The Galleries of the Exposition | Page 3

gold frame, the design of which in many cases is out of all
relation to the picture as well as to the wall. In fact, most frames
impress one as nothing but attempts to make them as costly as possible.
I imagine that practically all true painters would rather do their pictures
under and for a given physical condition, to support and be supported
by architecture; but with the unfortunate present-day elimination of
paintings from most architectural problems, most artists have to paint
their pictures for an imaginary condition. The present production of
paintings has become absolutely unmindful of the true, function of a
painting, which is to decorate in collaboration with the other arts -
architecture and sculpture.
It is necessary to bear these facts in mind in trying to do justice to a
large aggregate of canvases in an international exhibition, or any
exhibition. Thousands of pictures, created by a host of different artists,
are temporarily thrown together. The result, of course, can never be
entirely satisfying. Many devices are employed to overcome this very
disturbing condition and with varying success. The hanging of pictures
against neutral backgrounds, the grouping of works of one man, the
selection of works of similar tonality, colour schemes, technique,
subject, style, etc. - these are all well known methods of trying to
overcome the essential artificiality of the methods of exhibition of
modern paintings. I doubt whether so long as we insist upon art
exhibitions of the conventionally accepted type, we shall ever be able
to present pictures with due regard to their meaning. We must not make
the mistake of blaming a director of an exhibition for a difficulty which
he cannot possibly overcome. So long as painters turn out thousands of
pictures, we can expect only the results which are much in evidence in
all modern exhibitions. The fault is entirely with the artist, who is
forever painting easel pictures, and neglecting the great field of
decorative painting. On investigation of our exhibition we shall find
that the good picture - that is, the picture of a certain respectful attitude
toward its function, which is largely decorative - is far less injured by

unavoidable neighbors than the loud-mouthed canvas of the "Look!
Here I am!" variety, which is afraid of being overlooked. Art
exhibitions of the generally adopted modern type are logically
intolerable, and the only solution of the problem of the correct
presentation of pictures is to display fewer of them, within certain
individual rooms, designed by artists, where a few pictures will take
their place with their surroundings in a unity of artistic expression.
It is certainly no small task to enjoy a large exhibit like ours and to
preserve one's peace of mind. The purpose of these pages is to assist in
guiding the uninitiated, in his visit and in retrospect, without depriving
him of the pleasure of personal observation and investigation. It is not
to be expected that all pictures exhibited should be of a superior kind. If
so, we should never be able to learn to recognize the good among the
bad. So many pictures are only experiments. Only by having the
opportunity for comparison can we learn to discriminate. The
predominant characteristic of our art exhibition is its instructive value
in teaching the development of painting by successive periods,
sometimes represented and some times only indicated. The person who
never had the opportunity to visit the larger historical collections of
paintings abroad, could here obtain an idea of the many changes in
subjects, as well as in technique, which have taken place in the
relatively short existence of the art of painting. It is unfortunately true
that the majority of people are not at all interested in the technical
procedure of the making of the picture, but wholly in the subject matter.
If this be pleasing, the picture is apt to be declared a success. The artist,
on the other hand, and to my mind very justly, looks primarily for what
he calls good painting, and a simple statement of these two points of
view explains a great deal of very deplorable friction between the artist
and the willing and enthusiastic layman, who is constantly discouraged
by finding that his artist friend greets his pet canvas with a cynical
smile.
The subject of the appreciation of pictures from a theoretical point of
view is not exactly the purpose of this book. So enormous is it that it
could be dealt with adequately only in a separate volume the writing of
which I look forward to with joyful anticipation. What I should like to
do - and I should be very glad if I could succeed - is to bring the public
a little closer to the artist's point of view through the discussion of the

merit