hereby be avoided when the object is seen near, and the shapes will seem well varied, tho' fewer in number, at a distance; as figure [36 p. I] supposed to be the same as the former, but removed so far off that the eye loses sight of the smaller members.

When you're creating an object made up of many different parts, make sure some of those parts stand out on their own due to their noticeable differences from the adjacent ones. This way, each part will look like a distinct and well-defined piece, as shown by the dotted lines in figure [35 T p. I] (similar to what they refer to as passages in music or paragraphs in writing). This approach not only helps in understanding the whole object better but also makes each part clearer to the eye. It prevents confusion when viewing the object up close, and even though there may be fewer parts, they will appear well varied when seen from a distance, just like figure [36 p. I], which is assumed to be the same as the previous one but far enough away that the smaller components become hard to see.

figs 35 and 36

The parsley-leaf [Fig. 37 T p. I], in like manner, from whence a beautiful foliage in ornament was originally taken, is divided into three distinct passages; which are again divided[Pg 43] into other odd numbers; and this method is observ'd, for the generality, in the leaves of all plants and flowers, the most simple of which are the trefoil and cinquefoil.

The parsley leaf [Fig. 37 T p. I], similarly, from which a beautiful ornamental foliage was first derived, is split into three distinct sections; these are further divided[Pg 43] into other odd numbers. This approach is commonly seen in the leaves of all plants and flowers, with the simplest examples being the trefoil and cinquefoil.

37

Light and shade, and colours, also must have their distinctness to make objects completely beautiful: but of these in their proper places——only I will give you a general idea of what is here meant by the beauty of distinctness of forms, lights, shades, and colours, by putting you in mind of the reverse effects in all them together.

Light and shadow, along with colors, need to be distinct to make objects truly beautiful. However, I will only provide a general idea of what is meant by the beauty of distinct forms, lights, shadows, and colors by reminding you of the opposite effects when they're not combined harmoniously.

Observe the well-composed nosegay how it loses all its distinctness when it dies; each leaf and flower then shrivels and loses its distinct shape; and the firm colours fade into a kind of sameness: so that the whole gradually becomes a confused heap.

Notice how a nicely arranged bouquet loses all its clarity when it wilts; each leaf and flower shrivels and loses its unique shape; and the vibrant colors fade into a uniform dullness: eventually, it all turns into a jumbled pile.

If the general parts of objects are preserv'd large at first, they will always admit of farther enrichments of a small kind, but then they must be so small as not to confound the general masses or quantities.—thus you see variety is a check upon itself when overdone, which of course begets what is call'd a petit taste and a confusion to the eye.

If the main parts of objects are kept large at first, they can always be enhanced with smaller details, but those details must be small enough not to overwhelm the overall shapes or sizes. This shows that too much variety can actually limit itself, leading to what is known as a petit taste and creating confusion for the eye.

figs 38 and 39

It will not be amiss next to shew what effects an object or two will have that are put together without, or contrary to these rules of composing variety. Figure [38 L p. I], is taken from one of those branches fixt to the sides of common old-fashion'd stove-grates by way of ornament, wherein you see how the parts have been varied by[Pg 44] fancy only, and yet pretty well: close to which [Fig. 39 L p. I] is another, with about the like number of parts; but as the shapes, neither are enough varied as to their contents, nor in their situations with each other, but one shape follows its exact likeness: it is therefore a disagreeable and tasteless figure, and for the same reason the candlestick, fig. [40 T p. I] is still worse, as there is less variety in it. Nay, it would be better to be quite plain, as figure [41 T p. I], than with such poor attempts at ornament.

It’s not out of place to show what happens when objects are combined without following these rules of variety in design. Figure [38 L p. I] shows a design from those outdated ornamental branches attached to the sides of old-fashioned stove grates, where you can see how the parts have been varied just by imagination, and it actually looks pretty good. In comparison, [Fig. 39 L p. I] features a similar number of parts, but the shapes aren’t varied enough in terms of their details or how they’re positioned together; one shape just repeats itself. This makes it an unattractive and tasteless design. The candlestick in figure [40 T p. I] is even worse, as it has even less variety. In fact, it would be better to be completely plain, like figure [41 T p. I], than to have such weak attempts at decoration.

figs 40-2

These few examples, well understood, will, I imagine, be sufficient to put what was said at the beginning of this chapter out of all doubt, viz. that the art of composing well is no more than the art of varying well; and to shew, that the method which has been here explain'd, must consequently produce a pleasing proportion amongst the parts; as well as that all deviations from it will produce the contrary. Yet to strengthen this latter assertion, let the following figures, taken from the life, be examin'd by the above rules for composing, and it will be found that the Indian-fig or torch-thistle, figure [42 T p. I], as well as all that tribe of uncouth shaped exotics, have the same reasons for being ugly, as the candlestick, fig. 40; as also that the beauties of the Lily [Fig. 43 T p. I] and the calcidonian Iris [Fig. 44 T p. I] proceeds from their being composed with great variety, and that the loss of variety, to a certain degree, in the imitations of those flowers underneath them (fig. 45 and 46) is the cause of the meanness of their shapes, tho' they retain enough to be call'd by the same names.

These few examples, when well understood, should clearly confirm what was stated at the beginning of this chapter: that the art of composing well is simply the art of varying well; and to show that the method explained here must therefore create a pleasing balance among the parts, while any deviations from it will result in the opposite. To reinforce this point, let the following figures, taken from nature, be assessed according to the compositional rules mentioned above, and it will be evident that the Indian-fig or torch-thistle, figure [42 T p. I], along with others of that oddly shaped group of exotics, have the same reasons for being unattractive as the candlestick, fig. 40; and that the beauty of the Lily [Fig. 43 T p. I] and the Calchonian Iris [Fig. 44 T p. I] comes from their being composed with great variety. Furthermore, the lack of variety to some extent in the imitations of those flowers shown below (fig. 45 and 46) causes the simplicity of their shapes, even though they still retain enough resemblance to be called by the same names.

figs 43 and 44
figs 45 and 46

Hitherto, with regard to composition, little else but forms made up of straight and curv'd lines have been spoken of, and though these lines have but little variety in themselves, yet by reason of the great diversifications that they are capable of in being join'd with one another; great variety of beauty of the more useful sort is produced by them, as in necessary utensils and building: but in my opinion, buildings as I before hinted, might be much more varied than they are, for after fitness hath been strictly and mechanically complied with, any additional ornamental members, or parts, may, by the foregoing rules, be varied with equal elegance; nor can I help thinking, but that churches, palaces, hospitals, prisons, common houses and summer houses, might be built more in distinct characters than they are, by contriving orders suitable to each; whereas were a modern architect to build a palace in Lapland, or the West-Indies, Paladio must be his guide, nor would he dare to stir a step without his book.

So far, when it comes to design, only shapes made up of straight and curved lines have really been discussed. While these lines may not offer much variety on their own, the countless ways they can be combined create a rich diversity of aesthetics, especially in practical items and architecture. However, I believe that buildings could be designed with much more variety than they currently have. Once the basic requirements for function are met, any additional decorative elements can be adjusted with equal finesse according to the principles mentioned earlier. I can't help but feel that churches, palaces, hospitals, prisons, regular homes, and summer houses could be designed with more distinct styles by using designs suited to each purpose. In contrast, if a modern architect were to build a palace in Lapland or the Caribbean, they would feel compelled to follow Palladio's guidelines and wouldn't feel comfortable making any changes without his book.

Have not many gothic buildings a great deal of consistent beauty in them? perhaps acquired by a series of improvements made from time to time by the natural persuasion of the eye, which often very near answers the end of working by principles; and sometimes begets them. There is at present such a thirst after variety, that even paltry imitations of Chinese buildings have a kind of vogue, chiefly on account of their novelty: but not only these, but any other new-invented characters of[Pg 46] building might be regulated by proper principles. The mere ornaments of buildings, to be sure, at least might be allow'd a greater latitude than they are at present; as capitals, frizes, &c. in order to increase the beauty of variety.

Don't many gothic buildings have a lot of consistent beauty? Maybe it's due to a series of improvements made over time by the natural appeal to the eye, which often closely achieves the purpose of working based on principles; and sometimes even creates them. Right now, there’s such a craving for variety that even cheap imitations of Chinese buildings are trendy, mainly because they're new: but not just those, any newly invented styles of[Pg 46]building could be guided by appropriate principles. The basic decorations of buildings, at least, could be allowed more freedom than they currently are; like capitals, friezes, etc., to enhance the beauty of variety.

Nature, in shells and flowers, &c. affords an infinite choice of elegant hints for this purpose; as the original of the Corinthian capital was taken from nothing more, as is said, than some dock-leaves growing up against a basket. Even a capital composed of the aukward and confin'd forms of hats and periwigs, as fig. [48 p. I] in a skilful hand might be made to have some beauty.

Nature, in shells and flowers, etc., provides an endless array of stylish ideas for this purpose; as it's said, the design of the Corinthian capital was inspired by nothing more than some dock leaves growing up against a basket. Even a capital made up of the awkward and restricted shapes of hats and wigs, as shown in fig. [48 p. I], could be crafted into something beautiful by a skilled hand.

48

However, tho' the moderns have not made many additions to the art of building, with respect to mere beauty or ornament, yet it must be confess'd, they have carried simplicity, convenience, and neatness of workmanship, to a very great degree of perfection, particularly in England; where plain good sense hath prefer'd these more necessary parts of beauty, which every body can understand, to that richness of taste which is so much to be seen in other countries, and so often substituted in their room.

However, although modern builders haven't added much in terms of beauty or decoration to the art of construction, it must be acknowledged that they have achieved a high level of perfection in simplicity, convenience, and quality of workmanship, especially in England. There, plain common sense has prioritized these more essential aspects of beauty, which everyone can appreciate, over the lavish taste that is often seen in other countries and frequently takes its place.

St. Paul's cathedral is one of the noblest instances that can be produced of the most judicious application of every principle that has been spoken of. There you may see the utmost variety without confusion, simplicity without nakedness, richness without taudriness, distinctness without hardness, and quantity without excess.[Pg 47] Whence the eye is entertain'd throughout with the charming variety of all its parts together; the noble projecting quantity of a certain number of them, which presents bold and distinct parts at a distance, when the lesser parts within them disappear; and the grand few, but remarkably well-varied parts that continue to please the eye as long as the object is discernable, are evident proofs of the superior skill of Sir Christopher Wren, so justly esteem'd the prince of architects.

St. Paul's Cathedral is one of the best examples of how to wisely apply every principle we've discussed. There, you can see a great variety without chaos, simplicity without being bare, richness without being gaudy, clarity without harshness, and size without overindulgence.[Pg 47] The eye is constantly entertained by the lovely variety of all its parts together; the impressive size of some of them presents bold and distinct features from a distance, while the smaller elements fade away. The few grand yet well-contrasted parts continue to delight the eye as long as the structure is visible, serving as clear evidence of the exceptional skill of Sir Christopher Wren, rightly regarded as the top architect.

It will scarcely admit of a dispute, that the outside of this building is much more perfect than that of St. Peter's at Rome: but the inside, though as fine and noble, as the space it stands on, and our religion will allow of, must give way to the splendor, shew, and magnificence of that of St. Peter's, on account of the sculptures and paintings, as well as the greater magnitude of the whole, which makes it excel as to quantity.

It’s hard to argue that the exterior of this building is much more impressive than that of St. Peter’s in Rome. However, the interior, while just as beautiful and grand as the space it occupies and what our faith allows, can’t compete with the splendor, display, and grandeur of St. Peter’s. The sculptures, paintings, and the overall larger scale of St. Peter’s give it an edge in terms of magnitude.

There are many other churches of great beauty, the work of the same architect, which are hid in the heart of the city, whose steeples and spires are raised higher than ordinary, that they may be seen at a distance above the other buildings; and the great number of them dispers'd about the whole city, adorn the prospect of it, and give it an air of opulence and magnificence: on which account their shapes will be found to be particularly beautiful. Of these, and perhaps of any in Europe, St. Mary-le-Bow is the most elegantly varied. St. Bride's in Fleet-street diminishes sweetly by elegant[Pg 48] degrees, but its variations, tho' very curious when you are near them, not being quite so bold, and distinct, as those of Bow, it too soon looses variety at a distance. Some gothic spires are finely and artfully varied, particularly the famous steeple of Strasburg.

There are many other beautiful churches designed by the same architect, which are tucked away in the heart of the city. Their steeples and spires reach higher than usual so they can be seen from a distance above the other buildings. The numerous churches scattered throughout the city enhance its appearance and give it an air of wealth and grandeur; for this reason, their designs are particularly striking. Among these, and perhaps any in Europe, St. Mary-le-Bow is the most elegantly varied. St. Bride's in Fleet Street gradually tapers off in an appealing way, but its details, while very interesting up close, aren't as bold or distinct from afar as those of Bow, so it loses its variety too quickly at a distance. Some Gothic spires are beautifully and skillfully varied, especially the famous steeple of Strasbourg.

Westminster-Abbey is a good contrast to St. Paul's, with regard to simplicity and distinctness, the great number of its filligrean ornaments, and small divided and subdivided parts appear confused when nigh, and are totally lost at a moderate distance; yet there is nevertheless such a consistency of parts altogether in a good gothic taste, and such propriety relative to the gloomy ideas, they were then calculated to convey, that they have at length acquir'd an establish'd and distinct character in building. It would be look'd upon as an impropriety and as a kind of profanation to build places for mirth and entertainment in the same taste.

Westminster Abbey is a great contrast to St. Paul's in terms of simplicity and clarity. The many intricate decorations and the small, divided elements can look confusing up close and are completely lost from a distance. However, there is still a strong sense of unity in the design, showcasing good Gothic style, and it effectively conveys the somber themes it was intended to express. As a result, it has gained a well-defined and distinct character in architecture. It would be seen as inappropriate and somewhat disrespectful to construct places for joy and entertainment in this same style.


CHAPTER IX.

Of Content with the Wavy Line.

There is scarce a room in any house whatever, where one does not see the waving-line employ'd in some way or other. How inelegant would the shapes of all our moveables be without it? how very plain and unornamental the mouldings of cornices, and chimney-pieces, without the variety introduced by the ogee member, which is entirely composed of waving-lines.

There’s hardly a room in any house where you don’t see the use of wavy lines in some form. How ungraceful would all our furniture look without it? How plain and unadorned would the shapes of cornices and mantels be without the diversity added by the ogee design, which is made up entirely of wavy lines?

figs 49 and 50

Though all sorts of waving-lines are ornamental, when properly applied; yet, strictly speaking, there is but one precise line, properly to be called the line of beauty, which in the scale of them [Fig. 49 T p. I] is number 4: the lines 5, 6, 7, by their bulging too much in their curvature becoming gross and clumsy; and, on the contrary, 3, 2, 1, as they straighten, becoming mean and poor; as will appear in the next figure [50 T p. I] where they are applied to the legs of chairs.

Though all kinds of wavy lines can be decorative when used correctly, there is only one true line that can be called the line of beauty. In the scale of these lines [Fig. 49 T p. I], it is number 4. Lines 5, 6, and 7 become too bulky and awkward due to their excessive curvature, while on the other hand, lines 3, 2, and 1 become insignificant and unattractive as they straighten out. This will be evident in the next figure [50 T p. I], where they are applied to the legs of chairs.

53
53

A still more perfect idea of the effects of the precise waving-line, and of those lines that deviate from it, may be conceived by the row of stays, figure [53 B p. I], where number 4 is composed of precise waving-lines, and is therefore the best shaped stay. Every whale-bone of a good stay must be made to bend in this manner: for the whole stay, when put close together behind, is truly a shell of well-varied contents, and its surface of course a fine form; so that if a line, or the lace were to be drawn, or brought from the top of the lacing of the stay behind, round the body, and down to the bottom peak of the stomacher; it would form such a perfect, precise, serpentine-line, as has been shewn, round the cone, figure 26 in plate I.——For this reason all ornaments obliquely contrasting the body in this manner, as the ribbons worn by the knights of the garter, are both genteel and graceful. The numbers 5, 6, 7 and 3, 2, 1, are deviations into stiffness and meanness on one hand, and clumsiness and deformity on the other. The[Pg 50] reasons for which disagreeable effects, after what has been already said, will be evident to the meanest capacity.

A clearer understanding of how the exact waving-line and the lines that stray from it work can be gained from the row of stays, figure [53 B p. I], where number 4 consists of exact waving-lines and is therefore the best-shaped stay. Each whale-bone of a good stay must be designed to bend this way because the entire stay, when closely arranged from the back, is truly a shell with a well-varied interior, and its surface is, of course, elegantly shaped. So, if a line or lace were drawn from the top of the lacing of the stay at the back, around the body, and down to the bottom peak of the stomacher, it would create a perfect, precise serpentine line as shown around the cone in figure 26 of plate I. For this reason, all ornaments that contrast obliquely with the body in this way, like the ribbons worn by the knights of the garter, are both fashionable and elegant. The numbers 5, 6, 7, and 3, 2, 1 represent deviations into stiffness and lackluster on one side, and clumsiness and ugliness on the other. The reasons for these undesirable effects will be clear to even the simplest understanding.

26

It may be worth our notice however, that the stay, number 2, would better fit a well-shaped man than number 4; and that number 4, would better fit a well-form'd woman, than number 2; and when on considering them, merely as to their forms, and comparing them together as you would two vases, it has been shewn by our principles, how much finer and more beautiful number 4 is, than number 2: does not this our determination enhance the merit of these principles, as it proves at the same time how much the form of a woman's body surpasses in beauty that of a man?

It’s worth noting, however, that size 2 would fit a well-shaped man better than size 4; and that size 4 would fit a well-formed woman better than size 2. When considering them purely based on their shapes and comparing them as you would two vases, our principles show how much finer and more beautiful size 4 is compared to size 2. Doesn’t this conclusion enhance the value of these principles, as it simultaneously proves how much more beautiful the shape of a woman’s body is than that of a man?

From the examples that have been given, enough may be gathered to carry on our observations from them to any other objects that may chance to come in our way, either animate or inanimate; so that we may not only lineally account for the ugliness of the toad, the hog, the bear, and the spider, which are totally void of this waving-line, but also for the different degrees of beauty belonging to those objects that possess it.

From the examples we've seen, we can extend our observations to any other things that might come our way, whether they’re living or non-living. This allows us to not only explain the unattractiveness of the toad, the pig, the bear, and the spider, which completely lack this flowing line, but also to discuss the varying levels of beauty in those objects that do have it.


CHAPTER X.

Of Creations with the Zigzag Line.

The very great difficulty there is in describing this line, either in words, or by the pencil (as was hinted before, when I first mention'd it) will make it necessary[Pg 51] for me to proceed very slowly in what I have to say in this chapter, and to beg the reader's patience whilst I lead him step by step into the knowledge of what I think the sublime in form, so remarkably display'd in the human body; in which, I believe, when he is once acquainted with the idea of them, he will find this species of lines to be principally concern'd.

The immense challenge of describing this line, whether with words or with a pencil (as I mentioned earlier), will require me to move very slowly in what I have to say in this chapter. I ask for the reader's patience as I guide him step by step toward understanding what I believe to be the sublime in form, so distinctly shown in the human body. I think that once he grasps the concept, he will see that this type of line is primarily involved. [Pg 51]

First, then, let him consider fig. [56 B p. II], which represents a straight horn, with its contents, and he will find, as it varies like the cone, it is a form of some beauty, merely on that account.

First, let him look at fig. [56 B p. II], which shows a straight horn with its contents, and he will see that, like the cone, it has a certain beauty just for that reason.

56

Next let him observe in what manner, and in what degree the beauty of this horn is increas'd, in fig. [57 B p. II], where it is supposed to be bent two different ways.

Next, let him notice how and to what extent the beauty of this horn is increased in fig. [57 B p. II], where it is shown bent in two different directions.

57

And lastly, let him attend to the vast increase of beauty, even to grace and elegance, in the same horn, fig. [58 B p. II], where it is supposed to have been twisted round, at the same time, that it was bent two different ways, (as in the last figure).

And finally, let him notice the significant increase in beauty, including grace and elegance, in the same horn, fig. [58 B p. II], where it seems to have been twisted around while also being bent in two different directions (as shown in the last figure).

58

In the first of these figures, the dotted line down the middle expresses the straight lines of which it is composed; which, without the assistance of curve lines, or light and shade, would hardly shew it to have contents.

In the first of these figures, the dotted line down the middle represents the straight lines that make it up; which, without the help of curved lines or light and shadow, would barely show that it has any content.

The same is true of the second, tho' by the bending of the horn, the straight dotted line is changed into the beautiful waving-line.

The same is true for the second, though by bending the horn, the straight dotted line changes into a beautiful wavy line.

But in the last, this dotted line, by the twisting as well as the bending of the horn, is changed from the waving into the serpentine-line; which, as it dips out of sight behind the horn in the middle, and returns again at the smaller end, not only gives play to the imagination, and delights the eye, on that account; but informs it likewise of the quantity and variety of the contents.

But in the end, this dotted line, through the twisting and bending of the horn, changes from a wave to a serpentine line; as it dips out of sight behind the horn in the middle and comes back at the smaller end, it not only sparks the imagination and pleases the eye, but also tells us about the quantity and variety of the contents.

I have chosen this simple example, as the easiest way of giving a plain and general idea of the peculiar qualities of these serpentine-lines, and the advantages of bringing them into compositions, where the contents you are to express, admit of grace and elegance.

I chose this simple example because it's the easiest way to give a clear and general idea of the unique qualities of these serpentine lines, and the benefits of incorporating them into compositions, where the subject matter allows for grace and elegance.

And I beg the same things may be understood of these serpentine-lines, that I have said before of the waving-lines. For as among the vast variety of waving-lines that may be conceiv'd, there is but one that truly deserves the name of the line of beauty, so there is only one precise serpentine-line that I call the line of grace. Yet, even when they are made too bulging, or too tapering, though they certainly lose of their beauty and grace, they do not become so wholly void of it, as not to be of excellent service in compositions, where beauty and grace are not particularly design'd to be express'd in their greatest perfection.

And I hope the same things can be understood about these serpentine lines that I’ve mentioned before regarding the waving lines. Just as there’s a vast variety of waving lines, but only one that truly deserves the title of the line of beauty, there is only one specific serpentine line that I call the line of grace. However, even when they are made too exaggerated or too narrow, although they definitely lose some of their beauty and grace, they don’t become entirely devoid of it, making them very useful in compositions where beauty and grace aren't meant to be expressed in their highest perfection.

Though I have distinguish'd these lines so particularly as to give them the titles of the lines of beauty and grace, I mean that the use and application of them should still[Pg 53] be confined by the principles I have laid down for composition in general; and that they should be judiciously mixt and combined with one another, and even with those I may term plain lines, (in opposition to these) as the subject in hand requires. Thus the cornu-copia, fig. [59 B p. II], is twisted and bent after the same manner, as the last figure of the horn; but more ornamented, and with a greater number of other lines of the same twisted kind, winding round it with as quick returns as those of a screw.

Though I've clearly marked these lines by calling them the lines of beauty and grace, I mean for their use and application to still[Pg 53] stick to the principles I've established for composition in general. They should be thoughtfully mixed and combined with each other, and even with what I would call plain lines, (as opposed to these) as the subject requires. So, the cornu-copia, fig. [59 B p. II], is twisted and bent in the same way as the last figure of the horn, but it's more decorative, featuring a larger number of other twisted lines winding around it with the same quick turns as those of a screw.

59

This sort of form may be seen with yet more variations, (and therefore more beautiful) in the goat's horn, from which, in all probability, the ancients originally took the extremely elegant forms they have given their cornu-copias.

This kind of shape can be observed with even more variations, (and therefore more beautiful) in the goat's horn, from which, most likely, the ancients originally derived the very elegant forms they've given their cornucopias.

There is another way of considering this last figure of the horn I would recommend to my reader, in order to give him a clearer idea of the use both of the waving and serpentine-lines in composition.

There’s another way to think about this last figure of the horn that I’d suggest to my reader, to help him understand better how both the wavy and serpentine lines are used in composition.

This is to imagine the horn, thus bent and twisted, to be cut length-ways by a very fine saw into two equal parts; and to observe one of these in the same position the whole horn is represented in; and these two observations will naturally occur to him. First, that the edge of the saw must run from one end to the other of the horn in the line of beauty; so that the edges of this half of the horn will have a beautiful shape: and, secondly, that wherever the dotted serpentine-line on the[Pg 54] surface of the whole horn dips behind, and is lost to the eye, it immediately comes into sight on the hollow surface of the divided horn.

This is to picture the horn, bent and twisted like this, being cut lengthwise with a very fine saw into two equal parts; and to see one of these in the same position as the whole horn is shown in; and these two points will naturally come to mind. First, the edge of the saw must follow a beautiful curve from one end of the horn to the other, so that the edges of this half will have an attractive shape: and, secondly, wherever the dotted serpentine line on the[Pg 54] surface of the entire horn dips behind and disappears, it immediately becomes visible on the hollow side of the cut horn.

The use I shall make of these observations will appear very considerable in the application of them to the human form, which we are next to attempt.

The way I will use these observations will seem quite significant when we apply them to the human body, which we will attempt next.

It will be sufficient, therefore, at present only to observe, first, that the whole horn acquires a beauty by its being thus genteely bent two different ways; secondly, that whatever lines are drawn on its external surface become graceful, as they must all of them, from the twist that is given the horn, partake in some degree or other, of the shape of the serpentine-line: and, lastly, when the horn is split, and the inner, as well as the outward surface of its shell-like form is exposed, the eye is peculiarly entertained and relieved in the pursuit of these serpentine-lines, as in their twistings their concavities and convexities are alternately offer'd to its view. Hollow forms, therefore, composed of such lines are extremely beautiful and pleasing to the eye; in many cases more so, than those of solid bodies.

It’s enough to note for now that the entire horn becomes beautiful because it’s gently curved in two different directions. Additionally, any lines drawn on its outside surface look elegant, as they all reflect the shape of a serpentine line due to the way the horn is twisted. Finally, when the horn is cut open and both the inside and outside of its shell-like structure are visible, the eye finds it particularly interesting and pleasant to follow these serpentine lines, as their curves and bends are alternately presented. Therefore, hollow shapes made from such lines are extremely beautiful and pleasing to the eye, often more so than solid shapes.

Almost all the muscles, and bones, of which the human form is composed, have more, or less of these kind of twists in them; and give in a less degree, the same kind of appearance to the parts which cover them, and are the immediate object of the eye: and for this reason it is that I have been so particular in describing these forms of the bent, and twisted, and ornamented horn.

Almost all the muscles and bones that make up the human body have various twists in them, which also slightly affect the appearance of the skin and surface that covers them—this is what catches the eye. For this reason, I've gone into detail about these shapes of bent, twisted, and decorated horns.

There is scarce a straight bone in the whole body. Almost all of them are not only bent different ways, but have a kind of twist, which in some of them is very graceful; and the muscles annex'd to them, tho' they are of various shapes, appropriated to their particular uses, generally have their component fibres running in these serpentine-lines, surrounding and conforming themselves to the varied shape of the bones they belong to: more especially in the limbs. Anatomists are so satisfied of this, that they take a pleasure in distinguishing their several beauties. I shall only instance in the thigh-bone, and those about the hips.

There’s hardly a straight bone in the entire body. Almost all of them are not just bent in different directions, but also have a kind of twist, which in some cases is quite graceful. The muscles attached to them, even though they come in various shapes tailored to their specific functions, usually have their fibers running in these serpentine lines, wrapping around and conforming to the unique shapes of the bones they belong to, especially in the limbs. Anatomists are so convinced of this that they take pleasure in highlighting their different beauties. I’ll only mention the thigh bone and those around the hips.

figs 62 and 64

The thigh-bone fig. [62 R p. II], has the waving and twisted turn of the horn, 58: but the beautiful bones adjoining, call'd the ossa innominata [Fig. 60 B p. II], have, with greater variety, the same turns and twists of that horn when it is cut; and its inner and outward surfaces are exposed to the eye.

The thigh bone fig. [62 R p. II] has the curling and spiraling shape of a horn, 58: but the lovely bones next to it, called the ossa innominata [Fig. 60 B p. II], show even more variety with similar curves and twists of that horn when it's sliced; and both its inner and outer surfaces are visible.

figs 60, 61 and 63

How ornamental these bones appear, when the prejudice we conceive against them, as being part of a skeleton, is taken off, by adding a little foliage to them, may be seen in fig. [61 B p. II]——such shell-like winding forms, mixt with foliage, twisting about them, are made use of in all ornaments; a kind of composition calculated merely to please the eye. Divest these of their serpentine twinings, and they immediately lose all grace, and return to the poor gothic taste they were in an hundred years ago [Fig. 63 B p. II].

How decorative these bones look when we remove our bias against them as part of a skeleton by adding a bit of greenery, as seen in fig. [61 B p. II]—those shell-like, curved shapes mixed with foliage that twine around them are used in all decorations; it's a type of design meant only to please the eye. Strip them of their serpentine twists, and they instantly lose all elegance, reverting to the unattractive gothic style they had a hundred years ago [Fig. 63 B p. II].

figs 62 and 64

Fig. [64 B p. II] is meant to represent the manner, in which most of the muscles, (those of the limbs in particular) are twisted round the bones, and conform themselves to their length and shape; but with no anatomical exactness. As to the running of their fibres, some anatomists have compared them to skains of thread, loose in the middle, and tight at each end, which, when they are thus consider'd as twisted contrary ways round the bone, gives the strongest idea possible of a composition of serpentine-lines.

Fig. [64 B p. II] is meant to show how most muscles, especially those in the limbs, wrap around the bones and adapt to their length and shape, but not with anatomical precision. Some anatomists have likened the arrangement of their fibers to strands of thread that are loose in the middle and tight at both ends. When viewed as twisted in opposite directions around the bone, this provides the clearest idea of a composition of serpentine lines.

65 66 67

Of these fine winding forms then are the muscles and bones composed, and which, by their varied situations with each other, become more intricately pleasing, and form a continued waving of winding forms from one into the other, as may be best seen by examining a good anatomical figure, part of which you have here represented, in the muscular leg and thigh, fig. [65 p. I]: which shews the serpentine forms and varied situations of the muscles, as they appear when the skin is taken off. It was drawn from a plaster of paris figure cast off nature, the original of which was prepared for the mould by Cowper, the famous anatomist. In this last figure, as the skin is taken off the parts are too distinctly traced by the eye, for that intricate delicacy which is necessary to the utmost beauty; yet the winding figures of the muscles, with the variety of their situations, must always be allow'd elegant forms: however, they lose in the imagination some of the beauty, which they really have, by the idea[Pg 57] of their being flayed; nevertheless, by what has already been shewn both of them and the bones, the human frame hath more of its parts composed of serpentine-lines than any other object in nature; which is a proof both of its superior beauty to all others, and, at the same time, that its beauty proceeds from those lines: for although they may be required sometimes to be bulging in their twists, as in the thick swelling muscles of the Hercules, yet elegance and greatness of taste is still preserved; but when these lines lose so much of their twists as to become almost straight, all elegance of taste vanishes.

The muscles and bones are made up of these fine winding shapes, which, due to their various positions relative to each other, create a more complex and pleasing appearance. They form a continuous flow of curves from one to another, best seen in a detailed anatomical figure, part of which is shown here in the muscular leg and thigh, fig. [65 p. I]: which displays the serpentine shapes and different positions of the muscles as they appear when the skin is removed. This was drawn from a plaster cast made from nature, the original prepared for the mold by Cowper, the renowned anatomist. In this last figure, as the skin is removed, the details are too clearly visible for that intricate delicacy necessary for ultimate beauty; yet the winding shapes of the muscles, along with their varied positions, are undoubtedly elegant forms. However, the idea of their being flayed somewhat diminishes their perceived beauty. Still, as shown both for them and the bones, the human body has more serpentine lines than any other object in nature, proving its superior beauty and the fact that this beauty comes from those lines. While these lines may sometimes need to bulge in their twists, like the thick, muscular arms of Hercules, elegance and a strong sense of taste are still maintained; but when these lines lose their twists and nearly become straight, any sense of elegance disappears.

Thus fig. [66 p. I], was also taken from nature, and drawn in the same position, but treated in a more dry, stiff, and what the painters call, sticky manner, than the nature of flesh is ever capable of appearing in, unless when its moisture is dryed away: it must be allowed, that the parts of this figure are of as right dimensions, and as truly situated, as in the former; it wants only the true twist of the lines to give it taste.

Thus fig. [66 p. I] was also taken from nature and drawn in the same position, but it was done in a drier, stiffer, and what painters call a sticky manner, which flesh never really looks like unless its moisture has dried up. It's true that the parts of this figure are accurately sized and properly placed, just like in the previous one; it just needs the right twist of the lines to give it some style.

To prove this further, and to put the mean effect of these plain or unvaried lines in a stronger light, see fig. [67 p. I], where, by the uniform, unvaried shapes and situation of the muscles, without so much as a waving-line in them, it becomes so wooden a form, that he that can fashion the leg of a joint-stool may carve this figure as well as the best sculptor. In the same manner, divest one of the best antique statues of all its serpentine winding parts, and it becomes from an[Pg 58] exquisite piece of art, a figure of such ordinary lines and unvaried contents, that a common stone-mason or carpenter, with the help of his rule, calipers, and compasses, might carve out an exact imitation of it: and were it not for these lines a turner, in his lathe, might turn a much finer neck than that of the grecian Venus, as according to the common notion of a beautiful neck, it would be more truly round. For the same reason, legs much swoln with disease, are as easy to imitate as a post, having lost their drawing, as the painters call it; that is, having their serpentine-lines all effaced, by the skin's being equally puffed up, as figure [68].

To prove this even more and to highlight the simple effect of these plain, unchanging lines, take a look at fig. [67 p. I], where the consistent shapes and positions of the muscles, with not a single flowing line in sight, create such a rigid form that anyone who can shape the leg of a joint stool can carve this figure just as well as the best sculptor. Similarly, if you strip one of the finest antique statues of all its serpentine, winding parts, it transforms from an exquisite piece of art into a figure with such basic lines and uniform features that an average stone mason or carpenter, using just a ruler, calipers, and compass, could carve out an exact replica of it. If it weren’t for these lines, a lathe operator could create a much more elegant neck than that of the Grecian Venus since, according to common ideas of beauty, it would be more perfectly round. For the same reason, legs that are severely swollen due to disease are as easy to replicate as a post, having lost their drawing, as painters call it; in other words, having their flowing lines completely erased, with the skin appearing uniformly puffed up, as shown in figure [68].

68

If in comparing these three figures one with another, the reader, notwithstanding the prejudice his imagination may have conceiv'd against them, as anatomical figures, has been enabled only to perceive that one of them is not so disagreeable as the others; he will easily be led to see further, that this tendency to beauty in one, is not owing to any greater degree of exactness in the proportions of its parts, but merely to the more pleasing turns, and intertwistings of the lines, which compose its external form; for in all the three figures the same proportions have been observ'd, and, on that account, they have all an equal claim to beauty.

If the reader compares these three figures to each other, despite any biases their imagination may hold against them as anatomical illustrations, they might only notice that one of them is less unpleasant than the others. This observation will lead them to realize that the appeal of this figure isn’t due to any superior accuracy in the proportions of its parts, but rather to the more appealing curves and twists of the lines that make up its outer shape. In all three figures, the same proportions have been maintained, and for that reason, they all have an equal claim to beauty.

And if he pursues this anatomical enquiry but a very little further, just to form a true idea of the elegant use that is made of the skin and fat beneath it, to conceal[Pg 59] from the eye all that is hard and disagreeable, and at the same time to preserve to it whatever is necessary in the shapes of the parts beneath, to give grace and beauty to the whole limb: he will find himself insensibly led into the principles of that grace and beauty which is to be found in well-turn'd limbs, in fine, elegant, healthy life, or in those of the best antique statues; as well as into the reason why his eye has so often unknowingly been pleased and delighted with them.

And if he takes this anatomical inquiry a little further, just to get a clear idea of how the skin and fat underneath are used to hide[Pg 59] everything hard and unpleasant from view while also showing whatever shapes are needed to give grace and beauty to the whole limb, he will find himself naturally drawn into the principles of that grace and beauty found in well-formed limbs, in fine, elegant, healthy life, or in the best classical statues. He will also understand why his eye has so often been unknowingly pleased and delighted by them.

Thus, in all other parts of the body, as well as these, wherever, for the sake of the necessary motion of the parts, with proper strength and agility, the insertions of the muscles are too hard and sudden, their swellings too bold, or the hollows between them too deep, for their out-lines to be beautiful; nature most judiciously softens these hardnesses, and plumps up these vacancies with a proper supply of fat, and covers the whole with the soft, smooth, springy, and, in delicate life, almost transparent skin, which, conforming itself to the external shape of all the parts beneath, expresses to the eye the idea of its contents with the utmost delicacy of beauty and grace.

Thus, in all other parts of the body, as well as these, wherever movement of the parts is necessary, the connections of the muscles can be too rigid and abrupt, their bulges too pronounced, or the gaps between them too deep for their outlines to look attractive. Nature wisely softens these rigid areas, fills in these gaps with the right amount of fat, and covers everything with a soft, smooth, springy, and, in living beings, almost transparent skin. This skin adapts to the external shape of all the parts underneath, portraying its contents with exceptional beauty and grace.

The skin, therefore, thus tenderly embracing, and gently conforming itself to the varied shapes of every one of the outward muscles of the body, soften'd underneath by the fat, where, otherwise, the same hard lines and furrows would appear, as we find come on with age in the face, and with labour, in the limbs, is evidently[Pg 60] a shell-like surface (to keep up the idea I set out with) form'd with the utmost delicacy in nature; and therefore the most proper subject of the study of every one, who desires to imitate the works of nature, as a master should do, or to judge of the performances of others as a real connoisseur ought.

The skin, therefore, gently embracing and adapting to the different shapes of all the muscles in the body, is softened underneath by fat; otherwise, the same hard lines and wrinkles that we see with age in the face and from work in the limbs would appear. It is clearly[Pg 60] a shell-like surface (to keep up with the idea I started with) formed with the utmost delicacy in nature; and thus, it is the most suitable subject for anyone who wants to imitate nature’s creations, as a master should do, or to evaluate the works of others as a true connoisseur ought.

I cannot be too long, I think, on this subject, as so much will be found to depend upon it; and therefore shall endeavour to give a clear idea of the different effect such anatomical figures have on the eye, from what the same parts have, when cover'd by the fat and skin; by supposing a small wire (that has lost its spring and so will retain every shape it is twisted into) to be held fast to the out-side of the hip (fig. 65. plate I) and thence brought down the other side of the thigh obliquely over the calf of the leg, down to the outward ancle (all the while press'd so close as to touch and conform itself to the shape of every muscle it passes over) and then to be taken off. If this wire be now examined it will be found that the general uninterrupted flowing twist, which the winding round the limbs would otherwise have given to it, is broken into little better than so many separate plain curves, by the sharp indentures it every where has receiv'd on being closely press'd in between the muscles.

I can't spend too much time on this topic because so much depends on it. So, I’ll try to clearly illustrate how different anatomical figures affect the eye compared to how those same parts look when covered by fat and skin. Imagine a small wire (that has lost its spring and will hold any shape it's twisted into) attached to the outside of the hip (fig. 65. plate I) and then brought down the opposite side of the thigh, diagonally over the calf of the leg, down to the outer ankle, pressing it closely against each muscle it passes over. When this wire is removed, you’ll see that the smooth, flowing twist it would typically have acquired from winding around the limbs is now broken into almost separate, simple curves due to the sharp indentations it picked up while being pressed tightly between the muscles.

65 66 67

Suppose, in the next place, such a wire was in the same manner twisted round a living well-shaped leg and thigh, or those of a fine statue; when you take it off you will find no such sharp indentures, nor any of[Pg 61] those regular engralings (as the heralds express it) which displeased the eye before. On the contrary, you will see how gradually the changes in its shape are produced; how imperceptibly the different curvatures run into each other, and how easily the eye glides along the varied wavings of its sweep. To enforce this still further, if a line were to be drawn by a pencil exactly where these wires have been supposed to pass, the point of the pencil, in the muscular leg and thigh, would perpetually meet with stops and rubs, whilst in the others it would flow from muscle to muscle along the elastic skin, as pleasantly as the lightest skiff dances over the gentlest wave.

Imagine a wire wrapped around a well-shaped leg or thigh, or even those of a beautiful statue; when you remove it, you won't see any sharp indentations or those regular engralings (as heralds put it) that used to be unpleasant to look at. Instead, you'll notice how gradually the changes in its shape occur; how seamlessly the different curves blend into one another, and how easily the eye flows along the varied curves of its form. To emphasize this even more, if you were to draw a line with a pencil exactly where these wires were thought to have been, the pencil point on the muscular leg and thigh would constantly encounter stops and friction, while on the others, it would glide from one muscle to another along the flexible skin, as smoothly as a lightweight boat floats over gentle waves.

This idea of the wire, retaining thus the shape of the parts it passes over, seems of so much consequence, that I would by no means have it forgot; as it may properly be consider'd as one of the threads (or outlines) of the shell (or external surface) of the human form: and the frequently recurring to it will assist the imagination in its conceptions of those parts of it, whose shapes are most intricately varied: for the same sort of observations may be made, with equal justice, on the shapes of ever so many such wires twisted in the same manner in ever so many directions over every part of a well made man, woman, or statue.

This concept of the wire, keeping the shape of the areas it touches, is so important that I definitely want it remembered; it can be seen as one of the guiding lines (or outlines) of the outer surface of the human body. Regularly referring to this will help the imagination grasp those parts of the body that have the most complex shapes. The same kinds of observations can be applied just as fairly to the shapes of countless wires twisted in the same way across various directions over every part of a well-constructed man, woman, or statue.

And if the reader will follow in his imagination the most exquisite turns of the chisel in the hands of a master, when he is putting the finishing touches to a[Pg 62] statue; he will soon be led to understand what it is the real judges expect from the hand of such a master, which the Italians call, the little more, Il poco piu, and which in reality distinguishes the original master-pieces at Rome from even the best copies of them.

And if the reader can picture in their mind the most delicate movements of the chisel in the hands of a master as he adds the final touches to a[Pg 62] statue, they will quickly come to grasp what the true critics expect from such a master’s work, which the Italians refer to as "the little more," Il poco piu. This is what truly sets apart the original masterpieces in Rome from even the finest replicas.

An example or two will sufficiently explain what is here meant; for as these exquisite turns are to be found, in some degree of beauty or other, all over the whole surface of the body and limbs: we may by taking any one part of a fine figure (though so small a one that only a few muscles are express'd in it) explain the manner in which so much beauty and grace has been given to them, as to convince a skilful artist, almost at sight, that it must have been the work of a master.

An example or two will clearly illustrate what is meant here; because these beautiful details can be found, to some extent, all over the body and limbs. By examining just one part of an elegant figure (even a small part that shows only a few muscles), we can explain how so much beauty and grace have been achieved, convincing a skilled artist, almost immediately, that it must have been created by a master.

76

I have chosen, for this purpose, a small piece of the body of a statue, fig. [76 T p. II], representing part of the left side under the arm, together with a little of the breast, (including a very particular muscle, which, from the likeness its edges bear to the teeth of a saw, is, if consider'd by itself, void of beauty) as most proper to the point in hand, because this its regular shape more peculiarly requires the skill of the artist to give it a little more variety than it generally has, even in nature.

I have selected a small portion of a statue’s body, fig. [76 T p. II], showing part of the left side under the arm, along with a bit of the breast. This includes a specific muscle that, because its edges resemble saw teeth, lacks beauty when viewed alone. I believe it’s the most relevant choice for our discussion since its regular shape demands the artist's skill to add a touch more variety than it typically has, even in nature.

77

First, then, I will give you a representation of this part of the body, from an anatomical figure [Fig. 77 T p. II], to show what a sameness there is in the shapes of all the teeth-like insertions of this muscle; and how regularly the fibres, which compose it, follow the almost parallel out-lines of the ribs they partly cover.

First, I will show you a diagram of this part of the body [Fig. 77 T p. II] to illustrate how similar the shapes of all the teeth-like attachments of this muscle are, and how consistently the fibers that make it up follow the nearly parallel outlines of the ribs they partially cover.

78

From what has been said before of the use of the natural covering of the skin, &c. the next figure [78 T p. II] will easily be understood to mean so tame a representation of the same part of the body, that tho' the hard and stiff appearance of the edges of this muscle is taken off by that covering, yet enough of its regularity and sameness remains to render it disagreeable.

From what has been mentioned earlier about the skin's natural covering, the next figure [78 T p. II] will be easy to understand as a straightforward depiction of the same body part. Although the hard and stiff look of this muscle's edges is softened by that covering, there’s still enough of its uniformity and sameness left that makes it unappealing.

Now as regularity and sameness, according to our doctrine, is want of elegance and true taste, we shall endeavour in the next place to show how this very part (in which the muscles take so very regular a form) may be brought to have as much variety as any other part of the body whatever. In order to this, though some alteration must be made in almost every part of it, yet it should be so inconsiderable in each, that no remarkable change may appear in the shape and situation of any.

Now, since regularity and sameness, according to our belief, lack elegance and true taste, we will next try to demonstrate how this specific area (where the muscles have such a uniform shape) can be made to have as much variety as any other part of the body. To achieve this, while some changes will need to be made in almost every part, they should be so minimal that no noticeable change appears in the shape and position of any.

figs 79, 80 and 81

Thus, let the parts mark'd 1, 2, 3, 4, (which appear so exactly similar in shape, and parallel in situation in the muscular figure 77) and not much mended in fig. 78, be first varied in their sizes, but not gradually from the uppermost to the lowest, as in fig. [79 T p. II], nor alternately one long and one short, as in fig. [80 T p. II], for in either of these cases there would still remain too great a formality. We should therefore endeavour, in the next place, to vary them every way in our power, without losing entirely the true idea of the parts themselves. Suppose them then to have changed their situations[Pg 64] a little, and slip'd beside each other irregularly, (some how as is represented in fig. [81 T p. II], merely with regard to their situation) and the external appearance of the whole piece of the body, now under our consideration, will assume the more varied and pleasing form, represented in fig. 76, easily to be discern'd by comparing the three figures, 76, 77, 78, one with another; and it will as easily be seen, that were lines to be drawn, or wires to be bent, over these muscles, from one to the other, and so on to the adjoining parts; they would have a continued waving flow, let them pass in any direction whatever.

So, let's take the parts marked 1, 2, 3, and 4 (which look almost identical in shape and are positioned similarly in muscular figure 77) and not much improved in figure 78, and first change their sizes, but not in a gradual way from top to bottom as in fig. [79 T p. II], nor alternating between one long and one short, as in fig. [80 T p. II], because in either case it would still feel too formal. Instead, we should aim to vary them in every way possible without completely losing the true essence of the parts themselves. Let's imagine they’ve shifted their positions slightly and are placed beside each other irregularly (somewhat like how it's shown in fig. [81 T p. II], just regarding their placement), and the overall appearance of the body part we’re focusing on will take on a more diverse and attractive shape, as shown in fig. 76, easily noticeable when comparing figures 76, 77, and 78 with each other. It's also clear that if we were to draw lines or bend wires over these muscles, connecting one to another and extending to the neighboring parts, they would create a continuous wave, regardless of the direction.

The unskilful, in drawing these parts after the life, as their regularities are much more easily seen and copied than their fine variations, seldom fail of making them more regular and poor than they really appear even in a consumptive person.

The unskilled, when drawing these parts from life, tend to see and replicate their regularities much more easily than their subtle variations. As a result, they often end up making them look more regular and lacking in detail than they actually appear, even in someone who is unwell.

The difference will appear evident by comparing fig. 78, purposely drawn in this tasteless manner, with fig. 76. But will be more perfectly understood by examining this part in the Torso of Michael Angelo [Fig. 54 p. I], whence this figure was taken.

The difference will become clear by comparing fig. 78, intentionally drawn in this unappealing style, with fig. 76. However, it will be better understood by looking at this part in the Torso of Michelangelo [Fig. 54 p. I], from which this figure was taken.

54

Note, there are casts of a small copy of that famous trunk of a body to be had at almost every plaster-figure makers, wherein what has been here described may be sufficiently seen, not only in the part which figure 76 was taken from, but all over that curious piece of antiquity.

Note, there are casts of a small version of that famous trunk of a body available at almost every plaster figure maker, where what has been described here can be clearly seen, not only in the part that figure 76 was taken from, but throughout that entire interesting piece of history.

I must here again press my reader to a particular attention to the windings of these superficial lines, even in their passing over every joint, what alterations soever may be made in the surface of the skin by the various bendings of the limbs: and tho' the space allow'd for it, just in the joints, be ever so small, and consequently the lines ever so short, the application of this principle of varying these lines, as far as their lengths will admit of, will be found to have its effect as gracefully as in the more lengthen'd muscles of the body.

I must once again urge my reader to pay close attention to the twists of these surface lines, even as they flow over each joint, regardless of the changes that may occur in the skin due to the different angles of the limbs. And although the space allowed for these lines at the joints might be very small, and therefore the lines themselves quite short, applying this principle of varying the lines, as much as their lengths permit, will still be effective and graceful, just like in the longer muscles of the body.

It should be observ'd in the fingers, where the joints are but short, and the tendons straight; and where beauty seems to submit, in some degree, to use, yet not so much but you trace in a full-grown taper finger, these little winding lines among the wrinkles, or in (what is more pretty because more simple) the dimples of the nuckles. As we always distinguish things best by seeing their reverse set in opposition with them; if fig. 82 T p. II, by the straightness of its lines, shews fig. 83 T p. II, to have some little taste in it, tho' it is so slightly sketch'd; the difference will more evidently appear when you in like manner compare a straight coarse finger in common life with the taper dimpled one of a fine lady.

It should be noted in the fingers, where the joints are short and the tendons are straight; and where beauty seems to give way somewhat to function, yet not so much that you can't see in a well-shaped finger these little winding lines among the wrinkles, or in (what is prettier because simpler) the dimples of the knuckles. We always recognize things better by seeing their opposite; if figure 82 on page II, through the straightness of its lines, shows figure 83 on page II to have a bit of elegance, even if it’s only lightly sketched; the difference becomes even clearer when you compare a straight, rough finger in everyday life with the tapered, dimpled one of an elegant lady.

figs 82 and 83

There is an elegant degree of plumpness peculiar to the skin of the softer sex, that occasions these delicate dimplings in all their other joints, as well as these of the fingers; which so perfectly distinguishes them from those even of a graceful man; and which, assisted by[Pg 66] the more soften'd shapes of the muscles underneath, presents to the eye all the varieties in the whole figure of the body, with gentler and fewer parts more sweetly connected together, and with such a fine simplicity as will always give the turn of the female frame, represented in the Venus [Fig. 13 p. I], the preference to that of the Apollo [Fig. 12 p. I].

There’s a graceful softness to the skin of women that creates those delicate dimples in all their joints, including their fingers; this feature sets them apart from even the most graceful men. Combined with the softer shapes of the muscles underneath, it showcases all the variations in the body’s figure, with smoother and fewer parts that blend seamlessly together. This refined simplicity gives the female form, as seen in the Venus [Fig. 13 p. I], a distinct advantage over that of the Apollo [Fig. 12 p. I].

figs 13 and 12

Now whoever can conceive lines thus constantly flowing, and delicately varying over every part of the body even to the fingers ends, and will call to his remembrance what led us to this last description of what the Italians call, Il poco piu (the little more that is expected from the hand of a master) will, in my mind, want very little more than what his own observation on the works of art and nature will lead him to, to acquire a true idea of the word Taste, when applied to form; however inexplicable this word may hitherto have been imagined.

Now, anyone who can imagine lines constantly flowing and subtly changing all over the body, even down to the tips of the fingers, and can remember what brought us to this last description of what the Italians call Il poco piu (the little more expected from a master’s hand), will, in my opinion, need very little more than what their own observations of art and nature will provide to understand the meaning of the word Taste when related to form; no matter how puzzling this word may have seemed until now.

We have all along had recourse chiefly to the works of the ancients, not because the moderns have not produced some as excellent; but because the works of the former are more generally known: nor would we have it thought, that either of them have ever yet come up to the utmost beauty of nature. Who but a bigot, even to the antiques, will say that he has not seen faces and necks, hands and arms in living women, that even the Grecian Venus doth but coarsely imitate?

We have always mainly relied on the works of the ancients, not because the moderns haven't created some just as great, but because the former are more widely recognized. We wouldn't want anyone to think that either group has fully captured the true beauty of nature. Who, except a die-hard admirer of the past, would claim they haven't seen faces and necks, hands and arms in living women that even the Greek Venus only poorly mimics?

And what sufficient reason can be given why the same may not be said of the rest of the body?

And what valid reason can be provided for why the same can't be said about the rest of the body?


CHAPTER XI.

Of Ratio.

If anyone should ask, what it is that constitutes a fine-proportion'd human figure? how ready and seemingly decisive is the common answer: a just symmetry and harmony of parts with respect to the whole. But as probably this vague answer took its rise from doctrines not belonging to form, or idle schemes built on them, I apprehend it will cease to be thought much to the purpose after a proper enquiry has been made.

If someone asks what makes a well-proportioned human figure, the typical answer is quick and seemingly straightforward: a precise symmetry and harmony of parts in relation to the whole. However, this vague response likely originated from theories unrelated to form or from fanciful ideas based on them. I believe this answer will be regarded as less relevant after a thorough investigation is conducted.

Preparatory to which, it becomes necessary in this place, to mention one reason more which may be added to those given in the introduction, for my having persuaded the reader to consider objects scoop'd out like thin shells; which is, that partly by this conception, he may be the better able to separate and keep asunder the two following general ideas, as we will call them, belonging to form; which are apt to coincide and mix with each other in the mind, and which it is necessary (for the sake of making each more fully and particularly clear) should be kept apart, and consider'd singly.

Before we proceed, it's important to mention one more reason for encouraging the reader to think about objects shaped like thin shells. By understanding this concept, they will be better equipped to distinguish and separate two related general ideas regarding form. These ideas tend to blend together in our minds, but it is crucial (to clarify each one thoroughly and specifically) to keep them separate and examine them individually.

First, the general ideas of what hath already been discussed in the foregoing chapters, which only comprehends the surface of form, viewing it in no other light than merely as being ornamental or not.

First, the general ideas of what has already been discussed in the previous chapters, which only covers the surface of form, looking at it solely as either ornamental or not.

Secondly, that general idea, now to be discussed, which we commonly have of form altogether, as arising chiefly from a fitness to some design'd purpose or use.

Secondly, the general idea that we typically have of form, which we will discuss now, mainly comes from its suitability for a specific purpose or use.

Hitherto our main drift hath been to establish and illustrate the first idea only, by shewing, first the nature of variety, and then its effects on the mind; with the manner how such impressions are made by means of the different feelings given to the eye, from its movements in tracing and coursing[5] over surfaces of all kinds.

So far, our main goal has been to define and explain the first idea by showing, first the nature of variety, and then its effects on the mind; as well as how these impressions are created through the different feelings experienced by the eye, based on its movements in exploring and traveling over various surfaces.

[5] See Chapter V, page 25.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See Chapter 5, page __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__.

The surface of a piece of ornament, that hath every turn in it that lines are capable of moving into, and at the same time no way applied, nor of any manner of use, but merely to entertain the eye, would be such an object as would answer to this first idea alone.

The surface of a decorative item, which has every curve that lines can take and is not useful in any way, but just serves to catch the eye, would perfectly match this initial idea.

The figure like a leaf, at the bottom of plate I, near to fig. 67, is something of this kind; it was taken from an ash-tree, and was a sort of Lusus naturæ, growing only like an excressence, but so beautiful in the lines of its shell-like windings, as would have been above the power of a Gibbons to have equalled, even in its own materials; nor could the graver of an Edlinck, or Drevet, have done it justice on copper.

The shape that resembles a leaf at the bottom of plate I, near fig. 67, is something like this; it was taken from an ash tree and was a type of oddity, growing only as a sort of outgrowth, but so beautiful in the curves of its shell-like twists that even a Gibbons couldn't have matched it, even with his own materials; nor could the engraver Edlinck or Drevet have done it justice on copper.

fig nr 67 pl I

Note, the present taste of ornaments seems to have been partly taken from productions of this sort, which are to be found about autumn among plants, particularly asparagus, when it is running to seed.

Note, the current preference for decorations appears to have been partly influenced by similar creations that can be seen in the fall among plants, especially asparagus, when it is going to seed.

I shall now endeavour to explain what is included in what I have called for distinction sake, the second general idea of form, in a much fuller manner than was done in Chapter I, of Fitness. And begin with observing, that though surfaces will unavoidably be still included, yet we must no longer confine ourselves to the particular notice of them as surfaces only, as we heretofore have done; we must now open our view to general, as well as particular bulk and solidity; and also look into what may have filled up, or given rise thereto, such as certain given quantities and dimensions of parts, for inclosing any substance, or for performing of motion, purchase, stedfastness, and other matters of use to living beings, which, I apprehend, at length, will bring us to a tolerable conception of the word proportion.

I will now try to explain what I’ve referred to as the second general idea of form in much more detail than was done in Chapter I, which focused on fitness. First, I want to point out that while surfaces will still be a part of our discussion, we can’t limit ourselves to just thinking about them as surfaces anymore. We need to broaden our perspective to include both general and specific bulk and solidity, and also consider what might have filled or contributed to these aspects, like certain given quantities and dimensions of parts that enclose any substance, or that facilitate movement, stability, and other practical needs for living beings. I believe this will ultimately lead us to a clearer understanding of the term proportion.

As to these joint-sensations of bulk and motion, do we not at first sight almost, even without making trial, seem to feel when a leaver of any kind is too weak, or not long enough to make such or such a purchase? or when a spring is not sufficient? and don't we find by experience what weight, or dimension should be given, or taken away, on this or that account? if so, as the general as well as particular bulks of form, are made up of materials moulded together under mechanical directions, for some known purpose or other; how naturally, from these considerations, shall we fall into a judgment of fit proportion; which is one part of beauty to the mind tho' not always so to the eye.

As for these joint sensations of size and movement, don't we almost instantly feel, even without testing it, whether a lever is too weak or not long enough to do the job? Or when a spring isn’t strong enough? And don't we learn from experience how much weight or size should be added or removed for various reasons? If that's the case, since both the overall and specific shapes are created from materials shaped together under mechanical guidance for some known purpose, it follows naturally that we arrive at a judgment of fit proportion, which is one aspect of beauty in the mind, even if it doesn't always look beautiful to the eye.

Our necessities have taught us to mould matter into various shapes, and to give them fit proportions for particular uses, as bottles, glasses, knives, dishes, &c. Hath not offence given rise to the form of the sword, and defence to that of the shield? And what else but proper fitness of parts hath fix'd the different dimensions of pistols, muskets, great guns, fowling-pieces and blunderbusses; which differences as to figure, may as properly be called the different characters of fire-arms, as the different shapes of men are called characters of men.

Our needs have taught us to shape materials into various forms and give them appropriate proportions for specific uses, like bottles, glasses, knives, and dishes. Hasn't conflict inspired the creation of swords, and protection the design of shields? And what else but the proper fit of parts has determined the different sizes of pistols, muskets, cannons, shotguns, and blunderbusses? These differences in shape could just as well be called the different characteristics of firearms as the different shapes of people are referred to as the characteristics of humans.

We find also that the profuse variety of shapes, which present themselves from the whole animal creation, arise chiefly from the nice fitness of their parts, designed for accomplishing the peculiar movements of each.

We also find that the wide variety of shapes found in all animal life mainly comes from the precise way their parts are arranged to perform the specific movements of each creature.

And here I think will be the proper place to speak of a most curious difference between the living machines of nature, in respect of fitness, and such poor ones, in comparison with them, as men are only capable of making; by means of which distinction, I am in hopes of shewing what particularly constitutes the utmost beauty of proportion in the human figure.

And I believe this is the right time to discuss a truly fascinating difference between the living machines of nature, in terms of their fitness, and the inferior ones that humans can only create. Through this comparison, I hope to reveal what specifically defines the ultimate beauty of proportion in the human figure.

A clock, by the government's order, has been made, and another now making, by Mr. Harrison, for the keeping of true time at sea; which perhaps is one of the most exquisite movements ever made. Happy the ingenious contriver! although the form of the whole, or of every part of this curious machine, should be ever so confused,[Pg 71] or displeasingly shaped to the eye; and although even its movements should be disagreeable to look at, provided it answers the end proposed. An ornamental composition was no part of his scheme, otherwise than as a pollish might be necessary. If ornaments are required to be added to mend its shape, care must be taken that they are no obstruction to the movement itself, and the more as they would be superfluous, as to the main design.—But in nature's machines, how wonderfully do we see beauty and use go hand in hand!

A clock has been created by government order, and Mr. Harrison is currently making another one to ensure accurate timekeeping at sea, which might be one of the most remarkable timekeeping mechanisms ever designed. Kudos to the clever inventor! Even if the overall design or any part of this fascinating device looks confusing or unattractive, and even if its movements are unappealing to watch, it’s still successful as long as it serves its intended purpose. The design wasn’t meant to be decorative, except for any polish that might be necessary. If decorations need to be added to improve its appearance, care should be taken that they don’t interfere with the mechanism, especially since they may be unnecessary for the primary function. However, in nature’s creations, we see how beautifully efficiency and aesthetics coexist![Pg 71]

Had a machine for this purpose been nature's work, the whole and every individual part would have had exquisite beauty of form without danger of destroying the exquisiteness of its motion, even as if ornament had been the sole aim; its movements too would have been graceful, without one superfluous tittle added for either of these lovely purposes.—Now this is that curious difference between the fitness of nature's machines (one of which is man) and those made by mortal hands: which distinction is to lead us to our main point proposed; I mean, to the shewing what constitutes the utmost beauty of proportion.

If a machine for this purpose had been created by nature, every part would have had stunning beauty in its form without risking the perfection of its movement, as if decoration was the only goal. Its motions would also be graceful, with not a single unnecessary detail added for either of these pleasing reasons. — This highlights the interesting difference between the efficiency of nature's machines (of which humans are one) and those crafted by humans; this distinction will guide us to our main point, which is to show what defines the highest beauty of proportion.

There was brought from France some years ago, a little clock-work machine, with a duck's head and legs fixt to it, which was so contrived as to have some resemblance of that animal standing upon one foot, and stretching back its leg, turning its head, opening and shutting its bill, moving its wings, and shaking its tail;[Pg 72] all of them the plainest and easiest directions in living movements: yet for the poorly performing of these few motions, this silly, but much extoll'd machine, being uncover'd, appeared a most complicated, confused, and disagreeable object: nor would its being covered with a skin closely adhering to its parts, as that of a real duck's doth, have much mended its figure; at best, a bag of hob-nails, broken hinges, and patten-rings, would have looked as well, unless by other means it had been stuffed out to bring it into form.

A few years ago, a small clockwork machine was brought over from France. It had a duck's head and legs attached, designed to mimic the appearance of the animal standing on one foot, stretching its leg, turning its head, opening and closing its bill, moving its wings, and shaking its tail; [Pg 72] all simple and straightforward movements. However, this poorly functioning machine, when exposed, looked incredibly complicated, messy, and unpleasant. Even covering it with a skin that closely fit its parts, like a real duck's, wouldn’t have improved its appearance much. At best, it resembled a bag of nails, broken hinges, and shoe parts, unless it had been otherwise stuffed to give it shape.

Thus again you see, the more variety we pretend to give to our trifling movements, the more confused and unornamental the forms become; nay chance but seldom helps them.—How much the reverse are nature's! the greater the variety her movements have, the more beautiful are the parts that cause them.

Thus again you see, the more variety we try to give to our trivial actions, the more confused and unappealing the forms become; indeed, chance rarely helps them. How much the opposite is true in nature! The greater the variety in her movements, the more beautiful the elements that create them.

The finny race of animals, as they have fewer motions than other creatures, so are their forms less remarkable for beauty. It is also to be noted of every species, that the handsomest of each move best: birds of a clumsy make seldom fly well, nor do lumpy fish glide so well through the water as those of a neater make; and beasts of the most elegant form, always excel in speed; of this, the horse and greyhound are beautiful examples: and even among themselves, the most elegantly made seldom fail of being the swiftest.

The fishy creatures, since they move less than other animals, are generally less striking in appearance. It's also worth noting that among each species, the most attractive ones tend to move the best: awkward birds rarely fly well, and clumpy fish don’t swim as smoothly as those with sleeker bodies; and animals with the most graceful shapes always excel in speed. The horse and greyhound are great examples of this. Even within their own groups, the elegantly built ones are usually the fastest.

The war-horse is more equally made for strength than the race-horse, which surplus of power in the[Pg 73] former, if suppos'd added to the latter, as it would throw more weight into improper parts for the business of mere speed, so of course it would lessen, in some degree, that admirable quality, and partly destroy that delicate fitness of his make; but then a quality in movement, superior to that of speed, would be given to him by the addition, as he would be render'd thereby more fit to move with ease in such varied, or graceful directions, as are so delightful to the eye in the carriage of the fine manag'd war-horse; and as at the same time, something stately and graceful would be added to his figure, which before could only be said to have an elegant neatness. This noble creature stands foremost among brutes; and it is but consistent with nature's propriety, that the most useful animal in the brute-creation, should be thus signalized also for the most beauty.

The war horse is built for strength more than the racehorse. If we were to add the extra power of the former to the latter, it would put too much weight in the wrong places for speed, which would naturally reduce that amazing quality and partly ruin the fine balance of its form. However, this addition would provide a quality of movement that surpasses just speed, making it more capable of moving easily in the varied and graceful directions that are so pleasing to see in a well-managed war horse. At the same time, it would add something majestic and graceful to its appearance, which could otherwise only be described as elegantly neat. This noble creature is at the top among animals, and it makes sense that the most useful animal in the animal kingdom should also be recognized for its beauty.

Yet, properly speaking, no living creatures are capable of moving in such truly varied and graceful directions, as the human species; and it would be needless to say how much superior in beauty their forms and textures likewise are. And surely also after what has been said relating to figure and motion, it is plain and evident that nature has thought fit to make beauty of proportion, and beauty of movement, necessary to each other: so that the observation before made on animals, will hold equally good with regard to man: i. e. that he who is most exquisitely well-proportion'd is most capable of exquisite movements, such as ease and grace in deportment, or in dancing.

Yet, to be precise, no living beings can move in such truly varied and graceful ways as humans can; and it's unnecessary to point out how much more beautiful their forms and textures are. Moreover, based on what has been said about shape and movement, it's clear that nature intended beauty of proportion and beauty of movement to be interdependent. Thus, the earlier observation made about animals applies equally to humans: that the person who is most perfectly proportioned is also the most capable of exquisite movements, such as ease and grace in behavior or in dancing.

It may be a sort of collateral confirmation of what has been said of this method of nature's working, as well as otherwise worth our notice, that when any parts belonging to the human body are conceal'd, and not immediately concern'd in movement, all such ornamental shapes, as evidently appear in the muscles and bones[6], are totally neglected as unnecessary, for nature doth nothing in vain! this is plainly the case of the intestines, none of them having the least beauty, as to form, except the heart; which noble part, and indeed kind of first mover, is a simple and well-varied figure; conformable to which, some of the most elegant Roman urns and vases have been fashion'd.

It might serve as a sort of confirmation of what has been said about how nature works, as well as being noteworthy in its own right, that when any parts of the human body are hidden and not actively involved in movement, all the decorative shapes that are clearly visible in the muscles and bones[6], are completely overlooked as unnecessary because nature doesn’t do anything on a whim! This is clearly true for the intestines, none of which have any beauty in terms of shape, except for the heart; which, as a noble part and indeed a kind of prime mover, has a simple yet varied shape; some of the most elegant Roman urns and vases have been designed based on this form.

[6] See Chapter IX on Compositions with the Serpentine-line.

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__ on Compositions with the Serpentine line.

Now, thus much being kept in remembrance, our next step will be to speak of, first, general measurements; such as the whole height of the body to its breadth, or the length of a limb to its thickness: and, secondly, of such appearances of dimensions as are too intricately varied to admit of a description by lines.

Now that we’ve kept this in mind, our next step will be to discuss, first, general measurements; like the overall height of the body compared to its width, or the length of a limb compared to its thickness: and, second, the aspects of dimensions that are too complex to be accurately described by lines.

The former will be confined to a very few straight lines, crossing each other, which will easily be understood by everyone; but the latter will require somewhat more attention, because it will extend to the precision of every modification, bound, or limit, of the human figure.

The former will be limited to just a few straight lines that cross each other, which will be easy for everyone to understand; but the latter will need a bit more focus, as it will cover the details of every change, boundary, or limit of the human figure.

To be somewhat more explicit. As to the first part, I shall begin with shewing what practicable sort of measuring[Pg 75] may be used in order to produce the most proper variety in the proportions of the parts of any body. I say, practicable, because the vast variety of intricately situated parts, belonging to the human form, will not admit of measuring the distances of one part by another, by lines or points, beyond a certain degree or number, without great perplexity in the operation itself, or confusion to the imagination. For instance, say, a line representing one breadth and an half of the wrist, would be equal to the true breadth of the thickest part of the arm above the elbow; may it not then be ask'd, what part of the wrist is meant? for if you place a pair of calipers a little nearer or further from the hand, the distance of the points will differ, and so they will if they are moved close to the wrist all round, because it is flatter one way than the other; but suppose, for argument sake, one certain diameter should be fix'd upon; may it not again be ask'd, how is it to be apply'd, if to the flattest side of the arm or the roundest, and how far from the elbow, and must it be when the arm is extended or when it is bent? for this also will make a sensible difference, because in the latter position, the muscle, call'd the biceps, in the front of that part of the arm, swells up like a ball one way, and narrows itself another; nay all the muscles shift their appearances in different movements, so that whatever may have been pretended by some authors, no exact mathematical measurements by lines, can be given for the true proportion of a human body.

To be more straightforward, regarding the first part, I’ll start by showing what kind of feasible measuring[Pg 75] can be used to create the most appropriate variety in the proportions of any body’s parts. I use the term feasible because the wide variety of complex parts that make up the human form makes it impossible to measure the distances between one part and another using lines or points beyond a certain degree or number, without causing significant confusion in the process or in our understanding. For example, if a line represents one and a half widths of the wrist, it would be equal to the actual width of the thickest part of the arm above the elbow. This raises the question: which part of the wrist are we referring to? If you place a pair of calipers slightly closer or further from the hand, the distance of the points will change, and the same goes if they are moved around the wrist because it is wider in one direction than the other. But let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that we fix on one specific diameter; we can then ask how it should be applied: to the flattest side of the arm or the roundest, and how far from the elbow it should be positioned, and whether it should be measured when the arm is extended or bent. This also makes a noticeable difference, because when the arm is bent, the muscle called the biceps on the front bulges out in one way while narrowing in another. In fact, all the muscles change their appearance with different movements, so whatever some authors may claim, precise mathematical measurements using lines cannot accurately represent the true proportions of a human body.

figs 68 and 55

It comes then to this, that no longer than whilst we suppose all the lengths and breadths of the body, or limbs, to be as regular figures as cylinders, or as the leg, figure 68 in plate I, which is as round as a rolling-stone, are the measures of lengths to breadths practicable, or of any use to the knowledge of proportion: so that as all mathematical schemes are foreign to this purpose, we will endeavour to root them quite out of our way: therefore I must not omit taking notice, that Albert Durer, Lomazzo, (see two tasteless figures taken from their books of proportion [Fig. 55 p. I]) and some others, have not only puzzled mankind with a heap of minute unnecessary divisions, but also with a strange notion that those divisions are govern'd by the laws of music; which mistake they seem to have been led into, by having seen certain uniform and consonant divisions upon one string produce harmony to the ear, and by persuading themselves, that similar distances in lines belonging to form, would, in like manner, delight the eye. The very reverse of which has been shewn to be true, in Chapter III, on Uniformity. "The length of the foot," say they, "in respect to the breadth, makes a double suprabipartient, a diapason, and a diatesseron[7]:" which, in my opinion, would have been full as applicable to the ear, or to a[Pg 77] plant, or to a tree, or any other form whatsoever; yet these sort of notions have so far prevail'd by time, that the words, harmony of parts, seem as applicable to form, as to music.

It comes down to this: as long as we think of all the lengths and widths of the body or limbs as simple shapes like cylinders, or like the leg in figure 68 on plate I, which is as round as a rolling stone, those length-to-width measurements are practical or useful for understanding proportion. Since all mathematical concepts are irrelevant to this topic, we will try to completely clear them from our path. Therefore, I must note that Albert Durer, Lomazzo (see two unappealing figures from their books on proportion [Fig. 55 p. I]), and some others not only confused people with a bunch of unnecessary details but also with a strange idea that those divisions are governed by the principles of music. They seem to have been misled by observing that certain uniform and harmonious divisions on a string create pleasing sounds, and by convincing themselves that similar distances in lines related to form would, in the same way, please the eye. The opposite has been shown to be true, in Chapter III, on Uniformity. "The length of the foot," they say, "in relation to the width, creates a double suprabipartient, a diapason, and a diatesseron[7]:" which, in my view, could just as easily apply to the ear, or to a plant, or to a tree, or any other form at all; yet these kinds of ideas have prevailed over time so much that the terms harmony of parts seem as relevant to form as they do to music.

[7] Note, these authors assure you, that this curious method of measuring, will produce beauty far beyond any nature doth afford. Lomazzo, recommends also another scheme, with a triangle, to correct the poverty of nature, as they express themselves. These nature-menders put one in mind of Gulliver's tailor at Laputa, who, having taken measure of him for a suit of clothes, with a rule, quadrant, and compasses, after a considerable time spent, brought them home ill-made.

[7] Note, these authors assure us that this unique method of measurement, will create beauty far beyond what nature offers. Lomazzo also suggests another approach using a triangle to fix the limitations of nature, as they put it. These nature-fixers remind one of Gulliver's tailor at Laputa, who, after measuring him for a suit of clothes with a ruler, quadrant, and compass, ended up bringing back a poorly made outfit after spending a lot of time on it.

Notwithstanding the absurdity of the above schemes, such measures as are to be taken from antique statues, may be of some service to painters and sculptors, especially to young beginners, but nothing nigh of such use to them, as the measures, taken the same way, from ancient buildings, have been, and are, to architects and builders; because the latter have to do with little else but plain geometrical figures: which measures, however, serve only in copying what has been done before.

Despite the ridiculousness of the above plans, taking measurements from ancient statues can be somewhat helpful for painters and sculptors, especially for beginners. However, these measurements are nowhere near as useful as those taken from ancient buildings for architects and builders. This is because architects and builders mainly deal with simple geometric shapes. However, these measurements only assist in replicating what has already been created.

The few measures I shall speak of, for the setting out the general dimensions of a figure, shall be taken by straight lines only, for the more easy conception of what may indeed be properly call'd, gaging the contents of the body, supposing it solid like a marble statue, as the wires were described to do [Fig. 2 p. I] in the introduction: by which plain method, clear ideas may be acquir'd of what alone seem to me to require measuring, of what certain lengths to what breadths make the most eligible proportions in general.

The few methods I'll discuss for outlining the general dimensions of a shape will use only straight lines, making it easier to understand what can truly be called gaging the contents of the body, assuming it’s solid like a marble statue, as described by the wires in the introduction [Fig. 2 p. I]: with this straightforward approach, clear ideas can be gained about what only seems necessary to measure, which specific lengths in relation to widths create the best overall proportions.

2

The most general dimensions of a body, or limbs, are lengths, breadths, or thicknesses: now the whole[Pg 78] gentility of a figure, according to its character, depends upon the first proportioning these lines or wires (which are its measures) properly one to another; and the more varied these lines are, with respect to each other, the more may the future divisions be varied likewise, that are to be made on them; and of course the less varied these lines are, the parts influenced by them, as they must conform themselves to them, must have less variety too. For example, the exact cross [Fig. 69 R p. II] of two equal lines, cutting each other in the middle, would confine the figure of a man, drawn conformable to them, to the disagreeable character of his being as broad as he is long. And the two lines crossing each other, to make the height and breadth of a figure, will want variety a contrary way, by one line being very short in proportion to the other, and therefore, also incapable of producing a figure of tolerable variety. To prove this, it will be very easy for the reader to make the experiment, by drawing a figure or two (tho' ever so imperfectly) confin'd within such limits.

The main dimensions of a body or limbs are lengths, widths, or thicknesses. The overall elegance of a figure, based on its character, relies on how these measurements (which are its proportions) relate to each other. The more varied these measurements are in relation to one another, the more diverse the future divisions can be as well; conversely, the less varied these measurements are, the less diversity the parts influenced by them will have, as they must conform to these measurements. For instance, the exact intersection of two equal lines, cutting through each other at the midpoint, would limit the figure of a person drawn according to them to the awkward characteristic of being as wide as they are long. Additionally, if two lines cross to define the height and width of a figure, one line needs to be much shorter than the other to allow for more variety, otherwise, it won't create a figure with acceptable diversity. The reader can easily verify this by attempting to draw one or two figures (even imperfectly) confined within such boundaries.

69

There is a medium between these, proper for every character, which the eye will easily and accurately determine.

There’s a balance between these that suits every character, which the eye can easily and accurately discern.

70

Thus, if the lines, fig. [70 R p. II], were to be the measure of the extreme length and breadth, set out either for the figure of a man or a vase, the eye soon sees the longest of these is not quite sufficiently so, in proportion to the other, for a genteel man; and yet it would make a vase[Pg 79] too taper to be elegant; no rule or compasses would decide this matter either so quickly or so precisely as a good eye. It may be observed, that minute differences in great lengths, are of little or no consequence as to proportion, because they are not to be discerned; for a man is half an inch shorter when he goes to bed at night, than when he rises in the morning, without the possibility of its being perceived. In case of a wager the application of a rule or compasses may be necessary, but seldom on any other occasion.

Thus, if the lines, fig. [70 R p. II], were to represent the maximum length and width, whether for the shape of a man or a vase, the eye quickly realizes that the longest of these isn't quite right in proportion to the other for a stylish man; and yet it would make a vase too narrow to be elegant. No rule or compass can determine this as quickly or accurately as a good eye can. It's worth noting that small differences in large measurements don't really affect proportion because they aren't noticeable; for example, a man is half an inch shorter when he goes to bed at night than when he gets up in the morning, and no one can see that. In the case of a bet, using a rule or compass might be necessary, but rarely otherwise.

Thus much I apprehend is sufficient for the consideration of general lengths to breadths. Where, by the way, I apprehend I have plainly shewn, that there is no practicable rule, by lines, for minutely setting out proportions for the human body, and if there were, the eye alone must determine us in our choice of what is most pleasing to itself.

I think this is enough to consider the general lengths in relation to widths. By the way, I believe I've clearly shown that there isn't a practical rule, using lines, for precisely defining proportions for the human body. Even if there were, it would be the eye alone that determines what is most visually pleasing to it.

Thus having dispatch'd general dimension, which we may say is almost as much of proportion, as is to be seen when we have our cloaths on: I shall in the second, and more extensive method proposed for considering it, set out in the familiar path of common observation, and appeal as I go on to our usual feeling, or joint-sensation, of figure and motion.

Thus having covered the general dimensions, which we can say is almost as much about proportion as what we see when we wear our clothes: I will, in the second and broader approach I've suggested for considering it, lay out in the familiar way of common observation and reference our usual feelings or shared sensations of shape and movement.

Perhaps by mentioning two or three known instances it will be found that almost every one is farther advanced in the knowledge of this speculative part of proportion than he imagines; especially he who hath been used to observe[Pg 80] naked figures doing bodily exercise, and more especially if he be any way interested in the success of them; and the better he is acquainted with the nature of the exercise itself, still the better judge he becomes of the figure that is to perform it. For this reason, no sooner are two boxers stript to fight, but even a butcher, thus skill'd, shews himself a considerable critic in proportion; and on this sort of judgment, often gives, or takes the odds, at bare sight only of the combatants. I have heard a blacksmith harangue like an anatomist, or sculptor, on the beauty of a boxer's figure, tho' not perhaps in the same terms; and I firmly believe, that one of our common proficients in the athletic art, would be able to instruct and direct the best sculptor living, (who hath not seen, or is wholly ignorant of this exercise) in what would give the statue of an English-boxer, a much better proportion, as to character, than is to be seen, even in the famous group of antique boxers, (or as some call them, Roman wrestlers) so much admired to this day.

Maybe by mentioning two or three known examples, it will become clear that almost everyone has a better understanding of this theoretical aspect of proportion than they think; especially those who have observed unclothed figures engaging in physical activities, and even more so if they have any interest in their success. The more familiar someone is with the nature of the exercise itself, the better they can judge the figure that performs it. For this reason, as soon as two boxers strip down to fight, even a butcher, with this knowledge, reveals himself as a significant critic of proportion; and based on this kind of judgment, he often gives or takes bets just by looking at the fighters. I've heard a blacksmith speak like an expert anatomist or sculptor about the beauty of a boxer's physique, though perhaps not in the same terms; and I strongly believe that one of our regular practitioners of the athletic art could teach and guide the best sculptor alive (who hasn't seen or is completely ignorant of this exercise) on how to create a statue of an English boxer that has much better proportion and character than what can be seen, even in the famous group of ancient boxers (or as some call them, Roman wrestlers), which is still admired today.

Indeed, as many parts of the body are so constantly kept cover'd, the proportion of the whole cannot be equally known; but as stockings are so close and thin a covering, every one judges of the different shapes and proportions of legs with great accuracy. The ladies always speak skilfully of necks, hands, and arms; and often will point out such particular beauties or defects in their make, as might easily escape the observation of a man of science.

Indeed, since many parts of the body are usually covered up, the overall proportions aren’t always clear. However, because stockings are such a tight and thin layer, people can easily judge the different shapes and sizes of legs with great precision. Women often discuss necks, hands, and arms with expertise, and they frequently highlight specific beauties or flaws in their appearances that might easily be overlooked by a trained observer.

Surely, such determinations could not be made and pronounced with such critical truth, if the eye were not capable of measuring or judging of thicknesses by lengths, with great preciseness. Nay more, in order to determine so nicely as they often do, it must also at the same time, trace with some skill those delicate windings upon the surface which have been described in page 64 and 65, which altogether may be observ'd to include the two general ideas mention'd at the beginning of this chapter.

Surely, such conclusions couldn’t be made and stated with such critical accuracy if the eye weren't able to measure or assess thicknesses based on lengths, with great precision. Furthermore, to determine things as accurately as they often do, it must also, at the same time, skillfully follow those delicate patterns on the surface that have been described in page 64 and 65, which together include the two general concepts mentioned at the beginning of this chapter.

If so, certainly it is in the power of a man of science, with as observing an eye, to go still further, and conceive, with a very little turn of thought, many other necessary circumstances concerning proportion, as of what size and in what manner the bones help to make up the bulk, and support the other parts; as well as what certain weights or dimensions of muscles are proper (according to the principle of the steelyard) to move such or such a length of arm with this or that degree of swiftness or force.

If that's the case, then a scientist, with a keen eye for detail, certainly has the ability to dive deeper and come up with many other essential factors regarding proportion. This includes understanding how the size and arrangement of bones contribute to the overall structure and support of other body parts, as well as determining the appropriate weights or sizes of muscles needed (based on the principle of the steelyard) to move an arm of a certain length with specific speed or strength.

But though much of this matter, may be easily understood by common observation, assisted by science, still I fear it will be difficult to raise a very clear idea of what constitutes, or composes the utmost beauty of proportion; such as is seen in the Antinous; which is allowed to be the most perfect in this respect, of any of the antique statues; and tho' the lovely likewise seems to have been as much the sculptor's aim, as in the Venus;[Pg 82] yet a manly strength in its proportion is equally express'd from head to foot in it.

But even though a lot of this can be easily understood through common observation, supported by science, I still worry that it will be challenging to form a clear idea of what makes up the utmost beauty of proportion; like what we see in the Antinous, which is considered the most perfect in this regard among all the ancient statues. And while the beauty of it seems to have been as much the sculptor's goal as it was with the Venus;[Pg 82] there is also a strong masculinity in its proportions that is evident from head to toe.

6

Let us try, however, and as this master-piece of art is so well known, we will set it up before us as a pattern, and endeavour to fabricate, or put together in the mind, such kind of parts as shall seem to build another figure like it. In doing which, we shall soon find that it is chiefly to be effected by means of the nice sensation we naturally have of what certain quantities or dimensions of parts, are fittest to produce the utmost strength for moving, or supporting great weights; and of what are most fit for the utmost light agility, as also for every degree, between these two extremes.

Let’s try this: since this masterpiece of art is so well known, let’s use it as a model and work on creating or piecing together in our minds similar parts that can form another figure like it. While doing this, we’ll quickly realize that it's mainly achieved through our natural sensitivity to what specific sizes or dimensions are best for providing maximum strength for moving or supporting heavy weights, as well as what is best for light agility, including everything in between these two extremes.

He who hath best perfected his ideas of these matters by common observations, and by the assistance of arts relative thereto, will probably be most precisely just and clear, in conceiving the application of the various parts and dimensions, that will occur to him, in the following descriptive manner of disposing of them, in order to form the idea of a fine-proportion'd figure.

The person who has best refined their understanding of these topics through common observations and related arts will likely be the most accurate and clear in imagining how to apply the different parts and dimensions that will come to mind in the following detailed explanation of how to organize them to create the idea of a well-proportioned figure.

Having set up the Antinous as our pattern, we will suppose there were placed on one side of it, the unwieldy elephant-like figure of an Atlas, made up of such thick bones and muscles, as would best fit him for supporting a vast weight, according to his character of[Pg 83] extreme heavy strength. And, on the other side, imagine the slim figure of a Mercury, every where neatly formed for the utmost light agility, with slender bones and taper muscles fit for his nimble bounding from the ground.—Both these figures must be supposed of equal height, and not exceeding six foot[8].

Having established the Antinous as our model, let's imagine on one side the bulky, elephant-like form of Atlas, built with thick bones and muscles suited for carrying immense weight, in line with his character of extreme strength. On the other side, picture the slender figure of Mercury, perfectly crafted for maximum lightness and agility, with slim bones and tapered muscles made for swift movement from the ground. Both figures should be assumed to be the same height, not exceeding six feet.

[8] If the scale of either of these proportions were to exceed six foot in the life, the quality of strength in one, and agility in the other, would gradually decrease, the larger the person grew. There are sufficient proofs of this, both from mechanical reasonings and common observation.

[8] If either of these proportions were to exceed six feet in real life, the strength of one and agility of the other would slowly decline as the person got bigger. There are plenty of examples of this, both from logical reasoning and everyday observation.

Our extremes thus placed, now imagine the Atlas throwing off by degrees, certain portions of bone and muscle, proper for the attainment of light agility, as if aiming at the Mercury's airy form and quality, whilst on the other hand, see the Mercury augmenting his taper figure by equal degrees, and growing towards an Atlas in equal time, by receiving to the like places from whence they came, the very quantities that the other had been casting off, when, as they approach each other in weight, their forms of course may be imagined to grow more and more alike, till at a certain point of time, they meet in just similitude; which being an exact medium between the two extremes, we may thence conclude it to be the precise form of exact proportion, fittest for perfect active strength or graceful movement; such as the Antinous we proposed to imitate and figure in the mind[9].

Our extremes established, now picture Atlas gradually shedding some bone and muscle, aiming for a lighter, more agile form like Mercury's airy figure and qualities. Meanwhile, see Mercury enhancing his slender shape by the same increments, growing into an Atlas over the same period, taking back from where he originally came the exact amounts that Atlas had been shedding. As they draw closer in weight, we can imagine their shapes becoming more alike until, at a certain point in time, they meet in perfect similarity. This shared point represents the exact medium between the two extremes, and we can conclude it's the ideal form of proportion, best suited for perfect strength or graceful movement, like the Antinous we planned to emulate and visualize in our minds[9].

[9] The jocky who knows to an ounce what flesh or bone in a horse is fittest for speed or strength, will as easily conceive the like process between the strongest dray-horse and the fleetest racer, and soon conclude, that the fine war-horse must be the medium between the two extremes.

[9] The trainer who knows exactly what parts of a horse are best for speed or strength will easily understand the same balance between the strongest draft horse and the fastest racer, and will quickly conclude that the ideal warhorse must be the perfect blend between the two extremes.

I am apprehensive that this part of my scheme, for explaining exact proportion, may not be thought so[Pg 84] sufficiently determinate as could be wished: be this as it will, I must submit it to the reader, as my best resource in so difficult a case: and shall therefore beg leave to try to illustrate it a little more, by observing, that, in like manner, any two opposite colours in the rainbow, form a third between them, by thus imparting to each other their peculiar qualities; as for example, the brightest yellow, and the lively blue that is placed at some distance from it, visibly approach, and blend by interchangable degrees, and, as above, temper rather than destroy each other's vigour, till they meet in one firm compound; whence, at a certain point, the sight of what they were originally, is quite lost; but in their stead, a most pleasing green is found, which colour nature hath chose for the vestment of the earth, and with the beauty of which the eye is never tired.

I’m worried that this part of my plan to explain exact proportion might not be as clear as I’d like it to be. Still, I have to present it to the reader as my best effort in such a challenging situation. So, I’d like to clarify it a bit more by pointing out that, similarly, any two opposite colors in the rainbow create a third color between them by sharing their unique qualities. For instance, the brightest yellow and the vibrant blue that’s a bit farther away visibly come closer together and mix gradually. They temper each other's intensity instead of overpowering it until they form a solid combination. At a certain point, you can no longer see what they originally were; instead, a lovely green emerges, which nature has chosen as the color of the earth, and the eye never tires of its beauty.

From the order of the ideas which the description of the above three figures may have raised in the mind, we may easily compose between them, various other proportions. And as the painter, by means of a certain order in the arrangement of the colours upon his pallet, readily mixes up what kind of tint he pleases, so may we mix up and compound in the imagination such fit parts as will be consistent with this or that particular character, or at least be able thereby to discover how such characters are composed, when we see them either in art or nature.

From the way the descriptions of the three figures might have influenced our thinking, we can easily create different proportions between them. Just like a painter can mix different colors on their palette to create any shade they want, we can combine and imagine elements that fit specific characters, or at the very least, figure out how those characters are made when we see them in art or nature.

But perhaps even the word character, as it relates to form, may not be quite understood by every one, tho' it is so frequently used: nor do I remember to have seen it explained any where. Therefore on this account—and also as it will further shew the use of thinking of form and motion together, it will not be improper to observe,—that notwithstanding a character, in this sense, chiefly depends on a figure being remarkable as to its form, either in some particular part, or altogether; yet surely no figure, be it ever so singular, can be perfectly conceived as a character, till we find it connected with some remarkable circumstance or cause, for such particularity of appearance; for instance, a fat bloted person doth not call to mind the character of a Silenus, till we have joined the idea of voluptuousness with it; so likewise strength to support, and clumsiness of figure, are united, as well in the character of an Atlas as in a porter.

But maybe even the word character, as it relates to form, isn't fully understood by everyone, even though it's used so often: and I don't recall seeing it explained anywhere. So, for this reason—and also because it will help demonstrate the value of thinking about form and motion together—it makes sense to point out that even though a character, in this sense, mainly relies on a figure being notable for its shape, either in a specific part or as a whole, no figure, no matter how unique, can be fully understood as a character until we associate it with some notable circumstance or cause for its particular appearance. For example, a fat, bloated person doesn’t evoke the character of a Silenus until we connect it to the idea of indulgence; similarly, strength and a clumsy figure are linked in both the character of an Atlas and a porter.

When we consider the great weight chairmen often have to carry, do we not readily consent that there is a propriety and fitness in the tuscan order of their legs, by which they properly become characters as to figure?

When we think about the heavy responsibilities that chairmen often have to bear, do we not agree that there is a sense of appropriateness and suitability in the Tuscan style of their legs, which makes them fitting as characters in terms of appearance?

Watermen too, are of a distinct cast, or character, whose legs are no less remarkable for their smallness: for as there is naturally the greatest call for nutriment to the parts that are most exercised, so of course these that lye so much stretched out, are apt to dwindle, or not grow to their full size. There is scarcely a waterman[Pg 86] that rows upon the Thames, whose figure doth not confirm this observation. Therefore were I to paint the character of a Charon, I would thus distinguish his make from that of a common man's; and, in spite of the word low, venture to give him a broad pair of shoulders, and spindle shanks, whether I had the authority of an antique statue, or basso-relievo, for it or not.

Watermen are also a unique group, characterized by their notably small legs. Since the parts of the body that get the most exercise naturally require the most nourishment, those legs that are often stretched out tend to shrink or not reach their full size. There’s hardly a waterman[Pg 86] who rows on the Thames whose figure doesn't support this observation. So, if I were to paint a picture of a Charon, I would highlight his physique differently from an average man’s; and, despite the term low, I’d give him broad shoulders and skinny legs, whether or not I had the backing of an ancient statue or relief for it.

May be, I cannot throw a stronger light on what has been hitherto said of proportion, than by animadverting on a remarkable beauty in the Apollo-belvedere; which hath given it the preference even to the Antinous: I mean a super-addition of greatness, to at least as much beauty and grace, as is found in the latter.

I might not be able to shed more light on what has been said about proportion than by pointing out a remarkable beauty in the Apollo Belvedere, which has made it preferred over the Antinous. I'm referring to an added sense of grandeur, along with at least as much beauty and grace as is seen in the latter.

These two master-pieces of art, are seen together in the same palace at Rome, where the Antinous fills the spectator with admiration only, whilst the Apollo strikes him with surprise, and, as travellers express themselves, with an appearance of something more than human; which they of course are always at a loss to describe: and this effect, they say, is the more astonishing, as upon examination its disproportion is evident even to a common eye. One of the best sculptors we have in England, who lately went to see them, confirm'd to me what has been now said, particularly as to the legs and thighs being too long, and too large for the upper parts. And Andrea Sacchi, one of the great Italian painters, seems to have been of the same opinion, or he would hardly have given his Apollo, crowning Pasquilini[Pg 87] the musician, the exact proportion of the Antinous, (in a famous picture of his now in England) as otherwise it seems to be a direct copy from the Apollo.

These two masterpieces of art are displayed together in the same palace in Rome, where the Antinous evokes pure admiration from viewers, while the Apollo amazes them and, as travelers often say, has an appearance of something more than human; which they are of course always at a loss to describe. They claim this effect is even more surprising because, upon closer inspection, its disproportion is clear even to the casual observer. One of the best sculptors in England, who recently went to see them, confirmed what has been mentioned, especially regarding the legs and thighs being too long and too large compared to the upper body. Andrea Sacchi, one of the great Italian painters, seems to share this view, or he wouldn’t have given his Apollo, crowning Pasquilini[Pg 87] the musician, the exact proportions of the Antinous (in a famous painting of his currently in England), as it otherwise appears to be a direct copy of the Apollo.

Although in very great works we often see an inferior part neglected, yet here it cannot be the case, because in a fine statue, just proportion is one of its essential beauties: therefore it stands to reason, that these limbs must have been lengthened on purpose, otherwise it might easily have been avoided.

Although in truly great works we often notice that a minor part is overlooked, that can't be the case here, because in a beautiful statue, proper proportions are one of its key beauties. So, it makes sense that these limbs must have been intentionally lengthened; otherwise, it would have been easy to avoid.

So that if we examine the beauties of this figure thoroughly, we may reasonably conclude, that what has been hitherto thought so unaccountably excellent in its general appearance, hath been owing to what hath seem'd a blemish in a part of it: but let us endeavour to make this matter as clear as possible, as it may add more force to what has been said.

So if we take a close look at the beauty of this figure, we can reasonably conclude that what has previously been seen as so unexplainably excellent in its overall look has actually come from what seemed to be a blemish in one part of it. But let's try to clarify this as much as we can, as it may strengthen what has already been said.

Statues by being bigger than life, (as this is one, and larger than the Antinous) always gain some nobleness in effect, according to the principle of quantity[10] but this alone is not sufficient to give what is properly to be called, greatness in proportion; for were figures 17 and 18, in plate I, to be drawn or carved by a scale of ten feet high, they would still be but pigmy proportions, as, on the other hand, a figure of but two inches, may represent a gigantic height.

Statues, by being larger than life (like this one, which is even bigger than the Antinous), always come across as more noble because of their size. However, that alone isn't enough to achieve what we can truly call greatness in proportion. For example, if figures 17 and 18 from plate I were created at a scale of ten feet tall, they would still appear to be small. Conversely, a figure just two inches high could still represent something of enormous size.

17 18

__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ See __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_1__.

Therefore greatness of proportion must be considered, as depending on the application of quantity to those parts of the body where it can give more scope to its[Pg 88] grace in movement, as to the neck for the larger and swan-like turns of the head, and to the legs and thighs, for the more ample sway of all the upper parts together.

Therefore, the importance of proportion must be taken into account, as it relies on how quantity is applied to the body parts where it can enhance the[Pg 88] elegance of movement, like the neck for the larger, swan-like movements of the head, and the legs and thighs for the more pronounced movement of all the upper body together.

By which we find that the Antinous's being equally magnified to the Apollo's height, would not sufficiently produce that superiority of effect, as to greatness, so evidently seen in the latter. The additions necessary to the production of this greatness in proportion, as it there appears added to grace, must then be, by the proper application of them, to the parts mention'd only.

By this, we discover that Antinous being raised to the same level as Apollo wouldn't create the same impressive effect that's clearly seen in the latter. The extra elements needed to achieve this greatness in proportion, as it is added to grace, must therefore be applied correctly to the mentioned parts only.

I know not how further to prove this matter than by appealing to the reader's eye, and common observation, as before.

I don't know how else to prove this point other than by appealing to the reader's perspective and common observation, as I mentioned earlier.

The Antinous being allowed to have the justest proportion possible, let us see what addition, upon the principle of quantity, can be made to it, without taking away any of its beauty.

The Antinous being allowed to have the fairest proportion possible, let's see what addition, based on quantity, can be made to it without detracting from its beauty.

If we imagine an addition of dimensions to the head, we shall immediately conceive it would only deform—if to the hands or feet, we are sensible of something gross and ungenteel,—if to the whole lengths of the arms, we feel they would be dangling and aukward—if by an addition of length or breadth to the body, we know it would appear heavy and clumsy—there remains then only the neck, with the legs and thighs to speak of; but, to these we find, that not only certain additions may be admitted without causing any disagreeable effect,[Pg 89] but that thereby greatness, the last perfection as to proportion, is given to the human form; as is evidently express'd in the Apollo: and may still be further confirmed by examining the drawings of Parmigiano, where these particulars are seen in excess; yet on this account his works are said, by all true connoisseurs, to have an inexpressible greatness of taste in them, though otherwise very incorrect.

If we think about adding dimensions to the head, we can easily see it would just become deformed—if we do the same with the hands or feet, we notice something bulky and unattractive—if we extend the length of the arms, they would just look awkward and dangling—if we add length or width to the body, it would appear heavy and clumsy—so that leaves only the neck, along with the legs and thighs to consider; here, we find that certain additions can actually enhance the appearance without any negative effects,[Pg 89] and they can even give the human form a sense of greatness, the ultimate perfection in proportion, as clearly shown in the Apollo statue. This is further supported by looking at Parmigiano's drawings, where these features are exaggerated; yet, for this reason, true connoisseurs say his works possess an indescribable greatness of style, despite being otherwise quite inaccurate.

Let us now return to the two general ideas we set out with at the beginning of this chapter, and recollect that under the first, on surface, I have shewn in what manner, and how far human proportion is measureable, by varying the contents of the body, conformable to the given proportion of two lines. And that under the second and more extensive general idea of form, as arising from fitness for movement, &c. I have endeavour'd to explain, by every means I could devise, that every particular and minute dimension of the body, should conform to such purposes of movement, &c. as have been first properly considered and determined: on which conjunctively, the true proportion of every character must depend; and is found so to do, by our joint-sensation of bulk and motion. Which account of the proportion of the human body, however imperfect, may possibly stand its ground, till one more plausible shall be given.

Let’s go back to the two main ideas we started with at the beginning of this chapter. First, I've shown how human proportions can be measured by changing the body’s dimensions according to the set ratio of two lines. Second, under the broader idea of form related to movement and so on, I’ve tried to explain, using all the methods I could think of, that every specific and tiny measurement of the body should align with the intended purposes of movement and other related functions that have been properly considered and established. The true proportion of every characteristic must rely on these factors, and we experience this through our combined perception of size and motion. Although this explanation of human body proportions might not be perfect, it could hold up until a better one comes along.

As the Apollo [Fig. 12 p. I] has been only mention'd on account of the greatness of its proportion, I think in justice to so fine a performance; and also as it is not foreign to[Pg 90] the point we have been upon, we may subjoin an Observation or two on its perfections.

As the Apollo [Fig. 12 p. I] has only been mentioned due to its impressive size, I believe it's only fair to acknowledge such a remarkable piece. Additionally, since it relates to[Pg 90] the topic we've been discussing, we can add a remark or two about its qualities.

12

Besides, what is commonly allow'd, if we consider it by the rules here given for constituting or composing character, it will discover the author's great sagacity, in choosing a proportion for this deity, which has served two noble purposes at once; in that these very dimensions which appear to have given it so much dignity, are the same that are best fitted to produce the utmost speed. And what could characterise the god of day, either so strongly or elegantly, to be expressive in a statue, as superior swiftness, and beauty dignify'd? and how poetically doth the action it is put into, carry on the allusion to speed,[11] as he is lightly stepping forward, and seeming to shoot his arrows from him; if the arrows may be allowed to signify the sun's rays? This at least may as well be supposed as the common surmise, that he is killing the dragon, Python; which certainly is very inconsistent with so erect an attitude, and benign an aspect[12].

Besides, what is generally accepted, if we look at it through the rules given here for creating or defining character, will reveal the author's great insight in choosing a proportion for this deity that has served two noble purposes at once; these very dimensions that seem to give it so much dignity are also the ones best suited to achieve maximum speed. And what could define the god of day, either more powerfully or elegantly, in a statue, than superior swiftness and dignified beauty? How poetically does the action it is engaged in enhance the allusion to speed, as he lightly steps forward and seems to shoot his arrows away; if we can interpret the arrows as representing the sun's rays? This can be just as reasonably assumed as the common belief that he is slaying the dragon, Python; which certainly contradicts such an upright posture and kind expression.

[11]——the sun: which cometh forth as a bridegroom out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a giant to run his course. Psalm xix. 5.

[11]——the sun: which comes out like a bridegroom from his room, and is happy like a champion ready to run his race. Psalm xix. 5.

[12] The accounts given, in relation to this statue, make it so highly probable that it was the great Apollo of Delphos, that, for my own part, I make no manner of doubt of its being so.

[12] The stories told about this statue make it very likely that it is the great Apollo of Delphi, so for my part, I have no doubt that it is indeed him.

Nor are the inferior parts neglected: the drapery also that depends from his shoulders, and folds over his extended arm, hath its treble office. As first, it assists in keeping the general appearance within the boundary of a pyramid, which being inverted, is, for a single figure,[Pg 91] rather more natural and genteel than one upon its basis. Secondly, it fills up the vacant angle under the arm, and takes off the straightness of the lines the arm necessarily makes with the body in such an action; and, lastly, spreading as it doth, in pleasing folds, it helps to satisfy the eye with a noble quantity in the composition altogether, without depriving the beholder of any part of the beauties of the naked: in short, this figure might serve, were a lecture to be read over it, to exemplify every principle that hath been hitherto advanced. We shall therefore close not only all we have to say on proportion with it, but our whole lineal account of form, except what we have particularly to offer as to the face; which it will be proper to defer, till we have spoken of light and shade and colour.

The lower parts aren't overlooked either: the drapery hanging from his shoulders and cascading over his extended arm serves three purposes. First, it helps maintain the overall appearance within the shape of an inverted pyramid, which, for a single figure, looks more natural and elegant than one based on a regular pyramid. Second, it fills in the empty space under the arm and softens the straight lines formed between the arm and the body in this pose. Lastly, by spreading in attractive folds, it adds a rich visual element to the composition without hiding any of the beauty of the figure itself. In short, this figure could be used to illustrate every principle we've discussed so far, should someone give a lecture on it. Therefore, we'll conclude our discussion on proportion here, as well as our entire linear analysis of form, except for what we specifically want to address regarding the face; we’ll save that until after we talk about light, shade, and colour.

As some of the ancient statues have been of such singular use to me, I shall beg leave to conclude this chapter with an observation or two on them in general.

As some of the ancient statues have been so helpful to me, I’d like to end this chapter with a few observations about them in general.

It is allowed by the most skilful in the imitative arts, that tho' there are many of the remains of antiquity, that have great excellencies about them; yet there are not, moderately speaking, above twenty that may be justly called capital. There is one reason, nevertheless, besides the blind veneration that generally is paid to antiquity, for holding even many very imperfect pieces in some degree of estimation: I mean that peculiar taste of elegance which so visibly runs through them all, down to the most incorrect of their basso-relievos:[Pg 92] which taste, I am persuaded, my reader will now conceive to have been entirely owing to the perfect knowledge the ancients must have had of the use of the precise serpentine-line.

It’s recognized by the most skilled in the arts of imitation that, although there are many remnants from ancient times that have significant qualities, there are not, in moderate terms, more than twenty that can truly be called masterpieces. There is one reason, however, aside from the blind admiration that people generally have for antiquity, for valuing even many very flawed works to some extent: I’m referring to that particular taste for elegance which is clearly present in all of them, even in the most imperfect of their bas-reliefs:[Pg 92] which taste, I believe, my reader will now understand to have been entirely due to the ancients’ perfect grasp of how to use the precise serpentine line.

But this cause of elegance not having been since sufficiently understood, no wonder such effects should have appear'd mysterious, and have drawn mankind into a sort of religious esteem, and even bigotry, to the works of antiquity.

But since this reason for elegance hasn’t been fully understood, it’s no surprise that such effects seemed mysterious and led people to have a kind of religious reverence, even bigotry, towards the works of the past.

Nor have there been wanting of artful people, who have made good profit of those whose unbounded admiration hath run them into enthusiasm. Nay there are, I believe, some who still carry on a comfortable trade in such originals as have been so defaced and maimed by time, that it would be impossible, without a pair of double-ground connoisseur-spectacles, to see whether they have ever been good or bad: they deal also in cook'd-up copies, which they are very apt to put off for originals. And whoever dares be bold enough to detect such impositions, finds himself immediately branded, and given out as one of low ideas, ignorant of the true sublime, self-conceited, envious, &c.

There have also been clever people who have profited off those whose limitless admiration has driven them to enthusiasm. In fact, I believe there are still some who comfortably trade in originals that have been so damaged and worn by time that it's impossible, without a pair of double-ground connoisseur glasses, to tell if they were ever good or bad. They also sell made-up copies, which they are very likely to pass off as originals. And whoever is bold enough to expose such frauds quickly finds themselves labeled as someone with low standards, ignorant of true greatness, self-satisfied, envious, etc.

But as there are a great part of mankind that delight most in what they least understand; for ought I know, the emolument may be equal between the bubler and the bubled: at least this seems to have been Butler's opinion:

But since many people enjoy what they understand the least; for all I know, the benefits could be similar between the bubler and the bubled: at least this appears to have been Butler's opinion:

Doubtless the pleasure is as great
In being cheated, as to cheat.

There’s no doubt that the thrill of being deceived is just as intense as the thrill of deceiving.


CHAPTER XII.

Of Light and Shade, and the manner in which objects are explained to the eye by them.

Although both this and the next chapter may seem more particularly relative to the art of painting, than any of the foregoing; yet, as hitherto, I have endeavour'd to be understood by every reader, so here also I shall avoid, as much as the subject will permit, speaking of what would only be well-conceived by painters.

Although both this chapter and the next may seem more focused on the art of painting than the previous ones, I’ve tried to make myself clear for all readers. So here, I’ll also avoid discussing things that would only make sense to painters, as much as the topic allows.

There is such a subtile variety in the nature of appearances, that probably we shall not be able to gain much ground by this enquiry, unless we exert and apply the full use of every sense, that will convey to us any information concerning them.

There is such a subtle variety in the nature of appearances that we probably won't be able to get very far with this inquiry unless we fully use every sense that can give us any information about them.

So far as we have already gone, the sense of feeling, as well as that of seeing, hath been apply'd to; so that perhaps a man born blind, may, by his better touch than is common to those who have their sight, together with the regular process that has been here given of lines, so feel out the nature of forms, as to make a tolerable judgment of what is beautiful to sight.

So far, we've discussed the sense of touch along with sight, so it’s possible that a person born blind might, through a more refined sense of touch than those who can see, along with the method we've described for understanding shapes, be able to feel the nature of forms and make a decent judgment about what is visually beautiful.

Here again our other senses must assist us, notwithstanding in this chapter we shall be more confined to what is communicated to the eye by rays of light; and tho' things must now be consider'd as appearances only;[Pg 94] produced and made out merely by means of lights, shades, and colours.

Here, our other senses need to help us again, but in this chapter, we'll focus more on what we see through light rays. Even though we have to think of things as just appearances, they are created and understood solely through light, shadows, and colors.[Pg 94]

By the various circumstances of which, every one knows we have represented on the flat surface of the looking-glass, pictures equal to the originals reflected by it. The painter too, by proper dispositions of lights, shades, and colours, on his canvas, will raise the like ideas. Even prints, by means of lights and shades alone, will perfectly inform the eye of every shape and distance whatsoever, in which even lines must be consider'd as narrow parts of shade, a number of them, drawn or engrav'd neatly side by side, called hatching, serve as shades in prints, and when they are artfully managed, are a kind of pleasing succedaneum to the delicacy of nature's.

Through various circumstances, as everyone knows, we've depicted on the flat surface of a mirror images that are equal to the original reflections. Similarly, a painter, through careful arrangements of light, shadow, and color on their canvas, can create similar impressions. Even prints, using only light and shadow, can accurately convey every shape and distance. In this, lines should be seen as narrow areas of shadow; a number of them, drawn or engraved closely together—known as hatching—act as shadows in prints. When done skillfully, they provide a pleasing succedaneum to the delicacy found in nature.

Could mezzo-tinto prints be wrought as accurately as those with the graver, they would come nearest to nature, because they are done without strokes or lines.

Could mezzotint prints be created as accurately as those made with a graver, they would be closest to nature, since they are made without strokes or lines.

I have often thought that a landskip, in the process of this way of representing it, doth a little resemble the first coming on of day. The copper-plate it is done upon, when the artist first takes it into hand, is wrought all over with an edg'd-tool, so as to make it print one even black, like night: and his whole work after this, is merely introducing the lights into it; which he does by scraping off the rough grain according to his design, artfully smoothing it most where light is most required: but as he proceeds in burnishing the lights, and clearing[Pg 95] up the shades, he is obliged to take off frequent impressions to prove the progress of the work, so that each proof appears like the different times of a foggy morning, till one becomes so finish'd as to be distinct and clear enough to imitate a day-light piece. I have given this description because I think the whole operation, in the simplest manner, shews what lights and shades alone will do.

I often think that a landscape, in the way it's represented, is kind of like the first light of day. The copper plate the artist starts with is covered all over with a sharp tool, making it print a solid black, like night. The entire process after that is just about adding light, which he does by scraping off the rough surface according to his plan, carefully smoothing it out where light is needed the most. As he works on brightening the light and clearing up the shadows, he has to pull several prints to check the progress, so each print looks like different moments of a foggy morning, until one is finished enough to clearly resemble a daytime scene. I've described this because I think the whole process simply shows what light and shadows can achieve.

As light must always be supposed, I need only speak of such privations of it as are called shades or shadows, wherein I shall endeavour to point out and regularly describe a certain order and arrangement in their appearance, in which order we may conceive different kinds of softnings and modulations of the rays of light which are said to fall upon the eye from every object it sees, and to cause those more or less-pleasing vibrations of the optic nerves, which serve to inform the mind concerning every different shape or figure that presents itself.

As light is always a given, I only need to talk about the lack of it, which we call shades or shadows. In this discussion, I’ll aim to identify and systematically describe a particular order and arrangement in how they appear. In this order, we can imagine various types of softening and changes in the light rays that seem to come from every object we see, causing different levels of pleasing vibrations in our optic nerves, which help the mind understand the different shapes or figures that come into view.

The best light for seeing the shadows of objects truly, is, that which comes in at a common sized window, where the sun doth not shine; I shall therefore speak of their order as seen by this kind of light: and shall take the liberty in the present and following chapter, to consider colours but as variegated shades, which together with common shades, will now be divided into two general parts or branches.

The best light for seeing the true shadows of objects is the kind that comes through a standard-sized window where the sun isn’t shining. I will therefore talk about their arrangement as seen in this type of light. I’ll also take the liberty in this and the next chapter to consider colors simply as different shades, which, along with regular shades, will now be divided into two main parts or branches.

The first we shall call prime tints, by which is meant any colour or colours on the surfaces of objects; and the use we shall make of these different hues will be to consider them as shades to one another. Thus gold is a shade to silver, &c. exclusive of those additional shades which may be made in any degree by the privation of light.

The first we will refer to as primary colors, which means any color or colors found on the surfaces of objects; and we will use these different hues to see how they relate as shades to each other. For example, gold is a shade compared to silver, etc., apart from any additional shades that can be created in varying degrees by the absence of light.

The second branch may be called retiring shades, which gradate or go off by degrees, as figs. [84 and 85 T p. II]. These shades, as they vary more or less, produce beauty, whether they are occasioned by the privation of light, or made by the pencilings of art or nature.

The second branch can be referred to as retiring sunglasses, which blend or fade gradually, as seen in figs. [84 and 85 T p. II]. These shades create beauty, regardless of whether they arise from a lack of light or are crafted through the brushwork of art or nature.

figs 84 and 85

When I come to treat of colouring, I shall particularly shew in what manner the gradating of prime tints serve to the making a beautiful complexion; in this place we shall only observe how nature hath by these gradating shades ornamented the surfaces of animals; fish generally have this kind of shade from their backs downward; birds have their feathers enriched with it; and many flowers, particularly the rose, shew it by the gradually-increasing colours of their leaves.

When I discuss coloring, I'll specifically show how the gradation of primary colors contributes to a beautiful complexion. For now, let's just note how nature has decorated the surfaces of animals with these gradated shades; fish typically exhibit this kind of shading from their backs downward, birds have feathers enhanced by it, and many flowers, especially roses, display it in the gradually changing colors of their petals.

The sky always gradates one way or other, and the rising or setting sun exhibits it in great perfection, the imitating of which was Claud. de Loraine's peculiar excellence, and is now Mr. Lambert's: there is so much of what is called harmony to the eye to be produced by this shade, that I believe we may venture to say,[Pg 97] in art it is the painter's gamut, which nature has sweetly pointed out to us in what we call the eyes of a peacock's tail: and the nicest needle-workers are taught to weave it into every flower and leaf, right or wrong, as if it was as constantly to be observed as it is seen in flames of fire; because it is always found to entertain the eye. There is a sort of needle-work called Irish-stitch, done in these shades only; which pleases still, tho' it has long been out of fashion.

The sky always shifts in one way or another, and the rising or setting sun shows this beautifully. This was Claud. de Loraine's unique talent and is now Mr. Lambert's as well. There's so much what we call harmony to the eye that can be created by these colors, that I believe we can confidently say, [Pg 97] in art it's the painter's range, which nature has gracefully highlighted for us in what we see in a peacock's tail. The most skilled needleworkers are taught to incorporate it into every flower and leaf, right or wrong, as if it's something always noticeable, just like in flames of fire; because it's always captivating to look at. There’s a type of needlework called Irish-stitch that uses only these shades; it still captivates, even though it's been out of style for a long time.

There is so strict an analogy between shade and sound, that they may well serve to illustrate each other's qualities: for as sounds gradually decreasing and increasing give the idea of progression from, or to the ear, just so do retiring shades shew progression, by figuring it to the eye. Thus, as by objects growing still fainter, we judge of distances in prospects, so by the decreasing noise of thunder, we form the idea of its moving further from us. And with regard to their similitude in beauty, like as the gradating shade pleases the eye, so the increasing, or swelling note, delights the ear.

There is such a strong connection between shade and sound that they effectively illustrate each other's qualities: just as sounds gradually getting quieter or louder give the impression of moving away from or toward the ear, retiring shades demonstrate progression by showing it to the eye. Similarly, just as we judge distances in landscapes by objects that become fainter, we perceive the idea of thunder moving away from us through its decreasing noise. And in terms of their similarity in beauty, just as gradating shades please the eye, the increasing or swelling notes delight the ear.

I have call'd it the retiring shade, because by the successive, or continual change in its appearance, it is equally instrumental with converging lines[13], in shewing how much objects, or any parts of them, retire or recede from the eye; without which, a floor, or horizontal-plane, would often seem to stand upright like[Pg 98] a wall. And notwithstanding all the other ways by which we learn to know at what distances things are from us, frequent deceptions happen to the eye on account of deficiencies in this shade: for if the light chances to be so disposed on objects as not to give this shade its true gradating appearance, not only spaces are confounded, but round things appear flat, and flat ones round.

I’ve called it the retiring shade because its changing appearance helps show how much objects, or parts of them, move away from our view. Without it, a floor or horizontal surface would often look like it was standing upright like a wall. Despite all the other ways we learn to judge distances, our eyes can still be easily deceived due to flaws in this shade. If the lighting on objects isn’t right to create this gradual shading, spaces can get mixed up, making round objects look flat and flat ones look round.

[13] See p. 17. The two converging lines from the ship, to the point C, under fig. 47, plate I.

[13] See p. 17. The two lines that meet from the ship to point C, under fig. 47, plate I.

94

But although the retiring shade hath this property, when seen with converging lines, yet if it describes no particular form, as none of those do in fig. 94, on top of plate II, it can only appear as a flat-pencil'd shade; but being inclosed within some known boundary or out-line, such as may signify a wall, a road, a globe, or any other form in perspective where the parts retire, it will then shew its retiring quality: as for example, the retiring shade on the floor, in plate II, which gradates from the dog's feet to those of the dancer's, shews, that by this means a level appearance is given to the ground: so when a cube is put into true perspective on paper, with lines only, which do but barely hint the directions every face of it is meant to take, these shades make them seem to retire just as the perspective lines direct; thus mutually compleating the idea of those recessions which neither of them alone could do.

But even though the fading shadow has this quality when seen with converging lines, if it doesn't form a specific shape, like none of those in fig. 94 at the top of plate II, it will just look like a flat pencil-thin shadow. However, if it is contained within some recognizable boundary or outline, such as a wall, a road, a globe, or any other shape in perspective where the parts recede, it will show its depth: for example, the shadow on the floor in plate II, which fades from the dog's feet to the dancer's feet, demonstrates that this way a flat appearance is given to the ground. So when a cube is accurately drawn in perspective on paper, with lines that only loosely suggest the direction of each face, these shadows make them seem to recede just as the perspective lines indicate; thus, together they complete the idea of those recessions that neither could accomplish alone.

gradated shadow

Moreover, the out-line of a globe is but a circle on the paper; yet, according to the manner of filling up the space within it, with this shade, it may be made[Pg 99] to appear either flat, globular, or concave, in any of its positions with the eye; and as each manner of filling up the circle for those purposes must be very different, it evidently shews the necessity of distinguishing this shade into as many species or kinds, as there are classes or species of lines, with which they may have a correspondence.

Moreover, the outline of a globe is just a circle on paper; however, depending on how you fill in the space inside it with shading, it can appear flat, round, or indented from any angle of view. Since each method of filling in the circle for these effects must be quite different, it clearly shows the need to categorize this shading into as many types or kinds as there are categories or types of lines they can relate to.[Pg 99]

In doing which, it will be found, that, by their correspondency with, and conformity to objects, either composed of straight, curved, waving, or serpentine lines, they of course take such appearances of variety as are adequate to the variety made by those lines; and by this conformity of shades we have the same ideas of any of the objects composed of the above lines in their front aspects, as we have of them by their profiles; which otherwise could not be without feeling them.

In doing this, it will become clear that, by their connection to and alignment with objects made of straight, curved, wavy, or serpentine lines, they naturally take on a variety of appearances that match the variety created by those lines. Through this consistency in shading, we have the same perceptions of any of the objects made from the lines mentioned above when viewed from the front, as we do when looking at their profiles; otherwise, that wouldn't be possible without physically interacting with them.

Now instead of giving engraved examples of each species of shade, as I have done of lines, I have found that they may be more satisfactorily pointed out and described by having recourse to the life.

Now, instead of providing engraved examples of each type of shade, like I did with lines, I've realized that they can be more effectively highlighted and explained by referring to real life.

But in order to the better and more precisely fixing upon what may be there seen, as the distinct species, of which all the shades of the retiring kind in nature partake, in some degree or other, the following scheme is offered, and intended as an additional means of making such simple impressions in the mind, as may be thought adequate to the four species of lines described in Chapter VII. Wherein we are to suppose imperceptible degrees of[Pg 100] shade gradating from one figure to another.

But to better and more precisely identify what can be observed as the distinct types that all variations of the elusive kind in nature share to some extent, the following outline is presented. It's meant to serve as an additional tool for creating clear impressions in the mind, which may be deemed sufficient for the four types of lines discussed in Chapter VII. In this, we should assume there are imperceptible degrees of[Pg 100] shade transitioning from one shape to another.

The first species to be represented by, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
the second by, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
and the third by, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
gradating from the dots underneath, repeated either way.

The first species is represented by 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
The second is represented by 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
And the third is represented by 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
This progresses from the dots below, repeated in either direction.

As the first species varies or gradates but one way, it is therefore least ornamental, and equal only to straight lines.

As the first type varies or shifts in just one direction, it is the least decorative and is only as interesting as straight lines.

The second gradating contrary ways, doubling the others variety, is consequently twice as pleasing, and thereby equal to curved lines.

The second gradating contrasting ways, doubling the variety of the others, is therefore twice as pleasing and is thereby comparable to curved lines.

The third species gradating doubly contrary ways, is thereby still more pleasing in proportion to that quadruple variety which makes it become capable of conveying to the mind an equivalent in shade, which expresses the beauty of the waving line, when it cannot be seen as a line.

The third type, which gradates in two opposing directions, is even more enjoyable because of that fourfold variety, which allows it to convey a corresponding shade to the mind that expresses the beauty of a flowing line when it can't be perceived as a line.

The retiring shade, adequate to the serpentine line, now should follow; but as the line itself could not be expressed on paper, without the figure of a cone [Fig. 26 p. I], so neither can this shade be described without the assistance of a proper form, and therefore must be deferred a little longer.

The fading shade, fitting for the winding line, should now follow; but just as the line itself can't be shown on paper without the shape of a cone [Fig. 26 p. I], this shade can't be described without a proper form, so it must be postponed a little longer.

26

When only the ornamental quality of shades is spoken of, for the sake of distinguishing them from retiring shades, let them be considered as pencilings only; whence another advantage will arise, which is, that then[Pg 101] all the intervening mixtures, with their degrees of beauty between each species, may be as easily conceived, as those have been between each class of lines.

When we're just talking about the decorative quality of shades, to set them apart from softer shades, let's think of them as just sketches; this will bring another benefit, which is that then[Pg 101] all the different mixtures, along with their levels of beauty between each type, can be easily understood, just like those have been between each type of line.

And now let us have recourse to the experiments in life, for such examples as may explain the retiring power of each species; since, as has been before observed, they must be considered together with their proper forms, or else their properties cannot be well distinguished.

And now let’s turn to real-life examples to understand the unique traits of each species. As mentioned earlier, we need to look at them alongside their specific forms, or else we won't be able to clearly identify their characteristics.

All the degrees of obliquity that planes, or flat surfaces are capable of moving into, have their appearances of recession perfected by the first species of retiring shades, which may evidently be seen by setting opposite a door, as it is opening outwards from the eye, and fronting one light.

All the angles that flat surfaces can tilt at show their depth through the first type of fading shadows, which you can clearly see when you stand in front of a door that is opening outward towards you, facing one light source.

But it will be proper to premise, that when it is quite shut, and flat or parallel to the eye and window, it will have only a penciling shade gradating upon it, and spreading all around from the middle, but which will not have the power of giving the idea of recession any way, as when it opens, and the lines run in perspective to a point; because the square figure or parallel lines of the door, do not correspond with such shade; but let a door be circular in the same situation, and all without side, or round about it, painted of any other colour, to make its figure more distinctly seen, and it will immediately appear concave like a bason, the shade continually retiring; because this circular species of shade would[Pg 102] then be accompanied by its corresponding form, a circle[14].

But it’s important to point out that when it’s completely closed, and flat or parallel to the eye and window, it will only have a gradient shade on it, spreading outward from the center. However, it will not give the impression of depth like it does when it’s open, where the lines lead into the distance to a point. This is because the square shape or parallel lines of the door don’t correspond with that kind of shading. But if a door were circular in the same position, with everything around it painted a different color to make its shape stand out more, it would immediately look concave like a bowl, with the shade constantly receding. This is because this type of circular shading would be paired with its corresponding shape, a circle.

[14] Note, if the light were to come in at a very little hole not far from the door, so as to make the gradation sudden and strong, like what may be made with a small candle held near a wall or a wainscot, the bason would appear the deeper for it.

[14] Keep in mind, if light were to shine through a small hole close to the door, creating a sharp and intense transition, similar to how a small candle held near a wall or paneling would look, the basin would appear deeper because of it.

Note also, that when planes are seen parallel to the eye in open day-light, they have scarce any round gradating or penciling shade at all, but appear merely as uniform prime tints, because the rays of light are equally diffused upon them. Nevertheless, give them but obliquity, they will more or less exhibit the retiring shade.

Note also that when planes are seen parallel to the eye in bright daylight, they hardly have any rounded gradation or shading at all, but appear only as solid primary colors, because the rays of light are evenly distributed on them. However, if you tilt them at an angle, they will show varying degrees of shadow.

But to return; we observ'd that all the degrees of obliquity in the moving of planes or flat surfaces, have the appearances of their recession perfected to the eye by the first species of retiring shade. For example, then; when the door opens, and goes from its parallel situation with the eye, the shade last spoken of, may be observed to alter and change its round gradating appearance, into that of gradating one way only; as when a standing water takes a current upon the least power given it to descend.

But to get back to the point; we noticed that all the angles of slant in the movement of planes or flat surfaces look like they're moving away from us, enhanced by the first type of shadow. For example, when the door opens and moves away from its parallel position to our line of sight, the shadow we just mentioned changes from a rounded, gradient look to a gradient that goes in only one direction, similar to how still water begins to flow with even the slightest push.

Note, if the light should come in at the door-way, instead of the window, the gradation then would be reversed but still the effect of recession would be just the same, as this shade ever complies with the perspective lines.

Note, if the light comes in through the doorway instead of the window, the gradation will be reversed, but the effect of recession will still be the same, as this shade always follows the perspective lines.

In the next place, let us observe the ovolo, or quarter-round in a cornice, fronting the eye in like manner, by which may be seen an example of the second species; where, on its most projecting part, a line of light is seen, from whence these shades retire contrary ways, by which the curvature is understood.

In the next place, let’s look at the ovolo, or quarter-round, in a cornice, which also catches the eye. This shows us an example of the second type; where, on its most prominent part, a line of light is visible, from which the shadows retreat in opposite directions, making the curvature clear.

And, perhaps, in the very same cornice may be seen an example of the third species, in that ornamental member[Pg 103] called by the architects cyma recta, or talon, which indeed is no more than a larger sort of waving or ogee moulding; wherein, by the convex parts gently gliding into the concave, you may see four contrasted gradating shades, shewing so many varied recessions from the eye; by which we are made as sensible of its waving form as if we saw the profile out-line of some corner of it, where it is miter'd, as the joiners term it. Note, when these objects have a little gloss on them these appearances are most distinct.

And, maybe, in the same cornice you can see an example of the third type in that decorative piece[Pg 103] called by architects cyma recta, or talon, which is really just a larger version of the wavy or ogee molding; here, the convex parts smoothly transition into the concave, revealing four contrasting shades that create various depths from our viewpoint. This makes us aware of its curved shape as if we were looking at the outline of a corner where it joins, as carpenters would say. Just a note: when these surfaces have a slight gloss, the effects are most noticeable.

Lastly, the serpentine shade may be seen (light and situation as before) by the help of the following figure, as thus; imagine the horn, figure 57, plate II, to be of so soft a nature, that with the fingers only, it might be pressed into any shape; then beginning gently from the middle of the dotted line, but pressing harder and harder all the way up the lesser end, by such pressure there would be as much concave above, as would remain convex below, which would bring it equal in variety or beauty to the ogee moulding; but after this, by giving the whole a twist, like figure 58, these shades must unavoidably change their appearances, and in some measure, twist about as the concave and convex parts are twisted, and consequently thereby add that variety,[Pg 104] which of course will give this species of shade, as much the preference to the foregoing, as forms composed of serpentine lines have, to those composed only of the waving. See Chapter IX and Chapter X.

Lastly, the coiling shade can be seen (with the same light and position as before) with the help of the following figure. Imagine the horn, figure 57, plate II, made of such a soft material that you could easily shape it with just your fingers. Starting gently from the middle of the dotted line and pressing harder toward the smaller end, you would create an upper concave shape equal to the convex shape below. This would make it as varied or beautiful as the ogee molding. Then, by twisting the entire shape, like in figure 58, these shades would inevitably change their appearance, twisting as the concave and convex parts do, which would naturally add variety. This would give this type of shade a clear advantage over the previous one, just as shapes made of curvy lines are preferred over those that are only wavy. See Chapter IX and Chapter X.

figs 57 and 58

I should not have given my reader the trouble of compleating, by the help of his imagination, the foregoing figure, but as it may contribute to the more ready and particular conception of that intricate variety which twisted figures give to this species of shade, and to facilitate his understanding the cause of its beauty, wherever it may be seen on surfaces of ornament, when it will be found no where more conspicuous than in a fine face, as will be seen upon further enquiry.

I shouldn’t have made my reader work to complete the earlier figure using their imagination. However, this may help them better understand the complex variety that twisted figures add to this type of shade and make it easier to grasp what makes it beautiful. This beauty is most noticeable on ornamental surfaces, but it is especially prominent on an attractive face, as will be explored further.

The dotted line [Fig. 97 B p. I], which begins from the concave part, under the arch of the brow, near the nose, and from thence winding down by the corner of the eye, and there turning obliquely with the round of the cheek, shews the course of that twist of shades in a face, which was before described by the horn; and which may be most perfectly seen in the life, or in a marble busto, together with the following additional circumstances still remaining to be described.

The dotted line [Fig. 97 B p. I], starting from the curved part under the eyebrow near the nose, and then curving down by the corner of the eye, turning diagonally with the shape of the cheek, shows the path of the shadow twist on a face that was previously illustrated by the horn. This can be most clearly observed in real life or in a marble bust, along with the additional details that still need to be described.

97

As a face is for the most part round, it is therefore apt to receive reflected light on its shadowy side[15], which[Pg 105] not only adds more beauty by another pleasing tender gradation, but also serves to distinguish the roundness of the cheeks, &c. from such parts as sink and fall in: because concavities do not admit of reflections, as convex forms do[16].

As a face is generally round, it tends to catch reflected light on its shadowy side[15], which[Pg 105] not only enhances its beauty with a soft gradient but also helps to highlight the roundness of the cheeks, etc., compared to the areas that dip or sink in. This is because concave shapes don’t reflect light the way convex shapes do[16].

[15] Note, though I have advised the observing objects by a front light, for the sake of the better distinguishing our four fundamental species of shades, yet objects in general are more advantagiously, and agreeably seen by light coming side-ways upon them, and therefore generally chose in paintings; as it gives an additional reflected softness, not unlike the gentle tone of an echo in music.

[15] Keep in mind, though I have recommended using frontal lighting for better distinguishing our four basic types of shades, objects are usually seen more favorably and pleasantly when illuminated from the side. This approach is often preferred in paintings because it adds a softness that resembles the gentle tone of an echo in music.

[16] As an instance that convex and concave would appear the same, if the former were to have no reflection thrown upon, observe the ovolo and cavetto, or channel, in a cornice, placed near together, and seen by a front light, when they will each of them, by turns, appear either concave, or convex, as fancy shall direct.

[16] An example of how convex and concave shapes might look the same is when a convex shape doesn't reflect anything. Look at the ovolo and cavetto (or channel) in a cornice when they are placed close together and illuminated from the front. Each will alternately appear either concave or convex, depending on how you perceive them.

I have now only to add, that as before observed, Chapter IV, page 23, that the oval hath a noble simplicity in it, more equal to its variety than any other object in nature; and of which the general form of a face is composed; therefore, from what has been now shewn, the general gradation-shade belonging to it, must consequently be adequate thereto, and which evidently gives a delicate softness to the whole composition of a face; insomuch that every little dent, crack, or scratch, the form receives, its shadows also suffer with it, and help to shew the blemish. Even the least roughness interrupts and damages that soft gradating play of shades which fall upon it. Mr. Dryden, describing the light and shades of a face, in his epistle to Sir Godfrey Kneller the portrait painter, seems, by the penetration of his incomparable genius, to have understood that language in the works of nature, which the latter, by means of an exact eye and a strict obeying hand, could only faithfully transcribe; when he says,

I just want to add, as I mentioned before, Chapter IV, page 23, that the oval shape has a noble simplicity to it, more balanced in its variety than any other object in nature. The general shape of a face is made up of this oval, so from what we've shown, the shading that goes with it must be fitting, which clearly adds a delicate softness to the whole look of a face. Even the slightest dent, crack, or scratch the shape takes on, its shadows are affected too, highlighting the flaw. Even the smallest roughness interrupts and harms that soft gradation of shadows that fall on it. Mr. Dryden, in his letter to Sir Godfrey Kneller, the portrait painter, seems to have, through his exceptional insight, understood the language of nature that Kneller could only faithfully reproduce with his precise eye and skilled hand, when he says,

Where light to shades descending, plays, not strives,
Dies by degrees, and by degrees revives.

Where light fades into the shadows, it plays, not struggles,
It gradually dies, and gradually comes back to life.


CHAPTER XIII.

Of Content with regard to Light, Shadow and Colors.

Under this head I shall attempt shewing what it is that gives the appearance of that hollow or vacant space in which all things move so freely; and in what manner light, shade and colours, mark or point out the distances of one object from another, and occasion an agreeable play upon the eye, called by the painters a fine keeping, and pleasing composition of light and shade. Herein my design is to consider this matter as a performance of nature without, or before the eye; I mean, as if the objects with their shades, &c. were in fact circumstanced as they appear, and as the unskill'd in optics take them to be. And let it be remarked throughout this chapter, that the pleasure arising from composition, as in a fine landskip, &c. is chiefly owing to the dispositions and assemblages of light and shades, which are so order'd by the principles called opposition, breadth and simplicity, as to produce a just and distinct perception of the objects before us.

Under this topic, I will try to explain what creates the illusion of that empty or vacant space in which everything moves so freely, and how light, shadow, and colors indicate the distance between objects, creating a pleasing effect on the eye, which painters refer to as a fine balance and attractive composition of light and shadow. My goal is to consider this as a natural phenomenon as it appears to the eye; that is, as if the objects and their shadows are actually positioned as they seem, and as those who are not skilled in optics perceive them. It's important to note throughout this chapter that the enjoyment derived from composition, such as in a beautiful landscape, is primarily due to the arrangement and combinations of light and shadow, which are organized according to principles called opposition, breadth, and simplicity, resulting in a clear and distinct perception of the objects in front of us.

Experience teaches us that the eye may be subdued and forced into forming and disposing of objects even quite contrary to what it would naturally see them, by[Pg 107] the prejudgment of the mind from the better authority of feeling, or some other persuasive motive. But surely this extraordinary perversion of the sight would not have been suffer'd, did it not tend to great and necessary purposes, in rectifying some deficiencies which it would otherwise be subject to (tho' we must own at the same time, that the mind itself may be so imposed upon as to make the eye see falsely as well as truly) for example, were it not for this controul over the sight, it is well known, that we should not only see things double, but upside down, as they are painted upon the retina, and as each eye has a distinct sight. And then as to distances; a fly upon a pane of glass is sometimes imagined a crow, or larger bird afar off, till some circumstance hath rectified the mistake, and convinced us of its real size and place.

Experience teaches us that the eye can be trained and influenced to perceive and organize objects in ways that are completely opposite to what it would naturally see, due to the mind's prejudgments stemming from the stronger authority of feelings or some other compelling reason. However, this unusual distortion of vision surely wouldn't be tolerated if it didn't serve significant and necessary purposes, correcting some inadequacies that it would otherwise suffer from (though we must admit at the same time that the mind can also be misled, causing the eye to see both falsely and truly). For instance, without this control over our vision, it's well-known that we would not only see things doubled but also upside down, as they appear on the retina, with each eye capturing a distinct perspective. As for distances, a fly on a window can sometimes be mistaken for a crow or larger bird in the distance until something clarifies the misconception and reveals its actual size and position.

Hence I would infer, that the eye generally gives its assent to such space and distances as have been first measured by the feeling, or otherwise calculated in the mind: which measurements and calculations are equally, if not more, in the power of a blind man, as was fully experienced by that incomparable mathematician and wonder of his age, the late professor Sanderson.

Hence, I would conclude that the eye generally accepts spaces and distances that have been first measured by touch or otherwise calculated in the mind; these measurements and calculations are just as much, if not more, within the ability of a blind person, as was clearly demonstrated by that remarkable mathematician and marvel of his time, the late Professor Sanderson.

By pursuing this observation on the faculties of the mind, an idea may be formed of the means by which we attain to the perception or appearance of an immense space surrounding us; which cavity, being subject to divisions and subdivisions in the mind, is afterwards[Pg 108] fashioned by the limited power of the eye, first into a hemisphere, and then into the appearance of different distances, which are pictured to it by means of such dispositions of light and shade as shall next be described. And these I now desire may be looked upon, but as so many marks or types set upon these distances, and which are remember'd and learnt by degrees, and when learnt, are recurred to upon all occasions.

By examining how our mind works, we can understand how we perceive the vast space around us. This space, which our mind breaks down into parts, is then shaped by the eye’s limited ability, first into a hemisphere and then into different distances, created by the play of light and shadow that will be explained next. I want these to be seen simply as marks or types used to identify these distances—things that we gradually remember and learn, and once learned, we refer back to them in various situations.

If permitted then to consider light and shades as types of distinction, they become, as it were, our materials, of which prime tints are the principal; by these, I mean the fixed and permanent colours of each object, as the green of trees, &c. which serve the purposes of separating and relieving the several objects by the different strengths or shades of them being opposed to each other [Fig. 86 T p. II].

If we're allowed to think of light and shadows as types of distinction, they essentially become our materials, where prime tints are the main ones; by this, I mean the fixed and permanent colors of each object, like the green of trees, etc., which help to separate and highlight the different objects by contrasting their various strengths or shades against one another [Fig. 86 T p. II].

86

The other shades that have been before spoken of, serve and help to the like purposes when properly opposed; but as in nature they are continually fleeting and changing their appearances, either by our or their situations, they sometimes oppose and relieve, and sometimes not, as for instance; I once observed the tower-part of a steeple so exactly the colour of a light cloud behind it, that, at the distance I stood, there was not the least distinction to be made, so that the spire (of a lead-colour) seemed suspended in the air; but had a cloud of the like tint with the steeple, supplied the place of the white one, the tower would then have been relieved[Pg 109] and distinct, when the spire would have been lost to the view.

The other colors mentioned earlier serve similar purposes when used correctly; however, since they are constantly shifting and changing due to our perspectives or their own contexts, they sometimes clash and sometimes harmonize. For example, I once noticed the top part of a steeple matched the color of a light cloud behind it so perfectly that, from the distance I was standing, you couldn't tell them apart at all. This made the spire (which was lead-colored) appear to float in the air. But if a cloud with a similar color had replaced the white one, the tower would have stood out clearly while the spire would have disappeared from view.[Pg 109]

Nor is it sufficient that objects are of different colours or shades, to shew their distances from the eye, if one does not in part hide or lay over the other, as in fig. 86.

Nor is it enough for objects to be different colors or shades to indicate their distances from the eye if one doesn’t partially obscure or overlap the other, as in fig. 86.

90

For as fig. [90 T p. II] the two equal balls, tho' one were black and the other white, placed on the separate walls, supposed distant from each other twenty or thirty feet, nevertheless, may seem both to rest upon one, if the tops of the walls are level with the eye; but when one ball hides part of the other, as in the same figure, we begin to apprehend they are upon different walls, which is determin'd by the perspective[17]: hence you will see the reason, why the steeple of Bloomsbury-church, in coming from Hampstead, seems to stand upon Montague-house, tho' it is several hundred yards distant from it.

For instance, [90 T p. II] the two equal balls, even if one is black and the other white, placed on separate walls about twenty or thirty feet apart, may appear to rest on the same wall when the tops of the walls are level with your eye. However, when one ball partially covers the other, as shown in the same figure, we start to realize they are on different walls, which is determined by perspective[17]: that’s why, when coming from Hampstead, the steeple of Bloomsbury Church seems to be sitting on Montague House, even though it's actually several hundred yards away from it.

[17] The knowledge of perspective is no small help to the seeing objects truly, for which purpose Dr. Brook Taylor's Linear perspective made easy to those who are unacquainted with geometry, proposed to be publish'd soon by Mr. Kirby of Ipswich, may be of most service.

[17] Understanding perspective is really helpful for accurately seeing objects. In this regard, Dr. Brook Taylor's "Linear Perspective Made Easy" for those who are not familiar with geometry, which Mr. Kirby of Ipswich plans to publish soon, could be very useful.

Since then the opposition of one prime tint or shade to another, hath so great a share in marking out the recessions, or distances in a prospect, by which the eye is led onward step by step, it becomes a principle of consequence enough to be further discussed, with regard to the management of it in compositions of nature, as well as art. As to the management of it, when seen only[Pg 110] from one point, the artist hath the advantage over nature, because such fix'd dispositions of shades as he hath artfully put together, cannot be displaced by the alteration of light, for which reason, designs done in two prime tints only, will sufficiently represent all those recessions, and give a just keeping to the representation of a prospect, in a print; whereas, the oppositions in nature, depending, as has been before hinted, on accidental situations and uncertain incidents, do not always make such pleasing composition, and would therefore have been very often deficient, had nature worked in two colours only; for which reason she hath provided an infinite number of materials, not only by way of prevention, but to add lustre and beauty to her works.

Since then, the contrast between one main color or shade and another plays a significant role in highlighting the recessions or distances in a view, guiding the eye forward step by step. This proves to be an important principle worth discussing further, especially in terms of how it is managed in both natural and artistic compositions. When looked at from just one viewpoint, the artist has an advantage over nature, because the fixed arrangements of shades he cleverly creates cannot be changed by variations in light. For this reason, designs made with only two primary colors can effectively depict all those recessions and maintain an accurate representation of a scene in a print. On the other hand, the contrasts found in nature, which, as previously mentioned, depend on random positions and unpredictable events, don’t always create such pleasing compositions. If nature had only worked in two colors, it often would have fallen short. That’s why nature provides an endless variety of materials, not only to prevent inadequacies but also to enhance the brilliance and beauty of her creations.

By an infinite number of materials, I mean colours and shades of all kinds and degrees; some notion of which variety may be formed by supposing a piece of white silk by several dippings gradually dyed to a black; and carrying it in like manner through the prime tints of yellow, red, and blue; and then again, by making the like progress through all the mixtures that are to be made of these three original colours. So that when we survey this infinite and immense variety, it is no wonder, that, let the light or objects be situated or changed how they will, oppositions seldom miss; nor that even every incident of shade should sometimes be so completely disposed as to admit of no further beauty, as to composition; and from whence the artist hath[Pg 111] by observation taken his principles of imitation, as in the following respect.

By an endless number of materials, I mean colors and shades of every kind and degree; you can get a sense of this variety by imagining a piece of white silk that is gradually dyed to black through several dips, then taking it through the primary colors of yellow, red, and blue in the same way. After that, you go through all the different mixtures that can be made from these three original colors. So when we look at this infinite and vast variety, it’s no surprise that, no matter how the light or objects are positioned or changed, contrasts are rarely missed; nor is it surprising that every play of shade can sometimes be arranged in such a way that it allows for no more beauty in composition; and from this, the artist has[Pg 111] drawn his principles of imitation through observation, in the following way.

89

Those objects which are intended most to affect the eye, and come forwardest to the view, must have large, strong, and smart oppositions, like the fore-ground in fig. [89 p. II], and what are designed to be thrown further off, must be made still weaker and weaker, as expressed in figures 86, 92, and 93, which receding in order make a kind of gradation of oppositions; to which, and all the other circumstances already described, both for recession, and beauty, nature hath added what is known by the name of aerial perspective; being that interposition of air, which throws a general soft retiring tint over the whole prospect; to be seen in excess at the rising of a fog. All which again receives still more distinctness, as well as a greater degree of variety, when the sun shines bright, and casts broad shadows of one object upon another; which gives the skilful designer such hints for shewing broad and fine oppositions of shades, as give life and spirit to his performances.

Objects that are meant to catch the eye and stand out need to have large, bold contrasts, like the foreground in fig. [89 p. II]. Those that are meant to appear farther away should gradually become lighter and lighter, as shown in figures 86, 92, and 93, which create a kind of gradient of contrasts; and all of this, along with the other details already mentioned, adds to both depth and beauty. Nature also introduces what is known as aerial perspective, which is the layer of air that creates a soft, fading color over the entire view, especially noticeable when fog rolls in. This effect becomes even clearer and more varied when the sun shines brightly, casting wide shadows from one object onto another. This provides the skilled designer with ideas for showcasing bold and subtle contrasts of light and shadow, bringing energy and life to their work.

figs 92 and 93

Breadth of shade is a principle that assists in making distinction more conspicuous; thus fig. [87 p. I], is better distinguish'd by its breadth or quantity of shade, and view'd with more ease and pleasure at any distance, than fig. [88 p. I], which hath many, and these but narrow shades between the folds. And for one of the noblest instances of this, let Windsor-castle be viewed at the rising or setting of the sun.

Scope of shade is a principle that helps make differences more noticeable; thus fig. [87 p. I] is easier to distinguish by its wide or ample shade and can be viewed more comfortably and enjoyably from any distance than fig. [88 p. I], which has many narrow shades between the folds. One of the best examples of this is how Windsor Castle looks at sunrise or sunset.

figs 87 and 88

Let breadth be introduced how it will, it always gives great repose to the eye; as on the contrary, when lights and shades in a composition are scattered about in little spots, the eye is constantly disturbed, and the mind is uneasy, especially if you are eager to understand every object in the composition, as it is painful to the ear when any one is anxious to know what is said in company, where many are talking at the same time.

Let openness come in however it wants, it always provides a nice sense of calm for the eyes; on the other hand, when light and dark areas in a piece are spread out in small spots, the eyes are always unsettled, and the mind feels restless, especially if you're eager to grasp every part of the piece, just like it’s uncomfortable for the ears when someone is trying to catch what’s being said in a room full of people talking at once.

Simplicity (which I am last to speak of) in the disposition of a great variety, is best accomplished by following nature's constant rule, of dividing composition into three or five parts, or parcels, see Chapter IV on simplicity: the painters accordingly divide theirs into fore-ground, middle-ground, and distance or back-ground; which simple and distinct quantities mass together that variety which entertains the eye; as the different parts of base, tenor, and treble, in a composition in music, entertain the ear.

Simplicity (which I’m the least qualified to discuss) in arranging a variety of elements is best achieved by following nature's consistent rule of breaking composition into three or five parts or sections, see Chapter IV on simplicity: painters divide their works into foreground, middle ground, and background; these simple and distinct quantities combine to create the variety that captivates the eye, just like the different parts of bass, tenor, and treble in a musical composition captivate the ear.

Let these principles be reversed, or neglected, the the light and shade will appear as disagreeable as fig. [91 T p. II], whereas, was this to be a composition of lights and shades only, properly disposed, tho' ranged under no particular figures, it might still have the pleasing effect of a picture. And here, as it would be endless to enter upon the different effects of lights and shades on lucid and transparent bodies, we shall leave them to the reader's observation, and so conclude this chapter.

Let these principles be ignored or turned upside down, and the contrast between light and shade will look just as unpleasant as fig. [91 T p. II]. However, if this were just a mix of lights and shades that are arranged correctly, even without specific shapes, it could still create the enjoyable effect of a picture. Since it would take too long to discuss the various effects of light and shade on clear and transparent objects, we’ll leave that for the reader to explore and wrap up this chapter.

91

CHAPTER XIV.

Of Coloring.

By the beauty of colouring, the painters mean that disposition of colours on objects, together with their proper shades, which appear at the same time both distinctly varied and artfully united, in compositions of any kind; but, by way of pre-eminence, it is generally understood of flesh-colour, when no other composition is named.

By the beauty of color, painters refer to the arrangement of colors on objects, along with their proper shades, which appear both distinctly different and skillfully blended in any type of composition; however, it is typically understood to mean skin tones when no other composition is specified.

To avoid confusion, and having already said enough of retiring shades, I shall now only describe the nature and effect of the prime tint of flesh; for the composition of this, when rightly understood, comprehends every thing that can be said of the colouring of all other objects whatever.

To avoid confusion, and since I've already said enough about retiring shades, I will now only describe the nature and effect of the main flesh tone; because understanding this composition correctly encompasses everything that can be said about the coloring of all other objects.

And herein (as has been shewn in Chapter VIII, of the manner of composing pleasing forms) the whole process will depend upon the art of varying; i. e. upon an artful manner of varying every colour belonging to flesh, under the direction of the six fundamental principles there spoken of.

And here (as shown in Chapter VIII, about how to create attractive shapes) the entire process relies on the skill of variation; that is, on a skillful way of changing every color related to flesh, guided by the six basic principles mentioned earlier.

But before we proceed to shew in what manner these principles conduce to this design, we shall take a view of nature's curious ways of producing all sorts of complexions, which may help to further our conception of the principles of varying colours, so as to see why they cause the effect of beauty.

But before we move on to show how these principles contribute to this goal, let’s take a look at nature's fascinating methods of creating all sorts of complexions. This can help us better understand the principles of changing colors and see why they create the effect of beauty.

It is well known, the fair young girl, the brown old man, and the negro; nay, all mankind, have the same appearance, and are alike disagreeable to the eye, when the upper skin is taken away: now to conceal so disagreeable an object, and to produce that variety of complexions seen in the world, nature hath contrived a transparent skin, called the cuticula, with a lining to it of a very extraordinary kind, called the cutis; both which are so thin any little scald will make them blister and peel off. These adhering skins are more or less transparent in some parts of the body than in others, and likewise different in different persons. The cuticula alone is like gold-beaters-skin, a little wet, but somewhat thinner, especially in fair young people, which would shew the fat, lean, and all the blood-vessels, just as they lie under it, as through Isinglass, were it not for its lining the cutis, which is so curiously constructed, as to exhibit those things beneath it which are necessary to life and motion, in pleasing arrangements and dispositions of beauty.

It’s well known that the fair young girl, the elderly man, and people of all backgrounds appear the same and can be unattractive when the outer skin is removed. To hide such an unappealing sight and to create the variety of complexions in the world, nature has designed a transparent skin called the cuticula, with a unique inner layer called the cutis. Both layers are so thin that even a slight burn can cause them to blister and peel away. These outer skins are more or less transparent in different parts of the body and vary from person to person. The cuticula resembles a slightly damp goldbeater’s skin but is somewhat thinner, especially in fair young people, revealing the fat, lean tissue, and blood vessels below it, as if seen through Isinglass. However, because of its lining, the cutis is intricately structured to display the organs necessary for life and movement in beautiful arrangements and designs.

The cutis is composed of tender threads like network, fill'd with different colour'd juices. The white juice serves to make the very fair complexion;—yellow, makes the brunnet;—brownish yellow, the ruddy brown;—green yellow, the olive;—dark brown, the mulatto;—black, the negro;—These different colour'd juices, together with the different meshes of the network, and the size of its threads in this or that part, causes the variety of complexions.

The skin is made up of delicate, interwoven threads filled with different colored fluids. The white fluid contributes to a very fair complexion; yellow creates a brunette look; brownish yellow results in a ruddy brown; greenish yellow leads to an olive tone; dark brown produces a mulatto appearance; and black corresponds to a negro complexion. These various colored fluids, along with the different patterns of the network and the thickness of the threads in specific areas, result in the wide range of complexions.

A description of this manner of its shewing the rosy colour of the cheek, and, in like manner, the bluish tints about the temple, &c. see in the profile [fig. 95 T p. II], where you are to suppose the black strokes of the print to be the white threads of the network, and where the strokes are thickest, and the part blackest, you are to suppose the flesh would be whitest; so that the lighter part of it stands for the vermilion-colour of the cheek, gradating every way.

A description of how it shows the rosy color of the cheek, and similarly, the bluish tones around the temple, etc. can be found in the profile [fig. 95 T p. II], where you should imagine that the black lines of the print represent the white threads of the network. In areas where the lines are thickest and the part is darkest, you should assume that the flesh would be the whitest; thus, the lighter areas represent the vermilion color of the cheek, gradually blending in every direction.

95

Some persons have the network so equally wove over the whole body, face and all, that the greatest heat or cold will hardly make them change their colour; and these are seldom seen to blush, tho' ever so bashful, whilst the texture is so fine in some young women, that they redden, or turn pale, on the least occasion.

Some people have such a complex web of veins throughout their whole body, including their face, that even extreme heat or cold barely affects their color; they rarely blush, no matter how shy they are. In contrast, some young women have such delicate skin that they can easily blush or go pale at the slightest provocation.

I am apt to think the texture of this network is of a very tender kind, subject to damage many ways, but able to recover itself again, especially in youth. The fair fat healthy child of 3 or 4 years old hath it in great perfection; most visible when it is moderately warm, but till that age somewhat imperfect.

I tend to believe that the structure of this network is quite delicate, easily harmed in various ways, yet capable of bouncing back, especially in childhood. A healthy, plump child around 3 or 4 years old exhibits it beautifully; it's most noticeable when they’re moderately warm, but until that age, it’s somewhat underdeveloped.

It is in this manner, then, that nature seems to do her work.—And now let us see how by art the like appearance may be made and penciled on the surface of a uniform coloured statue of wax or marble; by describing which operation we shall still more particularly point out what is to our present purpose: I mean the reason why the order nature hath thus made use of[Pg 116] should strike us with the idea of beauty; which by the way, perhaps may be of more use to some painters than they will care to own.

It’s in this way that nature seems to carry out her work. Now, let’s explore how we can create a similar effect through art on the surface of a uniformly colored statue made of wax or marble. By explaining this process, we’ll focus even more on our current goal: the reason why the way nature works should give us a sense of beauty. This insight might actually be more beneficial to some painters than they would like to admit.[Pg 116]

94

There are but three original colours in painting besides black and white, viz. red, yellow and blue. Green, and purple, are compounded; the first of blue and yellow, the latter of red and blue: however these compounds being so distinctly different from the original colours, we will rank them as such. Fig. [94 T p. II], represents mixt up, as on a painter's pallet, scales of these five original colours divided into seven classes—1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.—4, is the medium, and most brillant class, being that which will appear a firm red, when those of 5, 6, 7, would deviate into white, and those of 1, 2, 3, would sink into black, either by twilight or at a moderate distance from the eye, which shews 4 to be brightest, and a more permanent colour than the rest. But as white is nearest to light it may be said to be equal if not superior in value as to beauty, with class 4. Therefore the classes 5, 6, 7, have also, almost equal beauty with it too, because what they lose of their brillancy and permanency of colour, they gain from the white or light; whereas 3, 2, 1, absolutely lose their beauty by degrees as they approach nearer to black, the representative of darkness.

There are only three primary colors in painting, aside from black and white: red, yellow, and blue. Green and purple are combinations; green is made from blue and yellow, while purple comes from red and blue. Since these mixtures are so distinct from the original colors, we’ll categorize them that way. Fig. [94 T p. II] shows a mix, like on a painter's palette, with scales of these five original colors divided into seven classes—1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. Class 4 is the medium and brightest class, appearing as a strong red, while classes 5, 6, and 7 shift toward white, and classes 1, 2, and 3 fade into black when viewed in twilight or from a moderate distance, making class 4 the brightest and most permanent color. However, since white is closest to light, it might be considered equal, if not superior, in beauty to class 4. Thus, classes 5, 6, and 7 also possess nearly equal beauty because what they lose in brightness and color permanence, they gain from white or light. In contrast, classes 3, 2, and 1 steadily lose their beauty as they get closer to black, which symbolizes darkness.

Let us then, for distinction and pre-eminence sake, call class 4 of each colour, bloom tints, or if you please, virgin tints, as the painters call them; and once more[Pg 117] recollect, that in the disposition of colours as well as of forms, variety, simplicity, distinctness, intricacy, uniformity and quantity, direct in giving beauty to the colouring of the human frame, especially if we include the face, where uniformity and strong opposition of tints are required, as in the eyes and mouth, which call most for our attention. But for the general hue of flesh now to be described, variety, intricacy and simplicity, are chiefly required.

Let’s then, for the sake of distinction and excellence, refer to class 4 of each color as bloom tints, or if you prefer, virgin tints, as the painters would say; and once again[Pg 117] remember that in the arrangement of colors as well as forms, diversity, simplicity, clarity, complexity, consistency, and quantity are essential in creating beauty in the coloring of the human body, especially when considering the face, where both uniformity and strong contrast of tones are necessary, particularly in the eyes and mouth, which draw the most attention. However, for the general flesh tone that we are about to describe, diversity, complexity, and simplicity are the main factors needed.

The value of the degrees of colour being thus consider'd and ranged in order upon the pallet, figure 94, let us next apply them to a busto, fig. [96 R p. II], of white marble, which may be supposed to let every tint sink into it, like as a drop of ink sinks in and spreads itself upon course paper, whereby each tint will gradate all around.

The value of the colors being considered and arranged in order on the palette, figure 94, let's now apply them to a bust, fig. [96 R p. II], made of white marble, which will absorb every tint, just like a drop of ink sinks into and spreads on rough paper, causing each tint to blend all around.

96

If you would have the neck of the busto tinged of a very florid and lively complexion, the pencil must be dipt in the bloom tints of each colour as they stand one above another at No. 4.—if for a less florid, in those of No. 5—if for a very fair, from No. 6—and so on till the marble would scarce be ting'd at all: let therefore No. 6, be our present choice, and begin with penciling on the red, as at r, the yellow tint at y, the blue tint at b, and the purple or lake tint at p.

If you want the neck of the bust to have a bright and lively color, you should dip the brush into the bloom tints of each color as they are arranged at No. 4. For a less vibrant look, use the tints from No. 5; for a very fair tone, use No. 6; and continue this until the marble barely has any tint at all. So, let's choose No. 6 for now and start by applying the red at r, the yellow tint at y, the blue tint at b, and the purple or lake tint at p.

These four tints thus laid on, proceed to covering the whole neck and breast, but still changing and varying the situations of the tints with one another, also causing[Pg 118] their shapes and sizes to differ as much as possible; red must be oftenest repeated, yellow next often, purple red next, and blue but seldom, except in particular parts as the temples, backs of the hands, &c. where the larger veins shew their branching shapes (sometimes too distinctly) still varying those appearances. But there are no doubt infinite variations in nature, from what may be called the most beautiful order and disposition of the colours in flesh, not only in different persons, but in different parts of the same, all subject to the same principles in some degree or other.

These four shades are then applied to cover the entire neck and chest, continually adjusting and mixing the positions of the shades with one another, while also making their shapes and sizes as different as possible; red should be used most often, followed by yellow, then purple-red, and blue should be used sparingly, except in specific areas like the temples and the backs of the hands, where the larger veins show their branching shapes (sometimes too clearly), still varying these appearances. But there are undoubtedly countless variations in nature, from what can be considered the most beautiful arrangement and combination of colors in skin, not only among different people but also in different parts of the same person, all subject to the same principles to some extent.

Now if we imagine this whole process to be made with the tender tints of class 7, as they are supposed to stand, red, yellow, blue, green and purple, underneath each other; the general hue of the performance will be a seeming uniform prime tint, at any little distance, that is a very fair, transparent and pearl-like complexion;[Pg 119] but never quite uniform as snow, ivory, marble or wax, like a poet's mistress, for either of these in living-flesh, would in truth be hideous.

Now, if we picture this whole process using the soft colors of class 7, standing in a row—red, yellow, blue, green, and purple—the overall look of the performance will appear as a single, uniform primary shade from a distance. It will have a nice, transparent, pearl-like quality; [Pg 119] but it will never be as uniform as snow, ivory, marble, or wax, like a poet’s ideal lover, since any of these in real life would actually be quite unattractive.

As in nature, by the general yellowish hue of the cuticula, the gradating of one colour into another appears to be more delicately soften'd and united together; so will the colours we are supposed to have been laying upon the busto, appear to be more united and mellowed by the oils they are ground in, which takes a yellowish cast after a little time, but is apt to do more mischief hereby than good; for which reason care is taken to procure such oil as is clearest, and will best keep its colour[18] in oil painting.

As in nature, the overall yellowish tint of the surface makes it seem like one color gradually blends into another more smoothly. Similarly, the colors we apply to the statue will look more blended and soft because of the oils they're mixed with, which take on a yellowish tint over time. However, this can cause more problems than benefits, so we make sure to use the clearest oil that will maintain its color best in oil painting.[18]

[18] Notwithstanding the deep-rooted notion, even among the majority of painters themselves, that time is a great improver of good pictures, I will undertake to shew, that nothing can be more absurd. Having mention'd above the whole effect of the oil, let us now see in what manner time operates on colours themselves; in order to discover if any changes in them can give a picture more union and harmony than has been in the power of a skilful master, with all his rules of art, to do. When colours change at all it must be somewhat in the manner following, for as they are made some of metal, some of earth, some of stone, and others of more perishable materials, time cannot operate on them otherwise than as by daily experience we find it doth, which is, that one changes darker, another lighter, one quite to a different colour, whilst another, as ultramarine, will keep its natural brightness even in the fire. Therefore how is it possible that such different materials, ever variously changing (visibly after a certain time) should accidentally coincide with the artist's intention, and bring about the greater harmony of the piece, when it is manifestly contrary to their nature, for do we not see in most collections that much time disunites, untunes, blackens, and by degrees destroys even the best preserved pictures.

[18] Despite the long-held belief, even among many artists themselves, that time improves good paintings, I will argue that this is completely absurd. Having mentioned the overall effect of oil, let’s now look at how time affects colors themselves to see if any changes can create more unity and harmony than a skilled master could achieve with all their artistic rules. When colors change at all, it must happen in the following ways, because they are made from various materials—some metal, some earth, some stone, and others from more fragile substances. Time influences them just as we observe daily: one color may darken, another may lighten, one may change to an entirely different shade, while others, like ultramarine, retain their natural brightness even when exposed to fire. So, how can such different materials, which change in diverse ways over time, accidentally align with the artist's intention and enhance the harmony of the artwork? It is clearly contrary to their nature. Don’t we often see that, over time, many artworks become disjointed, lose their tonal balance, darken, and gradually deteriorate, even those that are best preserved?

But if for argument sake we suppose, that the colours were to fall equally together, let us see what advantage this would give to any sort of composition. We will begin with a flower-piece: when a master hath painted a rose, a lily, an african, a gentianella, or violet, with his best art, and brightest colours, how far short do they fall of the freshness and rich brillancy of nature; and shall we wish to see them fall still lower, more faint, sullied, and dirtied by the hand of time, and then admire them as having gained an additional beauty, and call them mended and heightened, rather than fouled, and in a manner destroy'd; how absurd! Instead of mellow and softened therefore, always read yellow and sullied, for this is doing time the destroyer, but common justice. Or shall we desire to see complexions, which in life are often, literally, as brillant as the flowers above-mention'd, served in the like ungrateful manner. In a landskip, will the water be more transparent, or the sky shine with a greater lustre when embrown'd and darken'd by decay? surely no. I own it would be a pity that Mr. Addison's beautiful description of time at work in the gallery of pictures, and the following lines of Mr. Dryden, should want a sufficient foundation;—

But if we assume for the sake of argument that the colors were to blend together equally, let’s consider what advantage this would bring to any kind of composition. Let’s start with a flower painting: when an artist has depicted a rose, a lily, an African violet, a gentian, or any flower with their best skill and brightest colors, how far behind do they fall from the freshness and vibrant brilliance of nature? Should we really want to see them fade even more, becoming dull, spoiled, and tarnished by time, and then admire them as if they've gained extra beauty, calling them improved and enhanced rather than faded and, in fact, ruined? That’s ridiculous! Therefore, instead of saying they are mellowed and softened, we should say they are yellowed and tarnished, as this portrays time as the destroyer, which is only fair. Or would we like to see complexions, which in life can often be as vivid as the flowers mentioned above, treated in the same ungrateful way? In a landscape, will the water appear clearer, or the sky shine brighter when it’s darkened and dulled by decay? Certainly not. I admit it would be a shame if Mr. Addison’s beautiful description of time at work in the gallery of paintings and the following lines from Mr. Dryden lacked a solid foundation;—

For time shall with his ready pencil stand,
Retouch your figures with his ripening hand;
Mellow your colours, and imbrown the tint;
Add every grace which time alone can grant;
To future ages shall your fame convey,
And give more beauties than he takes away.         Dryden to Kneller.

For time will stand with his quick pencil,
Retouch your images with his mature hand;
Soften your colors and deepen the shade;
Add every charm that only time can provide;
To future generations, your reputation will carry,
And give more beauty than it removes. Dryden to Kneller.

were it not that the error they are built upon, hath been a continual blight to the growth of the art, by misguiding both the proficient, and the encourager; and often compelling the former, contrary to his judgment, to imitate the damaged hue of decayed pictures; so that when his works undergo the like injuries, they must have a double remove from nature; which puts it in the power of the meanest observer to see his deficiencies. Whence another absurd notion hath taken rise, viz. that the colours now-a-days do not stand so well as formerly; whereas colours well prepared, in which there is but little art or expence, have, and will always have, the same properties in every age, and without accidents, as damps, bad varnish, and the like (being laid separate and pure,) will stand and keep together for many years in defiance of time itself.

If it weren't for the mistake that they're based on, it would have been a constant hindrance to the development of the art, misleading both the skilled artist and the supporter; often forcing the former, against his better judgment, to copy the faded look of old paintings. As a result, when his works suffer similar damage, they drift even further from nature, allowing even the most casual observer to notice his flaws. This has led to another ridiculous idea that colors today don't hold up as well as they used to; however, well-prepared colors, which require little skill or expense, have always had the same properties through the ages, and without issues like moisture or poor varnish (when applied clean and separately), they will last and stay intact for many years against the test of time.

In proof of this, let any one take a view of the cieling at Greenwich-hospital, painted by Sir James Thornhil, forty years ago, which still remains fresh, strong and clear as if it had been finished but yesterday: and altho' several french writers have so learnedly, and philosophically proved, that the air of this island is too thick, or—too something, for the genius of a painter; yet France in all her palaces can hardly boast of a nobler, more judicious, or richer performance of its kind. Note, the upper end of the hall where the royal family is painted, was left chiefly to the pencil of Mr. Andrea a foreigner, after the payment originally agreed upon for the work was so much reduced, as made it not worth Sir James's while to finish the whole with his own more masterly hand.

To prove this point, anyone can look at the ceiling at Greenwich Hospital, painted by Sir James Thornhill forty years ago, which still looks fresh, vibrant, and clear as if it was completed just yesterday. Although several French writers have argued extensively and philosophically that the air in this country is too thick, or—too something else—for a painter's talent, France can hardly claim to have a nobler, more thoughtful, or richer example of this kind in all her palaces. It's worth noting that the upper end of the hall, where the royal family is depicted, was mostly left to the brush of Mr. Andrea, a foreigner, after the originally agreed payment for the work was so significantly reduced that it wasn't worth Sir James's time to finish it himself with his more skilled hand.

Upon the whole of this account we find, that the utmost beauty of colouring depends on the great principle of varying by all the means of varying, and on the proper and artful union of that variety; which may be farther[Pg 120] proved by supposing the rules here laid down, all or any part of them reversed.

Overall, this account shows that true beauty in color comes from the key idea of varying through all possible means and skillfully combining that variety. This can be further[Pg 120] demonstrated by imagining the rules presented here, either fully or partially reversed.

I am apt to believe, that the not knowing nature's artful, and intricate method of uniting colours for the production of the variegated composition, or prime tint of flesh, hath made colouring, in the art of painting, a kind of mystery in all ages; insomuch, that it may fairly be said, out of the many thousands who have labour'd to[Pg 121] attain it, not above ten or twelve painters have happily succeeded therein, Corregio (who lived in a country-village, and had nothing but the life to study after) is said almost to have stood alone for this particular excellence. Guido, who made beauty his chief aim, was always at a loss about it. Poussin scarce ever obtained a glimpse of it, as is manifest by his many different attempts: indeed France hath not produced one remarkably good colourist[19].

I tend to think that the lack of understanding of nature's clever and complex way of mixing colors to create the varied tones of skin has made coloring in painting a sort of mystery throughout history. It can truly be said that out of the thousands who have tried to master it, only about ten or twelve painters have successfully achieved this skill. Correggio, who lived in a rural village and had nothing but life to study, is often said to be almost alone in this particular talent. Guido, who aimed for beauty above all, always struggled with it. Poussin hardly ever got a glimpse of it, as shown by his numerous attempts; in fact, France has not produced a single outstanding colorist.

[19] The lame excuse writers on painting have made for the many great masters that have fail'd in this particular, is, that they purposely deaden'd their colours, and kept them, what they affectedly call'd chaste, that the correctness of their outlines might be seen to greater advantage. Whereas colours cannot be too brillant if properly disposed, because the distinction of the parts are thereby made more perfect; as may be seen by comparing a marble busto with the variegated colours of the face either in the life, or well painted: it is true, uncomposed variety, either in the features or the limbs, as being daubed with many, or one colour, will so confound the parts as to render them unintelligible.

[19] The weak excuse that writers about painting give for the many great masters who have failed in this area is that they intentionally muted their colors and kept them, which they pretentiously called chaste, to make the accuracy of their outlines more noticeable. However, colors can't be too bright if arranged properly, because this enhances the clarity of the parts; this is evident when comparing a marble bust with the varied colors of a face either in real life or in a good painting. It’s true that too much randomness, whether in the features or the limbs, whether splashed with many colors or just one, can confuse the parts and make them unclear.

Rubens boldly, and in a masterly manner, kept his bloom tints bright, separate, and distinct, but sometimes too much so for easel or cabinet pictures; however, his manner was admirably well calculated for great works, to be seen at a considerable distance, such as his celebrated cieling at Whitehall-chapel[20]: which upon a nearer view, will illustrate what I have advanc'd with regard to the separate brightness of the tints; and shew, what indeed is known to every painter, that had the colours there seen so bright and separate, been all smooth'd and absolutely blended together, they would have produced a dirty grey instead of flesh-colour. The difficulty then lies in bringing blue the third original colour, into flesh, on account of the vast variety introduced thereby; and this omitted, all the difficulty ceases; and a common sign-painter that lays his colours smooth, instantly becomes, in point of colouring, a Rubens, a Titian, or a Corregio.

Rubens confidently and skillfully maintained his bright colors separate and distinct, though sometimes perhaps too much for easel or cabinet paintings. However, his style was perfectly suited for large works, meant to be viewed from a distance, like his famous ceiling at Whitehall chapel[20]: which, upon closer inspection, illustrates my point about the separate brightness of the colors. It also demonstrates, as every painter knows, that if the colors had been blended smoothly together, they would have created a dull gray instead of a flesh tone. The challenge then is incorporating blue, the third primary color, into flesh tones due to the vast variety it introduces; and if this is overlooked, all difficulty disappears, allowing a typical sign painter who smooths their colors to instantly match a Rubens, a Titian, or a Correggio in terms of color.

[20] The front of this building by Inigo Jones, is an additional exemplification of the principles for varying the parts in building; (explained by the candlesticks, &c. Chapter VIII) which would appear to be a stronger proof still, were a building formed of squares, on squares; with squares uniformly cut in each square to be opposed to it, to shew the reverse.

[20] The facade of this building designed by Inigo Jones serves as a further example of the principles for varying architectural elements; (illustrated by the candlesticks, etc. Chapter VIII) which would seem to be an even stronger demonstration if a structure were made of squares, with squares consistently cut into each square to show the contrast.


CHAPTER XV.

Of the Face.

Having thus spoken briefly of light, shade, and colour, we now return to our lineal account of form, as proposed (page 91) with regard to the face.[Pg 123] It is an observation, that, out of the great number of faces that have been form'd since the creation of the world, no two have been so exactly alike, but that the usual and common discernment of the eye would discover a difference between them: therefore it is not unreasonable to suppose, that this discernment is still capable of further improvements by instructions from a methodical enquiry; which the ingenious Mr. Richardson, in his treatise on painting, terms the art of seeing.

Having briefly discussed light, shade, and color, we now return to our detailed account of form, as previously mentioned (page 91) regarding the face.[Pg 123] It's interesting to note that, out of the countless faces created since the beginning of time, no two have been exactly alike; the average eye can always detect some difference between them. Therefore, it makes sense to believe that this ability to discern can still be enhanced through a systematic study, which the clever Mr. Richardson refers to in his book on painting as the art of seeing.

97

1. I shall begin with a description of such lines as compose the features of a face of the highest taste, and the reverse. See fig. [97, B p. I], taken from an antique head, which stands in the first rank of estimation: in proof of this, Raphael Urbin, and other great painters and sculptors, have imitated it for the characters of their heroes and other great men; and the old man's head, fig. [98, L p. I] was model'd in clay, by Fiamingo (and not inferior in its taste of lines, to the best antique) for the use of Andrea Sacchi, after which model he painted all the heads in his famous picture of St. Romoaldo's dream; and this picture hath the reputation of being one of the best pictures in the world[21].

1. I'll start by describing the lines that make up the features of a face with the highest taste, as well as those that do the opposite. See fig. [97, B p. I], taken from an antique head, which is highly regarded: to prove this, Raphael Urbin and other great painters and sculptors have modeled it for their characters of heroes and notable figures; and the old man's head, fig. [98, L p. I], was sculpted in clay by Fiamingo (and is just as tasteful in its lines as the best antiques) for Andrea Sacchi's use, after which he painted all the heads in his famous work, St. Romoaldo's Dream; and this painting is considered one of the best in the world[21].

[21] Note, I must refer the reader to the casts of both these pieces of sculpture, which are to be found in the hands of the curious; because it is impossible to express all that I intend, with sufficient accuracy, in a print of this size, whatever pains might have been taken with it; or indeed in any print were it ever so large.

[21] Note, I need to direct the reader to the casts of both these sculptures, which are available for those who are interested; because it's impossible to convey everything I mean with enough precision in a print of this size, no matter how much effort has been put into it; or even in any print, no matter how large it might be.

98

These examples are here chosen to exemplify and confirm the force of serpentine lines in a face; and let[Pg 124] it also be observed, that in these master-pieces of art, all the parts are otherwise consistent with the rules heretofore laid down: I shall therefore only shew the effects and use of the line of beauty. One way of proving in what manner the serpentine line appears to operate in this respect, may be by pressing several pieces of wire close up and down the different parts of the face and features of those casts; which wires will all come off so many serpentine lines, as is partly marked in figure 97, by the dotted lines. The beard and hair of the head, fig. 98, being a set of loose lines naturally, and therefore disposable at the painter's or sculptor's pleasure, are remarkably composed in this head of nothing else but a varied play of serpentine lines, twisting together in a flame-like manner.

These examples are chosen to illustrate and confirm the impact of serpentine lines in a face. It's also important to note that in these masterpieces of art, all the elements are consistent with the rules established earlier. Therefore, I will focus on showing the effects and use of the line of beauty. One way to demonstrate how the serpentine line operates in this context is by pressing several pieces of wire along the different parts of the face and features of those casts; these wires will all form various serpentine lines, as partly shown in figure 97 with the dotted lines. The beard and hair of the head, shown in fig. 98, naturally consist of loose lines, which can be arranged at the painter's or sculptor's discretion, and are remarkably composed of nothing but a varied play of serpentine lines, twisting together in a flame-like manner.

But as imperfections are easier to be imitated than perfections, we shall now have it in our power to explain the latter more fully; by shewing the reverse in several degrees, down to the most contemptible meanness that lines can be form'd into.

But since flaws are easier to copy than perfection, we now have the opportunity to explain the latter in more detail; by showing the opposite in various levels, down to the most disgraceful mediocrity that lines can be shaped into.

99 to 105

Figure 99, is the first degree of deviation from figure 97; where the lines are made straighter, and reduced in quantity; deviating still more in figure 100, more yet in figure 101, and yet more visibly in 102; figure 103, still more so; figure 104 is totally divested of all lines of elegance, like a barber's block; and 105 is composed merely of such plain lines as children make, when of themselves they begin to imitate in drawing a[Pg 125] human face. It is evident, the inimitable Butler was sensible of the mean and ridiculous effect of such kind of lines, by the description he gives of the shape of Hudibras's beard, fig. [106 L p. I],

Figure 99 is the first degree of deviation from figure 97, where the lines are straighter and fewer. It deviates even more in figure 100, and even more in figure 101, becoming quite obvious in figure 102. Figure 103 shows an even greater deviation, while figure 104 completely lacks any elegant lines, resembling a barber's block; figure 105 consists only of simple lines that children draw when they start to imitate a human face. It's clear that the incomparable Butler recognized the basic and ridiculous effect of such lines, as shown in his description of the shape of Hudibras's beard, fig. [106 L p. I].

In cut and dye so like a tile,
A sudden view it would beguile.

In cut and color so like a tile,
A sudden glimpse it would charm.

106

2. With regard to character and expression; we have daily many instances which confirm the common received opinion, that the face is the index of the mind; and this maxim is so rooted in us, we can scarce help (if our attention is a little raised) forming some particular conception of the person's mind whose face we are observing, even before we receive information by any other means. How often is it said, on the slightest view, that such a one looks like a good-natur'd man, that he hath an honest open countenance, or looks like a cunning rogue; a man of sense, or a fool, &c. And how are our eyes riveted to the aspects of kings and heroes, murderers and saints; and as we contemplate their deeds, seldom fail making application to their looks. It is reasonable to believe that aspect to be a true and legible representation of the mind, which gives everyone the same idea at first sight; and is afterwards confirm'd in fact: for instance, all concur in the same opinion, at first sight, of a down-right idiot.

2. When it comes to character and expression, we see many examples every day that support the widely accepted belief that the face reflects the mind. This idea is so ingrained in us that, as soon as we focus our attention a bit, we can't help but form a specific impression of the person’s mind based on their face, even before we get any information in other ways. It’s often said that someone looks like a good-natured person, that they have an honest, open expression, or that they resemble a clever trickster, a sensible individual, or a fool, etc. Our eyes are drawn to the appearances of kings and heroes, murderers and saints; as we consider their actions, we rarely fail to connect those actions to their looks. It's reasonable to think that a person's appearance is a true and clear reflection of their mind when it conveys the same idea to everyone at first glance and is later confirmed by their actions. For example, everyone tends to share the same initial assessment of a complete idiot.

There is but little to be seen by childrens faces, more than that they are heavy or lively; and scarcely that unless they are in motion. Very handsom faces of almost[Pg 126] any age, will hide a foolish or a wicked mind till they betray themselves by their actions or their words: yet the frequent aukward movements of the muscles of the fool's face, tho' ever so handsom, is apt in time to leave such traces up and down it, as will distinguish a defect of mind upon examination: but the bad man, if he be a hypocrite, may so manage his muscles, by teaching them to contradict his heart, that little of his mind can be gather'd from his countenance, so that the character of an hypocrite is entirely out of the power of the pencil, without some adjoining circumstance to discover him, as smiling and stabbing at the same time, or the like.

You can hardly tell much from children's faces, other than whether they're happy or sad, and that's barely visible unless they're moving. Even the most beautiful faces at any age can conceal a foolish or wicked mind until they give themselves away through their actions or words. However, the awkward expressions of a fool, no matter how attractive, tend to reveal flaws in their mind over time. On the other hand, a bad person, if they’re a hypocrite, can train their facial muscles to hide their true feelings, making it hard to read their thoughts from their face. The true character of a hypocrite can’t be captured by mere appearance without some additional clues, like smiling while causing harm, or something similar.

It is by the natural and unaffected movements of the muscles, caused by the passions of the mind, that every man's character would in some measure be written in his face, by the time he arrives at forty years of age, were it not for certain accidents which often, tho' not always prevent it. For the ill-natur'd man, by frequently frowning, and pouting out the muscles of his mouth, doth in time bring those parts to a constant state of the appearance of ill-nature, which might have been prevented by the constant affectation of a smile; and so of the other passions: tho' there are some that do not affect the muscles at all simply of themselves, as love and hope.

It’s through the natural and genuine movements of the muscles, triggered by emotions, that a person’s character gets reflected in their face by the time they hit forty, unless certain circumstances, which don’t always happen, get in the way. For instance, a grumpy person who frequently frowns and purses their lips will eventually make those facial expressions a permanent sign of their bad temperament, which could have been avoided with a habitual fake smile; the same goes for other emotions. However, some feelings, like love and hope, don’t really impact the muscles at all by themselves.

But least I should be thought to lay too great a stress on outward shew, like a physiognomist, take this with[Pg 127] you, that it is acknowledg'd there are so many different causes which produce the same kind of movements and appearances of the features, and so many thwartings by accidental shapes in the make of faces, that the old adage, fronti nulla fides, will ever stand its ground upon the whole; and for very wise reasons nature hath thought fit it should. But, on the other hand, as in many particular cases, we receive information from the expressions of the countenance, what follows is meant to give a lineal description of the language written therein.

But just in case you think I'm putting too much emphasis on appearance, like a physiognomist, remember this: it's acknowledged that there are so many different reasons behind the same kinds of movements and expressions on people's faces, and so many variations caused by random features, that the old saying, "you can't judge a book by its cover," will always hold true overall; and for very good reasons, nature decided it should. On the other hand, in many specific situations, we can gather information from facial expressions, so what follows is intended to provide a straightforward description of the language expressed there.

It may not be amiss just to look over the passions of the mind, from tranquillity to extreme despair; as they are in order described in the common drawing-book, called, Le Brun's passions of the mind; selected from that great master's works for the use of learners; where you may have a compendious view of all the common expressions at once. And altho' these are but imperfect copies, they will answer our purpose in this place better than any other thing I can refer you to; because the passions are there ranged in succession, and distinctly marked with lines only, the shadows being omitted.

It might be helpful to review the emotions of the mind, from calmness to deep despair, as they are laid out in the common drawing book known as Le Brun's Passions of the Mind. This book was created from the works of that great master for learners' use, offering a concise overview of all the common expressions at once. And even though these are just rough copies, they will serve our purpose here better than anything else I can point you to, because the emotions are organized in order and clearly outlined with lines only, without the shadows included.

Some features are formed so as to make this or that expression of a passion more or less legible; for example, the little narrow chinese eye suits a loving or laughing expression best, as a large full eye doth those of fierceness and astonishment; and round-rising muscles will appear with some degree of chearfulness even in sorrow: the features thus suiting with the expressions that have[Pg 128] been often repeated in the face, at length mark it with such lines as sufficiently distinguish the character of the mind.

Some features are shaped to make certain expressions of emotions more or less recognizable. For instance, the small narrow Chinese eye is best suited for loving or laughing expressions, while a large full eye is better for fierce or astonished looks. Even when someone is sad, their round, rising muscles can give off a hint of cheerfulness. Over time, the repeated expressions on a face leave marks that clearly reveal the character of the mind.

The ancients in their lowest characters have shewn as much judgment, and as great a degree of taste in the management and twisting of the lines of them, as in their statues of a sublimer kind; in the former varying only from the precise line of grace in some parts where the character or action required it. The dying gladiator and the dancing fawn, the former a slave, the latter a wild clown, are sculptored in as high a taste of lines as the Antinous or the Apollo; with this difference, that the precise line of grace abounds more in the two last: notwithstanding which it is generally allow'd there is equal merit in the former, as there is near as much judgment required for the execution of them. Human nature can hardly be represented more debased than in the character of the Silenus, fig. [107 p. I], where the bulging-line figure 49, No. 7, runs through all the features of the face, as well as the other parts of his swinish body: whereas in the satyr of the wood, tho' the ancients have joined the brute with the man, we still see preserved an elegant display of serpentine lines, that make it a graceful figure.

The ancient artists, even when depicting lower forms, showed as much skill and taste in managing and stylizing their shapes as they did in their grander statues. They only deviated from the perfect lines of beauty in certain areas where the character or action called for it. The dying gladiator and the dancing fawn, the former being a slave and the latter a wild creature, are crafted with as much elegance as Antinous or Apollo; the only difference is that the latter two display a finer sense of grace. Nevertheless, it's generally agreed that the first two pieces hold equal merit, requiring nearly as much skill to create. Human nature is rarely depicted as degraded as in the character of Silenus, where the bulging lines define his facial features and the other parts of his pig-like body. In contrast, although the ancient artists combined beast and man in the satyr of the woods, they still managed to maintain an elegant array of flowing lines, giving it a graceful appearance.

figs 107 and 49

Indeed the works of art have need of the whole advantage of this line to make up for its other deficiencies: for tho' in nature's works the line of beauty is often neglected, or mixt with plain lines, yet so far are they from being defective on this account, that by this means[Pg 129] there is exhibited that infinite variety of human forms which always distinguishes the hand of nature from the limited and insufficient one of art; and as thus she for the sake of variety upon the whole, deviates sometimes into plain and inelegant lines, if the poor artist is but able now and then to correct and give a better taste to some particular part of what he imitates, by having learnt so to do from her more perfect works, or copying from those that have, ten to one he grows vain upon it, and fancies himself a nature-mender; not considering, that even in these, the meanest of her works, she is never wholly destitute of such lines of beauty and other delicacies, as are not only beyond his narrow reach, but are seen wanting even in the most celebrated attempts to rival her. But to return,

Indeed, art relies heavily on this line to compensate for its other shortcomings. While nature often overlooks the line of beauty or mixes it with simple lines, this doesn’t make them flawed. Instead, this mix showcases the incredible variety of human forms that always sets nature apart from the limited and inadequate attempts of art. Just as nature sometimes strays into plain and unrefined lines for the sake of variety, if the struggling artist can occasionally refine and enhance certain parts of his imitation—having learned from nature's more perfect works or from those who have mastered it—he might become vain about it and think of himself as a fixer of nature. He fails to realize that even in her simplest creations, nature is never completely devoid of beautiful lines and subtleties that are beyond his grasp, and those are often missing even in the most renowned attempts to imitate her. But to return,

As to what we call plain lines, there is this remarkable effect constantly produced by them, that being more or less conspicuous in any kind of character or expression of the face, they bring along with them certain degrees of a foolish or ridiculous aspect.

As for what we refer to as plain lines, they consistently create this noteworthy effect: regardless of the character or expression on a person's face, they tend to convey a certain degree of foolishness or absurdity.

It is the inelegance of these lines which more properly belonging to inanimate bodies, and being seen where lines of more beauty and taste are expected, that renders the face silly and ridiculous. See Chapter VI, p. 31.

It’s the clumsiness of these lines, which should belong to inanimate objects, that makes the face look silly and ridiculous when we expect to see lines that are more beautiful and tasteful. See Chapter VI, p. 31.

Children in infancy have movements in the muscles of their faces peculiar to their age, as an uninformed and unmeaning stare, an open mouth, and simple grin: all which expressions are chiefly formed of plain curves,[Pg 130] and these movements and expressions ideots are apt to retain; so that in time they mark their faces with these uncouth lines; and when the lines coincide and agree with the natural forms of the features, it becomes a more apparent and confirmed character of an ideot. These plain shapes last mentioned, sometimes happen to people of the best sense, to some when the features are at rest, to others when they are put into motion; which a variety of constant regular movements proceeding from a good understanding, and fashioned by a genteel education, will often by degrees correct into lines of more elegance.

Children in infancy have unique facial movements typical of their age, like a blank stare, an open mouth, and a simple grin. These expressions mainly consist of basic curves,[Pg 130] and individuals with intellectual disabilities tend to hold on to these expressions over time, marking their faces with these awkward lines. When these lines align with the natural shape of their features, it creates a clearer and more defined appearance of an intellectual disability. The basic shapes mentioned earlier can also appear in people with good sense—some when their features are relaxed and others when they're in motion. However, a variety of consistent, regular movements stemming from a good understanding and shaped by refined upbringing can gradually refine these into more elegant lines.

That particular expression likewise of the face, or movement of a feature which becomes one person, shall be disagreeable in another, just as such expressions or turns chance to fall in with lines of beauty, or the reverse; for this reason there are pretty frowns and disagreeable smiles: the lines that form a pleasing smile about the corners of the mouth have gentle windings, as fig. [108 L p. II], but lose their beauty in the full laugh, as fig. [109 L p. II], the expression of excessive laughter, oftener than any other, gives a sensible face a silly or disagreeable look, as it is apt to form regular plain lines about the mouth, like a parenthesis, which sometimes appears like crying; as, on the contrary, I remember to have seen a beggar who had clouted up his head very artfully, and whose visage was thin and pale enough to excite pity, but his features were otherwise so unfortunately[Pg 131] form'd for his purpose, that what he intended for a grin of pain and misery, was rather a joyous laugh.

That specific expression on a face, or the way a feature moves, can look good on one person but be off-putting on another. This is similar to how certain expressions align with beauty or the opposite. That's why you can have attractive frowns and unappealing smiles: the lines that create a nice smile around the corners of the mouth have gentle curves, as shown in fig. [108 L p. II], but they lose their charm in a full laugh, as in fig. [109 L p. II]. The look of excessive laughter often makes a serious face look silly or unpleasant, as it tends to create straight lines around the mouth that resemble parentheses, sometimes making it look like the person is crying. On the other hand, I recall seeing a beggar who had cleverly patched up his head, and although his face was thin and pale enough to evoke sympathy, his features were unfortunately shaped in such a way that what he tried to express as a grimace of pain and suffering ended up looking more like a joyful laugh.

figs 108 and 109

It is strange that nature hath afforded us so many lines and shapes to indicate the deficiencies and blemishes of the mind, whilst there are none at all that point out the perfections of it beyond the appearance of common sense and placidity. Deportment, words, and actions, must speak the good, the wise, the witty, the humane, the generous, the merciful, and the brave. Nor are gravity and solemn looks always signs of wisdom: the mind much occupied with trifles will occasion as grave and sagacious an aspect, as if it were charged with matters of the utmost moment; the balance-master's attention to a single point, in order to preserve his balance, may look as wise at that time as the greatest philosopher in the depth of his studies. All that the ancient sculptors could do, notwithstanding their enthusiastic endeavours to raise the characters of their deities to aspects of sagacity above human, was to give them features of beauty. Their god of wisdom hath no more in his look than a handsom manliness; the Jupiter is carried somewhat higher, by giving it a little more severity than the Apollo, by a larger prominency of brow gently bending in seeming thoughtfulness, with an ample beard, which being added to the noble quantity of its other lines, invests that capital piece of sculpture with uncommon dignity, which, in the mysterious language of a profound connoisseur, is stiled a divine idea, inconceivably great, and above nature.

It’s odd that nature has given us so many lines and shapes to show the flaws and imperfections of the mind, yet none that indicate its strengths beyond the surface level of common sense and calmness. Behavior, speech, and actions must reveal the good, the wise, the witty, the compassionate, the generous, the merciful, and the brave. Plus, serious expressions and solemn looks aren’t always signs of wisdom: a mind busy with trivial matters can have a serious and thoughtful appearance, just like one preoccupied with important issues. Just as a tightrope walker focuses on a single point to maintain balance, they can look just as wise at that moment as the greatest philosopher deep in thought. Even the ancient sculptors, despite their passionate efforts to elevate the appearances of their gods to portray wisdom beyond human understanding, could only give them beautiful features. Their god of wisdom has nothing in his expression beyond a handsome demeanor; Jupiter looks a bit more serious than Apollo, with a pronounced brow that suggests thoughtful contemplation, along with a full beard, which alongside the other noble features, gives that iconic sculpture a unique dignity that, in the intricate language of a true connoisseur, is called a divine idea—inconceivably great and beyond nature.

3dly and lastly, I shall shew in what manner the lines of the face alter from infancy upwards, and specify the different ages. We are now to pay most attention to simplicity, as the difference of ages we are about to speak of, turn chiefly upon the use made of this principle in a greater or less degree, in the form of the lines.

3rd and finally, I will show how the features of the face change from infancy onward and identify the different ages. We should focus mainly on simplicity, as the differences in age we are going to discuss primarily depend on how this principle is applied to varying degrees in the shape of the lines.

From infancy till the body has done growing, the contents both of the body and the face, and every part of their surface, are daily changing into more variety, till they obtain a certain medium (see page 78 on proportion) from which medium, as fig. [113 B p. II], if we return back to infancy, we shall see the variety decreasing, till by degrees that simplicity in the form, which gave variety its due limits, deviates into sameness; so that all the parts of the face may be circumscribed in several circles, as fig. [116 L p. II].

From infancy until the body stops growing, the contents of both the body and the face, as well as every part of their surface, change daily into more variety until they reach a certain balance (see page 78 on proportion). If we look back to infancy from this balance, we can see the variety decreasing, until gradually that simplicity in form, which provided variety with its proper limits, becomes uniformity; so that all parts of the face can be enclosed in several circles, as shown in fig. [116 L p. II].

figs 113 and 116

But there is another very extraordinary circumstance, (perhaps never taken notice of before in this light) which nature hath given us to distinguish one age from another by; which is, that tho' every feature grows larger and longer, till the whole person has done growing, the sight of the eye still keeps its original size; I mean the pupil, with its iris or ring; for the diameter of this circle continues still the same, and so becomes a fixt measure by which we, as it were, insensibly compare the daily perceiv'd growings of the other parts of the face, and thereby determine a young person's age. You may sometimes find this part of the eye in a new-born[Pg 133] infant, full as large as in a man of six foot; nay, sometimes larger, see fig. [110 B p. II], [114 B p. II] and [115 T p. I] which represents three different sizes of the pupil of the eye; the least, was exactly taken from the eye of a large-featur'd man, aged 105, the biggest, from one of twenty, who had this part larger than ordinary, and the other is the common size. If this part of the eye in the pictures of Charles II. and James II. painted by Vandyke at Kensington, were to be measured with a pair of compasses, and compared with their pictures painted by Lilly when they were men, the diameters would be found in both pictures respectively the same.

But there’s another really remarkable fact, (perhaps never noticed before in this way) that nature has given us to distinguish one age from another; even though every feature becomes larger and longer until the entire person has stopped growing, the size of the eye remains the same; I mean the pupil, with its iris or ring; the diameter of this circle stays unchanged, so it acts as a fixed measure by which we, in a sense, unconsciously compare the daily growth of the other parts of the face and determine a young person’s age. You might sometimes find this part of the eye in a newborn infant as large as in a six-foot tall man; in fact, sometimes larger, see fig. [110 B p. II], [114 B p. II] and [115 T p. I] which show three different sizes of the pupil of the eye; the smallest was taken from the eye of a large-featured man, aged 105, the largest from a 20-year-old, who had this part larger than usual, and the other is the common size. If this part of the eye in the portraits of Charles II and James II, painted by Vandyke at Kensington, were measured with a compass and compared with their portraits painted by Lilly when they were adults, the diameters would be found to be the same in both sets of pictures.

figs 110, 114 and 115

In infancy the faces of boys and girls have no visible difference, but as they grow up the features of the boy get the start, and grow faster in proportion to the ring of the eye, than those of the girl, which shews the distinction of the sex in the face. Boys who have larger features than ordinary, in proportion to the rings of their eyes, are what we call manly-featured children; as those who have the contrary, look more childish and younger than they really are. It is this proportion of the features with the eyes, that makes women, when they are dressed in mens-cloaths, look so young and boyish: but as nature doth not always stick close to these particulars, we may be mistaken both in sexes and ages.

In childhood, the faces of boys and girls look pretty much the same, but as they grow up, boys' features start to develop faster compared to their eye size, which highlights the differences between the sexes in facial features. Boys with larger features relative to their eye size are what we refer to as manly-featured children; those with smaller features tend to look more childish and younger than they actually are. It’s this proportionality of features to the eyes that makes women dressed in men’s clothing appear so youthful and boyish. However, since nature doesn’t always follow these patterns precisely, we can easily mistake both gender and age.

By these obvious appearances, and the differences of the whole size, we easily judge of ages till twenty, but not with such certainty afterwards; for the alterations from that age are of a different kind, subject to other changes by growing fatter or leaner, which it is well known, often give a different turn to the look of the person, with regard to his age.

By these obvious signs and the overall differences in size, we can easily estimate ages up to twenty, but we can't do so with the same certainty afterward. Changes that occur after that age are different, influenced by factors like gaining or losing weight, which often significantly alter a person's appearance in relation to their age.

The hair of the head, which encompasses a face as a frame doth a picture, and contrasts with its uniform colour, the variegated inclosed composition, adding more or less beauty thereto, according as it is disposed by the rules of art, is another indication of advanced age.

The hair on the head, framing the face like a picture frame, stands out against its uniform color. The mixed shades create different levels of beauty, depending on how they are styled according to artistic principles, and this is another sign of aging.

What remains to be said on the different appearances of ages, being less pleasing than what has gone before, shall be described with more brevity. In the age from twenty to thirty, barring accidents, there appears but little change, either in the colours or the lines of the face; for tho' the bloom tints may go off a little, yet on the other hand, the make of the features often attain a sort of settled firmness in them, aided by an air of acquired sensibility; which makes ample amends for that loss, and keeps beauty till thirty pretty much upon a par; after this time, as the alterations grow more and more visible, we perceive the sweet simplicity of many rounding parts of the face, begin to break into dented shapes, with more sudden turns about the muscles, occasioned by their many repeated movements; as also by dividing the broad parts, and thereby taking off the large sweeps of the serpentine lines; the shades of beauty also consequently suffering in their softnesses. Something of what is here meant between the two ages of thirty and fifty, see in figures [117 and 118 B p. II], and what further havock time continues to make after the age of fifty, is too remarkable to need describing: the strokes and cuts he then lays on are plain enough; however, in spite of all his malice, those lineaments that have once been elegant, retain their flowing turns in venerable age, leaving to the last a comely piece of ruins.

What’s left to say about the different stages of aging, which are less pleasing than what’s come before, will be explained more briefly. From ages twenty to thirty, barring any accidents, there’s usually not much change in the colors or lines of the face; while the bloom of youth may fade a bit, the features often gain a certain firmness, along with a hint of acquired sensitivity, which compensates for that loss. Beauty remains fairly consistent until about thirty. After this age, as changes become more noticeable, we see the sweet simplicity of many rounded facial features starting to transition into dented shapes, with sharper angles around the muscles caused by repeated movements. Additionally, the broad parts of the face become divided, which reduces the large curves of the serpentine lines, and the soft qualities of beauty also suffer as a result. For a glimpse of what happens between the ages of thirty and fifty, see figures [117 and 118 B p. II]; and the further damage that time inflicts after fifty is so evident that it doesn’t need much description. The marks and lines he leaves are clear enough; however, despite all his efforts, those once-elegant features still retain their graceful contours in old age, presenting a dignified form of decay.

figs 117 and 118

CHAPTER XVI.

Of Mindset.

Such dispositions of the body and limbs as appear most graceful when seen at rest, depend upon gentle winding contrasts, mostly govern'd by the precise serpentine line, which in attitudes of authority, are more extended and spreading than ordinary, but reduced somewhat below the medium of grace, in those of negligence and ease: and as much exaggerated in insolent and proud carriage, or in distortions of pain (see figure 9, plate I) as lessen'd and contracted into plain and parallel lines, to express meanness, aukwardness, and submission.

Such positions of the body and limbs that look the most graceful when still rely on gentle, flowing contrasts, mainly shaped by a specific serpentine line. In confident poses, these lines are more extended and spread out than usual, but they become slightly less graceful in relaxed and casual stances. They can be as exaggerated in a haughty and proud demeanor or in severe distortions of pain (see figure 9, plate I) as they are minimized and simplified into straight lines, which convey lowliness, awkwardness, and submission.

9

The general idea of an action, as well as of an attitude, may be given with a pencil in very few lines. It is easy to conceive that the attitude of a person upon the cross, may be fully signified by the two straight lines of the cross; so the extended manner of St. Andrew's crucifixion is wholly understood by the X-like cross.

The basic concept of an action, along with an attitude, can be conveyed with just a few lines drawn with a pencil. It's easy to imagine that a person's position on the cross can be represented by the two straight lines of the cross; similarly, the way St. Andrew was crucified is completely understood by the X-shaped cross.

Thus, as two or three lines at first are sufficient to shew the intention of an attitude, I will take this opportunity of presenting my reader (who may have been at the trouble of following me thus far) with the sketch of a country-dance, in the manner I began to set out the design; in order to shew how few lines are necessary[Pg 136] to express the first thoughts, as to different attitudes; see fig. [71 T p. II], which describe in some measure, the several figures and actions, mostly of the ridiculous kind, that are represented in the chief part of plate II.

So, since a couple of lines are enough to show the intention of a stance, I'll take this chance to present my reader (who may have been following me up to this point) with a sketch of a country dance, in the way I initially set out the design; to demonstrate how few lines are needed[Pg 136] to express the initial thoughts about different stances; see fig. [71 T p. II], which depict, to some extent, the various figures and actions, mostly of a funny nature, shown in the main part of plate II.

71

The most amiable person may deform his general appearance by throwing his body and limbs into plain lines, but such lines appear still in a more disagreeable light in people of a particular make, I have therefore chose such figures as I thought would agree best with my first score of lines, fig. 71.

The friendliest person can ruin their overall look by positioning their body and limbs in awkward ways, but this awkwardness is even more noticeable in people with specific body types. So, I’ve selected figures that I believe will match best with my initial set of lines, fig. 71.

the dancers

The two parts of curves next to 71, served for the figures of the old woman and her partner at the farther end of the room. The curve and two straight lines at right angles, gave the hint for the fat man's sprawling posture. I next resolved to keep a figure within the bounds of a circle, which produced the upper part of the fat woman, between the fat man and the aukward one in the bag wig, for whom I had made a sort of an X. The prim lady, his partner, in the riding-habit, by pecking back her elbows, as they call it, from the waste upwards, made a tolerable D, with a straight line under it, to signify the scanty stiffness of her peticoat; and a Z stood for the angular position the body makes with the legs and thighs of the affected fellow in the tye-wig; the upper part of his plump partner was confin'd to an O, and this chang'd into a P, served as a hint for the straight lines behind. The uniform diamond of a card, was filled up by the flying dress, &c. of the little capering[Pg 137] figure in the spencer-wig; whilst a double L mark'd the parallel position of his poking partner's hands and arms: and lastly, the two waving lines were drawn for the more genteel turns of the two figures at the hither end.

The two curved shapes next to 71 represented the figures of the old woman and her partner at the far end of the room. The curve and two straight lines at right angles suggested the fat man's sprawling position. I then decided to keep one figure within the circle, which created the upper part of the fat woman, situated between the fat man and the awkward guy in the bag wig, for whom I formed a sort of an X. The proper lady, his partner, in the riding outfit, by angling her elbows backward, as they say, formed a decent D shape, with a straight line below it to indicate the slight stiffness of her petticoat; and a Z represented the angle of the body in relation to the legs and thighs of the affected guy in the tie wig; the upper part of his plump partner was limited to an O, which transformed into a P, serving as a cue for the straight lines behind. The uniform diamond shape of a card was filled by the flaring dress, etc. of the small, capering figure in the spencer wig; while a double L marked the parallel position of his poking partner's hands and arms: and lastly, two wavy lines were drawn for the more elegant movements of the two figures at this end.

The best representation in a picture, of even the most elegant dancing, as every figure is rather a suspended action in it than an attitude, must be always somewhat unnatural and ridiculous; for were it possible in a real dance to fix every person at one instant of time, as in a picture, not one in twenty would appear to be graceful, tho' each were ever so much so in their movements; nor could the figure of the dance itself be at all understood.

The best way to capture a picture of even the most elegant dancing, since every pose is more like a moment frozen in time than a true stance, is always going to look somewhat unnatural and silly. If it were possible to freeze every dancer at a single moment, like in a photo, very few would actually look graceful, even if they moved beautifully. Plus, the overall shape of the dance wouldn't make any sense at all.

the pictures and statues

The dancing-room is also ornamented purposely with such statues and pictures as may serve to a farther illustration. Henry viii. fig. [72 p. II], makes a perfect X with his legs and arms; and the position of Charles the first, fig. [51 p. II], is composed of less-varied lines than the statue of Edward the sixth, fig. [73 p. II]; and the medal over his head is in the like kind of lines; but that over Q. Elizabeth, as well as her figure, is in the contrary; so are also the two other wooden figures at the end. Likewise the comical posture of astonishment (expressed by following the direction of one plain curve, as the dotted line in a french print of Sancho, where Don Quixote demolishes the puppet shew, fig. [75 R p. II])is a good contrast to the effect of the serpentine lines in the fine turn of the Samaritan[Pg 138] woman, fig. [74 L p. II], taken from one of the best pictures Annibal Carrache ever painted.

The dance room is also decorated with statues and paintings that further illustrate the theme. Henry VIII, fig. [72 p. II], makes a perfect X with his arms and legs, while Charles I, fig. [51 p. II], has less varied lines compared to the statue of Edward VI, fig. [73 p. II]; the medal above his head features similar lines, but the one over Queen Elizabeth, along with her figure, showcases contrasting lines, as do the two wooden figures at the end. Additionally, the funny pose of astonishment (shown by following the direction of one smooth curve, similar to the dotted line in a French print of Sancho, where Don Quixote knocks down the puppet show, fig. [75 R p. II]) contrasts nicely with the serpentine lines in the graceful shape of the Samaritan woman, fig. [74 L p. II], taken from one of the best paintings by Annibal Carrache.

figs 75 and 74

CHAPTER XVII.

Of Take action.

To the amazing variety of forms made still infinitely more various in appearance by light, shade and colour, nature hath added another way of increasing that variety, still more to enhance the value of all her compositions. This is accomplished by means of action; the fullest display of which is put into the power of the human species, and which is equally subject to the same principles with regard to the effects of beauty, or the reverse, as govern all the former compositions; as is partly seen in Chapter XI on proportion. My business here shall be, in as concise a manner as possible, to particularise the application of these principles to the movement of the body, and therewith finish this system of variety in forms and actions.

To the amazing variety of forms, made even more diverse in appearance by light, shade, and color, nature has added another way to enhance that variety, which increases the value of all her creations. This is achieved through action; the most complete expression of which is within the power of humans and is just as governed by the same principles regarding the effects of beauty, or the lack thereof, that regulate all earlier compositions, as is partially seen in Chapter XI on proportion. My aim here is to briefly outline how these principles apply to the movement of the body, and with that, conclude this system of variety in forms and actions.

There is no one but would wish to have it in his power to be genteel and graceful in the carriage of his person, could it be attained with little trouble and expence of time. The usual methods relied on for this purpose among well-bred people, takes up a considerable part of their time: nay even those of the first rank have no other resource in these matters, than to dancing-masters, and fencing-masters: dancing and fencing are[Pg 139] undoubtedly proper, and very necessary accomplishments; yet are they frequently very imperfect in bringing about the business of graceful deportment. For altho' the muscles of the body may attain a pliancy by these exercises, and the limbs, by the elegant movement in dancing, acquire a facility in moving gracefully, yet for want of knowing the meaning of every grace, and whereon it depends, affectations and misapplications often follow.

There’s no one who wouldn’t want the ability to be stylish and graceful in how they carry themselves, if it could be achieved with minimal effort and time. The typical methods used by well-mannered people for this purpose take up a significant amount of their time: even those in high society rely on dance instructors and fencing coaches. Dancing and fencing are undoubtedly valuable and necessary skills; however, they often fall short when it comes to achieving truly graceful behavior. While these activities can make the body more flexible and help limbs move elegantly, lacking an understanding of the essence of grace and its foundations can lead to awkwardness and misuse.

Action is a sort of language which perhaps one time or other, may come to be taught by a kind of grammar-rules; but, at present, is only got by rote and imitation: and contrary to most other copyings or imitations, people of rank and fortune generally excel their originals, the dancing-masters, in easy behaviour and unaffected grace; as a sense of superiority makes them act without constraint; especially when their persons are well turn'd. If so, what can be more conducive to that freedom and necessary courage which make acquired grace seem easy and natural, than the being able to demonstrate when we are actually just and proper in the least movement we perform; whereas, for want of such certainty in the mind, if one of the most finish'd gentlemen at court was to appear as an actor on the public stage, he would find himself at a loss how to move properly, and be stiff, narrow, and aukward, in representing even his own character: the uncertainty of being right would naturally give him some of that restraint which the[Pg 140] uneducated common people generally have when they appear before their betters.

Action is like a language that might eventually be taught through some kind of grammar rules; but for now, it’s mostly learned through repetition and imitation. Unlike most other forms of copying or mimicking, people of status and wealth usually outshine their teachers, the dancing instructors, with their ease and natural grace. Their sense of superiority allows them to perform without restraint, especially when they have well-proportioned bodies. So, what could be more helpful for achieving that freedom and essential confidence that makes learned grace appear effortless and natural than being able to show when we are genuinely just and proper in even the smallest gesture we make? On the other hand, without that mental clarity, if one of the most polished gentlemen at court were to take the stage as an actor, he would struggle with how to move correctly, appearing stiff, limited, and awkward while portraying even his own character. The uncertainty of doing the right thing would naturally cause him to experience some of that restraint that uneducated common people often feel when they find themselves in front of their superiors.

It is known that bodies in motion always describe some line or other in the air, as the whirling round of a fire-brand apparently makes a circle, the water-fall part of a curve, the arrow and bullet, by the swiftness of their motions, nearly a straight line; waving lines are formed by the pleasing movement of a ship on the waves. Now in order to obtain a just idea of action at the same time to be judiciously satisfied of being in the right in what we do, let us begin with imagining a line formed in the air by any supposed point at the end of a limb or part that is moved, or made by the whole part, or limb; or by the whole body together. And that thus much of movements may be conceived at once is evident, on the least recollection, for whoever has seen a fine arabian war-horse, unback'd and at liberty, and in a wanton trot, cannot but remember what a large waving line his rising, and at the same time pressing forward, cuts through the air; the equal continuation of which, is varied by his curveting from side to side; whilst his long mane and tail play about in serpentine movements.

It’s well known that moving bodies always create some kind of shape in the air. For example, the spinning of a firebrand seems to create a circle, the waterfall follows part of a curve, and arrows and bullets, because of their speed, nearly travel in a straight line. A ship moving on the waves creates graceful, flowing lines. To truly understand action and feel confident in our choices, we should start by imagining a line formed in the air by any moving part, like a limb or any part of the body; or by the whole body together. It's clear that we can grasp this concept of movement easily. Anyone who has seen a beautiful Arabian war horse, untrained and free, in a playful trot can’t help but remember the large, flowing line it creates as it moves forward and rises at the same time. This motion is accentuated by its side-to-side movements, while its long mane and tail create a serpentine dance in the air.

After thus having form'd the idea of all movements being as lines, it will not be difficult to conceive, that grace in action depends upon the same principles as have been shewn to produce it in forms.

After forming the idea that all movements can be seen as lines, it’s easy to understand that grace in action relies on the same principles that create it in forms.

The next thing that offers itself to our consideration is the force of habit and custom in action; for a great deal depends thereon.

The next thing we should think about is the power of habit and custom in action, because a lot depends on it.

The peculiar movements of each person, as the gate in walking, are particularised in such lines as each part describes by the habits they have contracted. The nature and power of habit may be fully conceived by the following familiar instance, as the motions of one part of the body may serve to explain those of the whole.

The strange movements of each person, like the way they walk, are detailed in the lines traced by their established habits. The nature and influence of habit can be clearly understood through a common example, as the actions of one part of the body can help explain the movements of the entire body.

Observe that whatever habit the fingers get in the use of the pen, you see exactly delineated to the eye by the shapes of the letters. Were the movements of every writer's fingers to be precisely the same, one hand-writing would not be known from another, but as the fingers naturally fall into, or acquire different habits of moving, every hand-writing is visibly different. Which movements must tally with the letters, tho' they are too quick and too small to be as perfectly traced by the eye; but this shews what nice differences are caused, and constantly retained by habitual movements.

Notice that whatever habits the fingers develop while using a pen are clearly visible in the shapes of the letters. If every writer's finger movements were identical, you wouldn't be able to distinguish one handwriting from another. However, since the fingers naturally adopt different habits of movement, every handwriting looks unique. These movements correspond to the letters, even though they are too quick and small to be perfectly seen. This illustrates how subtle differences are created and consistently maintained by habitual movements.

It may be remark'd, that all useful habitual motions, such as are readiest to serve the necessary purposes of life, are those made up of plain lines, i. e. straight and circular lines, which most animals have in common with mankind, tho' not in so extensive a degree: the monkey from his make hath it sufficiently in his power to be graceful, but as reason is required for this purpose, it would be impossible to bring him to move genteelly.

It can be noted that all useful habitual movements, especially those that are most effective for the essential needs of life, are composed of simple shapes, such as straight and circular lines. Most animals share this with humans, although not to the same extent. The monkey, due to its physical structure, has the potential to be graceful, but since reason is needed for that, it would be impossible for it to move in a refined way.

Though I have said that the ordinary actions of the body are performed in plain lines, I mean only comparatively so with those of studied movements in the[Pg 142] serpentine line, for as all our muscles are ever ready to act, when one part is moved, (as an hand, or arm, by its proper movers, for raising up or drawing down) the adjacent muscles act in some degree in correspondence with them: therefore our most common movements are but seldom performed in such absolutely mean lines, as those of jointed dolls and puppets. A man must have a good deal of practice to be able to mimic such very straight or round motions, which being incompatible with the human form, are therefore ridiculous.

Although I've mentioned that typical body movements occur in straightforward lines, I only mean this in comparison to the more deliberate movements in the serpentine line. Since all our muscles are always ready to act, when one part moves—like a hand or arm, raised or lowered by its specific muscles—the nearby muscles also respond to some extent. Therefore, our most common movements are rarely executed in perfectly straight lines like those of jointed dolls and puppets. A person needs quite a bit of practice to imitate such perfectly straight or circular motions, which don’t fit the human form and thus seem absurd.

Let it be observed, that graceful movements in serpentine lines, are used but occasionally, and rather at times of leisure, than constantly applied to every action we make. The whole business of life may be carried on without them, they being properly speaking, only the ornamental part of gesture; and therefore not being naturally familiarised by necessity, must be acquired by precept or imitation, and reduced to habit by frequent repetitions. Precept is the means I should recommend as the most expeditious and effectual way. But before we proceed to the method I have to propose, for the more ready and sure way of accustoming the limbs to a facility in the ornamental way of moving; I should observe, that quick time gives it spirit and vivacity, as slow time, gravity, and solemnity, and further, that the latter of these allows the eye an opportunity of seeing the line of grace to advantage, as in the address of heroes on the stage, or in any solemn act of ceremony;[Pg 143] and that although time in movement is reduced to certain rules for dancing, it is left more at large and at discretion for deportment.

It should be noted that graceful movements in flowing lines are only used occasionally, mostly during leisure time rather than in every action we take. You can go through life without them; they are basically just the decorative part of our gestures. Because they aren't naturally familiar due to necessity, they need to be learned through guidance or imitation and turned into habits through regular practice. Guidance is what I would recommend as the quickest and most effective way. However, before we move on to the method I want to suggest for helping your body get comfortable with graceful movements, I should point out that faster tempos add energy and liveliness, while slower tempos bring gravity and seriousness. The slower pace also allows the eye to appreciate the lines of elegance better, like in the performances of heroes on stage or any formal ceremony; [Pg 143]. While there are specific rules for timing in dance, the timing in movement for everyday behavior is more flexible and left to individual choice.

We come now to offer an odd, but perhaps efficacious method of acquiring a habit of moving in the lines of grace and beauty.

We now present a unique, but potentially effective, way to develop a habit of moving gracefully and beautifully.

119 120

1. Let any one chalk the line fig. [119 L p. II], on a flat surface, beginning at either end, and he will move his hand and arm in a beautiful direction, but if he chalks the same sort of line on an ogee-moulding of a foot or two in breadth, as the dotted line on figure [120 L p. II], his hand must move in that more beautiful direction, which is distinguished by the name of grace; and according to the quantity given to those lines, greatness will be added to grace, and the movement will be more or less noble.

1. If someone draws the line shown in fig. [119 L p. II] on a flat surface, starting from either end, they'll move their hand and arm in a graceful way. However, if they draw that same type of line on an ogee molding that's about a foot or two wide, like the dotted line in figure [120 L p. II], their hand will need to move in that even more graceful direction, which we refer to as grace. Additionally, depending on how long those lines are, the overall effect will enhance grace and the movement will appear more or less dignified.

Gentle movements of this sort thus understood, may be made at any time and any where, which by frequent repetitions will become so familiar to the parts so exercised, that on proper occasion they make them as it were of their own accord.

Gentle movements like this can be done anytime and anywhere, and with enough practice, they will become so familiar to the muscles involved that they will start to happen almost automatically when needed.

The pleasing effect of this manner of moving the hand, is seen when a snuff-box, or fan is presented gracefully or genteely to a lady, both in the hand moving forward and in its return, but care must be taken that the line of movement be but gentle, as No. 3, fig. 49, plate I, and not too S-like and twirling, as No. 7 in the same figure: which excess would be affected and ridiculous.

The nice effect of this way of moving your hand is noticeable when a snuff box or fan is presented gracefully to a lady, both when the hand moves forward and when it returns. However, it’s important to ensure that the movement is gentle, as shown in No. 3, fig. 49, plate I, and not overly S-shaped and twirling, like No. 7 in the same figure; that kind of excess would come across as affected and ridiculous.

49

Daily practising these movements with the hands and arms, as also with such other parts of the body as are capable of them, will in a short time render the whole person graceful and easy at pleasure.

Daily practicing these movements with your hands and arms, as well as with other parts of your body that can do them, will quickly make you look graceful and comfortable whenever you want.

2. As to the motions of the head; the awe most children are in before strangers, till they come to a certain age, is the cause of their dropping and drawing their chins down into their breasts, and looking under their foreheads, as if conscious of their weakness, or of something wrong about them. To prevent this aukward shyness, parents and tutors are continually teasing them to hold up their heads, which if they get them to do it is with difficulty, and of course in so constrain'd a manner that it gives the children pain, so that they naturally take all opportunities of easing themselves by holding down their heads; which posture would be full as uneasy to them were it not a relief from restraint: and there is another misfortune in holding down the head, that it is apt to make them bend too much in the back; when this happens to be the case, they then have recourse to steel-collars, and other iron-machines; all which shacklings are repugnant to nature, and may make the body grow crooked. This daily fatigue both to the children and the parents may be avoided, and an ugly habit prevented, by only (at a proper age) fastening a ribbon to a quantity of platted hair, or to the cap, so as it may be kept fast in its place, and the other end to the back of the coat, as fig. [121 L p. II], of such a[Pg 145] length as may prevent them drawing their chins into their necks; which ribbon will always leave the head at liberty to move in any direction but this aukward one they are so apt to fall into.

2. When it comes to the movements of the head; the fear most kids feel around strangers, until they reach a certain age, makes them lower their chins to their chests and glance out from under their brows, as if they're aware of their vulnerability or of something being off about them. To combat this awkward shyness, parents and teachers are always urging them to lift their heads, but when they do manage to, it's usually with such strain that it causes discomfort, leading kids to naturally seek relief by bowing their heads. This position would be just as uncomfortable if it weren't for the fact that it frees them from the pressure. Another downside of holding the head down is that it can cause them to slouch too much; when that happens, they often resort to steel collars and other contraptions. All these restrictions go against nature and can result in a crooked body. This daily struggle for both kids and parents can be avoided, and an unattractive habit can be prevented, simply by securely attaching a ribbon to a bunch of braided hair or to a cap, keeping it in place, with the other end fastened to the back of the coat, as shown in fig. [121 L p. II], long enough to prevent them from tucking their chins into their necks; this ribbon allows the head to move freely in every direction except for that awkward one they often fall into.

121

But till children arrive at a reasoning age it will be difficult by any means to teach them more grace than what is natural to every well made child at liberty.

But until children reach an age where they can reason, it will be hard to teach them any grace beyond what comes naturally to every well-made child who is free.

The grace of the upper parts of the body is most engaging, and sensible well made people in any station naturally have it in a great degree, therefore rules unless they are simple and easily retain'd and practis'd, are of little use; nay, rather are of disservice.

The elegance of the upper body is truly captivating, and well-built individuals in any position naturally possess a lot of it. Therefore, rules that aren't straightforward and easy to remember and practice are not very helpful; in fact, they can be counterproductive.

Holding the head erect is but occasionally right, a proper recline of it may be as graceful, but true elegance is mostly seen in the moving it from one position to another.

Holding your head up straight is only sometimes correct; tilting it can also look elegant. However, true grace is mostly about moving it fluidly from one position to another.

And this may be attain'd by a sensibility within yourself, tho' you have not a sight of what you do by looking in the glass, when with your head assisted by a sway of the body in order to give it more scope, you endeavour to make that very serpentine line in the air, which the hands have been before taught to do by the help of the ogee-moulding: and I will venture to say, a few careful repetitions at first setting out will make this movement as easy to the head as to the hands and arms.

And you can achieve this by being aware of what’s going on inside you, even if you can’t see what you’re doing by looking in the mirror. When you move your head along with your body to give it more range, try to create that same curvy line in the air that your hands have already learned to do with the support of the ogee molding. I can confidently say that a few careful repetitions at first will make this movement as easy for your head as it is for your hands and arms.

The most graceful bow is got by the head's moving in this direction, as it goes downward and rises up again. Some aukward imitators of this elegant way of bowing,[Pg 146] for want of knowing what they were about, have seem'd to bow with wry necks. The low solemn bow to majesty should have but a very little twist, if any, as more becoming gravity and submission. The clownish nod in a sudden straight line is quite the reverse of these spoken of.

The most graceful bow happens when the head moves in this direction, going down and then rising back up. Some awkward imitators of this elegant way of bowing,[Pg 146] not understanding what they were doing, seem to bow with a crooked neck. The low, solemn bow to majesty should have only a slight twist, if any, as it reflects more appropriate gravity and submission. The clumsy nod in a sudden straight line is the complete opposite of what has been described.

The most elegant and respectful curtesy hath a gentle, or small degree of the above graceful bowing of the head as the person sinks, and rises, and retreats. If it should be said, that a fine curtesy consists in no more than in being erect in person at the time of sinking and rising; Madam Catherine in clock-work, or the dancing bears led about the streets for a shew, must be allow'd to make as good a curtesy as anybody.

The most elegant and respectful courtesy involves a gentle or subtle nod of the head as a person bends, rises, and steps back. If it were claimed that a proper courtesy is simply standing upright while bending and rising, then Madam Catherine with her mechanical movements or the dancing bears paraded in the streets would surely be considered to perform as good a courtesy as anyone.

N. B. It is necessary in bowing and curtesying to shun an exact sameness at all times; for however graceful it may be on some occasions, at other times it may seem formal and improper. Shakespear seems to have meant the above spoken of ornamental manner of bowing, in Enobarbus's description of Cleopatra's waiting-women.——

N. B. When bowing and curtsying, it's important to avoid doing the exact same thing every time; while it might look graceful at times, at other moments it can come off as stiff and inappropriate. Shakespeare seems to refer to this decorative style of bowing in Enobarbus's description of Cleopatra's attendants.——

——And made their bends adornings.      Act 2.

——And made their curves beautiful.      Act 2.

3. Of Dancing. The minuet is allowed by the dancing-masters themselves to be the perfection of all dancing. I once heard an eminent dancing-master say, that the minuet had been the study of his whole life, and that he had been indefatigable in the pursuit of its beauties, yet at last he could only say with Socrates, he[Pg 147] knew nothing: adding, that I was happy in my profession as a painter, in that some bounds might be set to the study of it. No doubt, as the minuet contains in it a composed variety of as many movements in the serpentine lines as can well be put together in distinct quantities, it is a fine composition of movements.

3. Of Dancing. The minuet is considered by dancing teachers to be the ultimate form of dance. I once heard a renowned dance instructor say that he dedicated his entire life to mastering the minuet and had worked tirelessly to uncover its beauty. However, in the end, he could only echo Socrates by admitting that he[Pg 147] knew nothing. He added that I was fortunate in my career as a painter, as there are some limits to the study of painting. Certainly, the minuet incorporates a sophisticated variety of movements in flowing patterns, making it a remarkable arrangement of movement.

122

The ordinary undulating motion of the body in common walking (as may be plainly seen by the waving line, which the shadow a man's head makes against a wall as he is walking between it and the afternoon sun) is augmented in dancing into a larger quantity of waving by means of the minuet-step, which is so contrived as to raise the body by gentle degrees somewhat higher than ordinary, and sink it again in the same manner lower in the going on of the dance. The figure of the minuet-path on the floor is also composed of serpentine lines, as fig. [122 T p. II], varying a little with the fashion: when the parties by means of this step rise and fall most smoothly in time, and free from sudden starting and dropping, they come nearest to Shakespear's idea of the beauty of dancing, in the following lines,

The typical swaying motion of the body when walking (which can be clearly observed by the way the shadow of a man's head moves against a wall as he walks between it and the afternoon sun) becomes more pronounced in dancing, creating a greater amount of waving through the minuet step. This step is designed to lift the body gently a bit higher than normal, and then lower it again in the same gradual way as the dance continues. The pattern of the minuet on the floor is also made up of flowing lines, as shown in fig. [122 T p. II], which may vary slightly with the trend: when the dancers use this step to rise and fall smoothly and without any sudden jerks, they align most closely with Shakespeare's idea of the beauty of dancing, expressed in the following lines,

——What you do,
Still betters what is done,——
——When you do dance, I wish you
A wave o' th' sea, that you might ever do
Nothing but that; move still, still so,
And own no other function.        Winter's Tale.

——What you do,
Still improves what’s been done,——
——When you dance, I hope you
Have the fluidity of the sea, so you can always
Do nothing but that; keep moving, always like that,
And have no other purpose.        Winter's Tale.

The other beauties belonging to this dance, are the turns of the head, and twist of the body in passing each other, as also gentle bowing and presenting hands in the manner before described, all which together, displays the greatest variety of movements in serpentine lines imaginable, keeping equal pace with musical time.

The other beautiful aspects of this dance are the turns of the head and the twists of the body as dancers pass each other, along with gentle bows and hand gestures as described earlier. All of these come together to create a stunning variety of movements in flowing curves, perfectly in sync with the rhythm of the music.

There are other dances that entertain merely because they are composed of variety of movements and performed in proper time, but the less they consist of serpentine or waving lines, the lower they are in the estimation of dancing-masters: for, as has been shewn, when the form of the body is divested of its serpentine lines it becomes ridiculous as a human figure, so likewise when all movements in such lines are excluded in a dance, it becomes low, grotesque and comical; but however, being as was said composed of variety, made consistent with some character, and executed with agility, it nevertheless is very entertaining. Such are Italian peasant-dances, &c. But such uncouth contortions of the body as are allowable in a man would disgust in a woman; as the extreme graceful, so very alluring in this sex, is nauseous in the other; even the minuet-grace in a man would hardly be approved, but as the main drift of it represents repeated addresses to the lady.

There are other dances that entertain simply because they have a variety of movements and are performed on beat, but the less they include serpentine or flowing lines, the less valued they are by dance instructors. As has been shown, when the body is stripped of its serpentine lines, it appears ridiculous as a human figure. Similarly, when all movements in those lines are removed from a dance, it becomes low, absurd, and comical. However, if it is made up of a variety of movements, aligns with a specific character, and is performed with agility, it can still be quite entertaining. Such are the Italian peasant dances, etc. But the awkward body contortions that are acceptable in a man would be off-putting in a woman, as extreme grace, which is very appealing in the female form, becomes distasteful in the male. Even a man displaying the minuet's grace would hardly be appreciated, unless it mainly serves to show repeated attentions to the lady.

There is a much greater consistency in the dances of the Italian theatre than of the French, notwithstanding dancing seems to be the genius of that nation; the following distinctly marked characters were originally from[Pg 149] Italy; and if we consider them lineally as to their particular movements, we shall see wherein their humour consists.

There is a much greater consistency in the dances of the Italian theater than in the French, even though dancing seems to be a strong point of that nation; the following clearly defined characters originally came from [Pg 149] Italy; and if we look at them closely regarding their specific movements, we will understand where their humor lies.

The attitudes of the harlequin are ingeniously composed of certain little, quick movements of the head, hands, and feet, some of which shoot out as it were from the body in straight lines, or are twirled about in little circles.

The harlequin's attitudes are cleverly made up of quick, small movements of the head, hands, and feet. Some of these movements extend straight out from the body, while others spin in little circles.

Scaramouch is gravely absurd as the character is intended, in over-stretch'd tedious movements of unnatural lengths of lines: these two characters seem to have been contrived by conceiving a direct opposition of movements.

Scaramouch is seriously ridiculous as the character is meant to be, with overly stretched, tedious movements and unnaturally long lines: these two characters appear to have been created by imagining a direct opposition of movements.

Pierrott's movements and attitudes, are chiefly in perpendiculars and parallels, so is his figure and dress.

Pierrott's movements and attitudes are mostly up and down and side to side, just like his figure and outfit.

Punchinello is droll by being the reverse of all elegance, both as to movement, and figure, the beauty of variety is totally, and comically excluded from this character in every respect; his limbs are raised and let fall almost altogether at one time, in parallel directions, as if his seeming fewer joints than ordinary, were no better than the hinges of a door.

Punchinello is funny because he embodies the opposite of elegance, both in his movements and his looks. The beauty of variety is completely, and comically, absent from this character in every way. His limbs move up and down almost all at once, in straight lines, as if his fewer joints than usual are no better than the hinges of a door.

Dances that represent provincial characters, as these above do, or very low people, such as gardeners, sailors, &c. in merriment, are generally most entertaining on the stage: the Italians have lately added great pleasantry and humour to several french dances, particularly the wooden-shoe dance, in which there is a continual shifting[Pg 150] from one attitude in plain lines to another; both the man and the woman often comically fix themselves in uniform positions, and frequently start in equal time, into angular forms, one of which remarkably represents two W's in a line, as over figure 122, plate II, these sort of dances a little raised, especially on the woman's side, in expressing elegant wantonness (which is the true spirit of dancing) have of late years been most delightfully done, and seem at present to have got the better of pompous unmeaning grand ballets; serious dancing being even a contradiction in terms.

Dances that showcase provincial characters, like those mentioned above, or lower-class individuals such as gardeners and sailors, are generally the most entertaining on stage. Recently, Italians have added a lot of fun and humor to various French dances, especially the wooden-shoe dance, which features constant shifts from one position to another. Both the man and woman often comically hold uniform poses and frequently spring into angular shapes at the same time, one of which notably resembles two W's in a line, as shown in figure 122, plate II. These types of dances, slightly elevated—especially on the woman's side—expressing elegant playfulness (which is the true spirit of dancing), have been performed delightfully in recent years and seem to have surpassed the pompous and meaningless grand ballets; serious dancing is even a contradiction in terms.[Pg 150]

fig. over 122

4thly, Of Country Dancing. The lines which a number of people together form in country or figure dancing, make a delightful play upon the eye, especially when the whole figure is to be seen at one view, as at the playhouse from the gallery; the beauty of this kind of mystic dancing, as the poets term it, depends upon moving in a composed variety of lines, chiefly serpentine, govern'd by the principles of intricacy, &c. The dances of barbarians are always represented without these movements, being only composed of wild skiping, jumping, and turning round, or running backward and forward, with convulsive shrugs, and distorted gestures.

4thly, Of Country Dancing. The lines that a group of people create in country or figure dancing create a delightful visual effect, especially when the entire formation can be seen at once, like at the theater from the gallery. The beauty of this kind of mystical dancing, as poets call it, relies on moving in a composed variety of lines, mostly serpentine, governed by principles of intricacy, etc. The dances of primitive cultures are always depicted without these movements, consisting only of wild skipping, jumping, turning around, or running back and forth, accompanied by convulsive shrugs and distorted gestures.

One of the most pleasing movements in country dancing, and which answers to all the principles of varying at once, is what they call the hay; the figure of it altogether, is a cypher of S's, or a number of serpentine lines interlacing, or intervolving each other, which suppose[Pg 151] traced on the floor, the lines would appear as fig. [123 T p. II]. Milton in his Paradise lost, describing the angels dancing about the sacred hill, pictures the whole idea in words;

One of the most enjoyable movements in country dancing, which represents all the principles of simultaneous variation, is what's known as the hay; the overall shape resembles a series of S's or a number of winding lines intertwining with each other. If you could see it traced on the floor, the lines would look like fig. [123 T p. II]. Milton, in his *Paradise Lost*, describes the angels dancing around the holy hill and captures the whole concept in words;

Mystical dance!——
——Mazes intricate,
Eccentric, intervolv'd, yet regular
Then most, when most irregular they seem.

Mystical dance!——
——Intricate mazes,
Eccentric, intertwined, yet orderly
Most so when they appear the most chaotic.

123

I shall venture, lastly, to say a word or two of stage-action. From what has been said of habitually moving in waving lines, it may possibly be found that if stage-action, particularly the graceful, were to be studied lineally, it might be more speedily and accurately acquired by the help of the foregoing principles than the methods hitherto taken. It is known that common deportment, such as may pass for elegant and proper off the stage, would no more be thought sufficient upon it than the dialogue of common polite conversation, would be accurate or spirited enough for the language of a play. So that trusting to chance only will not do. The actions of every scene ought to be as much as possible a compleat composition of well varied movements, considered as such abstractedly, and apart from what may be merely relative to the sense of the words. Action consider'd with regard to assisting the authors meaning, by enforcing the sentiments or raising the passions, must be left entirely to the judgment of the performer, we only pretend to shew how the limbs may be made to have an equal readiness to move in all such directions as may be acquired.

I want to say a few words about stage action. Based on what we've talked about regarding moving in flowing lines, it seems that if we study graceful stage action in a straightforward way, we could master it more quickly and accurately using the principles mentioned earlier than with previous methods. It's clear that typical behavior, which might seem elegant and appropriate offstage, is not enough for the stage, just as the dialogue from polite everyday conversation isn’t lively or precise enough for a play. So, relying solely on chance won’t work. The actions in each scene should be a complete composition of varied movements, considered independently from the meaning of the words. Action that helps convey the author’s intent by emphasizing feelings or stirring emotions must be left up to the performer’s judgment; we only aim to show how the body can be trained for smooth movement in all directions.

What I would have understood by action, abstractedly and apart from its giving force to the meaning of the words, may be better conceived by supposing a foreigner, who is a thorough master of all the effects of action, at one of our theatres, but quite ignorant of the language of the play; it is evident his sentiments under such limitations, would chiefly arise from what he might distinguish by the lines of the movements belonging to each character; the actions of an old man, if proper, or not, would be visible to him at once, and he would judge of low and odd characters, by the inelegant lines which we have already shewn to belong to the characters of punch, harlequin, pierrott, or the clown; so he would also form his judgment of the graceful acting of a fine gentleman, or hero, by the elegance of their movements in such lines of grace and beauty as have been sufficiently described. See chapters V, VI, VII, VIII, on the composition of forms. Where note, that as the whole of beauty depends upon continually varying the same must be observed with regard to genteel and elegant acting: and as plain space makes a considerable part of beauty in form, so cessation of movement in acting is as absolutely necessary; and in my opinion much wanted on most stages, to relieve the eye from what Shakespear calls, continually sawing the air.

What I would understand by action, abstractly and apart from how it adds meaning to the words, might be better illustrated by imagining a foreigner who fully grasps all the effects of action but doesn’t understand the language of the play while at one of our theaters. It's clear that his feelings in such a situation would mostly come from what he could identify by the movements of each character. He would immediately notice whether the actions of an old man were appropriate or not, and he would judge silly and awkward characters by the clumsy movements associated with punch, harlequin, pierrot, or the clown. Similarly, he would assess the graceful performance of a refined gentleman or hero by the elegance of their movements, which have been adequately described in terms of grace and beauty. See chapters V, VI, VII, VIII, on the composition of forms. Note that just as all beauty relies on continually varying, the same must be true for refined and elegant acting. And just as plain space is a significant part of beauty in form, pauses in movement during acting are absolutely necessary, and in my opinion, much needed on most stages to give the eye a break from what Shakespeare calls continually sawing the air.

The actress hath sufficient grace with fewer actions, and those in less extended lines than the actor; for as the lines that compose the Venus are simpler and more[Pg 153] gently flowing, than those that compose the Apollo, so must her movements be in like proportion.

The actress has enough grace with fewer actions, and those in shorter lines than the actor; just as the lines that make up Venus are simpler and flow more gently than those that make up Apollo, her movements must be in the same proportion.

And here it may not be improper to take notice of a mischief that attends copied actions on the stage; they are often confin'd to certain sets and numbers, which being repeated, and growing stale to the audience, become at last subject to mimickry and ridicule, which would hardly be the case, if an actor were possest of such general principles as include a knowledge of the effects of all the movements that the body is capable of.

And here it might be relevant to point out a problem that comes with copied performances on stage; they are often limited to specific styles and numbers, which, when repeated, become old and tiresome for the audience, ultimately leading to imitation and mockery. This would likely not happen if an actor had a solid understanding of the general principles that encompass all the physical movements the body can perform.

The comedian, whose business it is to imitate the actions belonging to particular characters in nature, may also find his account in the knowledge of lines; for whatever he copies from the life, by these principles may be strengthened, altered, and adjusted as his judgment shall direct, and the part the author has given him shall require.

The comedian, whose job is to mimic the behaviors of specific characters in reality, can also benefit from understanding lines; because whatever he replicates from life can be enhanced, altered, and adjusted according to his judgment and the role assigned to him by the author.

FINIS.


Prints Publish'd by W. Hogarth, and are to be had at his House in Leicester Fields.

l. s. d.
Marriage a-la-mode, in six prints1 11 6
Harlot's Progress, in six prints1 1 0
Rake's Progress, in eight prints2 2 0
Four Times of the Day, in four prints1 0 0
Strolling Actresses dressing in a Barn.0 5 0
Midnight Conversation0 5 0
Southwark Fair0 5 0
Bishop of Winchester0 3 0
Calais, or the Roast Beef of Old England0 5 0
Before and After, two prints0 5 0
Distress'd Poet0 3 0
Enraged Musician0 3 0
Various Characters of Heads, in five groups0 2 6
Beer Street and Gin Lane, two prints0 3 0
Four Stages of Cruelty, four prints0 6 0
Moses brought to Pharoah's Daughter0 7 6
Paul before Felix0 7 6
Paul before Felix in the manner of Rembrant0 0 0
The Effects of Idleness and Industry,
exemplified in the Conduct of two
Fellow-Prentices, in twelve prints
0 12 0
Lord Lovat0 1 0
Country-Inn Yard0 1 0
Sleeping Congregation0 1 0
March to Finchley0 10 6
Mr. Garrick in the Character of King
Richard the third
0 7 6
Columbus breaking the Egg0 1 0
Frontispiece0 3 0

N. B. If any one purchases the whole together, they will have them deliver'd bound, at the Price of ten Guineas, and a sufficient Margin will be left for Framing.

N. B. If anyone buys the whole set together, they will have them delivered nicely bound for the price of ten guineas, and there will be plenty of margin left for framing.


Figures referr'd to in the Book.

PLATE I.

FigurePage
1,3
2,10, 77
3-4,15
Fig. over Fig. 4,xix
6,vi, viii, 20, 81, 82, 83, 86, 88, 128
7,viii, 20
9,22, 135
10-11,23
12,66, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 128, 153
13,66, 152
14,25, 26
15,27
16,31
17-18,31, 87
19-20,31
21,36
22,33
Fig. between 22 and 105,viii
23,37
24-25,38
26,38, 39, 100
29,40
30-32,41
33-37,42
38,43
39-4244
43,xix, 44
44-4644
47,xix
Fig. between 47 and 88,17, 97
48,46
49, 49,128, 143
Fig. under 49,4
50,49
53,49, 50
54,v, 20, 64
55,20, 76
65,56, 60
66-67,57
Fig. near 67,68
68,58, 76
87,88, 111
97,104, 123, 124
98,123, 124
99-105124
106,125
107,128
115,133

PLATE II.

FigurePage
51,137
52,x
56,51
57,51, 103
58,51, 55, 103
59,53
60-63,55
64,56
69-70,78
71,136
72,20, 137
73,137
74,138
75,137
76,62, 64
77,62, 63, 64
78,63, 64
79-8063
81,64
82-83,65
84-85,96
86,108, 109, 111
89,111
90,109
91,112
92,111
93,111
94,98, 116, 117, 118
95,115
96,117
108-109,130
110,133
113,132
114,133
116,132
117,118, 134
119,120, 143
121,144
122,147
123,151

Download ePUB

If you like this ebook, consider a donation!