23.5.55: $61.13., _ I; V ‘ _ , .
.15 .12.!“ «$131.31; Vilfr. Ni: $333.21.»
. y .“JJgnI-eeghrfiuiizvl rifx ;
‘ u . . I. .. _

Iii... cell-lifelinivlkn’, ..

«I 3x.» 4. xfirviruiwzf

‘ xgklft‘ .11 52.54.

V ,§%.\vt.:; .y

 

«£1.

(.32.) :

 

» n... :4)

.H L: . .5.
‘ , x . a},
n a. LIV! 3 , _ ,lauaw‘z.’

i an x? 25!!

ng [.n /, EITC ,. I: .
‘lruxixlinf In . {)erf‘i Av“.

._x. .f ‘ y 4. rifliiiirt.

41:129.?) .ZSA$.:.L}$LI,% .

 

 

 

 

. .. 1;?51i‘n
.Iniw‘tzflrib {yd-\ixi: all}! . ,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

u! .
JCA.
.3. W‘

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

REEF
POINT
GARDENS

g

g g
E LIBRARY g
’ e a

.3135“
., .a,‘
4,135?
’ H,
“I:
in,
.I,
-_ “‘3‘“
x
‘ W

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Gift of Beatrix F arrand
to the General Library

University of Califomia, Berkeley

 

 

 

 

i
g .

 

A

To

“a,
- 3W“;

H. REPTONVESIQ;

' ON THE APPLICATION OF THE PRACTICE AS WILL

’As THE PRINCIPLES or
‘ f '
Landfc ape-Paintin g to Landfcapc- Gardening :

INTENDED As;
[A SUPPLEMENT to the Eflay 'an the Figure/quay;
P5} . I
By UVEDALE PRICE, Em.

To which is prefixed;

Mr. REPTON’: Letter to Mr. PRICE.

 

LONDON:

Printed for J. ROBSON, in New Baums'rmrr.

 

M. DCC. XCV.
’

.. s»: ,

 

N!" -x '

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONTE—NTS.

 

MR. PRICE’S reafon for anfwering Mr. Rep- Page

ton’s letter fo much in detail — - , .-

’ As Mr..R. agrees with him in the general princi-
ples of improvement, the diEerence between
them is with regard to the propriety or pofiibi—

lity of reducing them tokpraétice—the trial as

yet has never fairly been made - -
Mr. R.’s principal aim throughout his letter, is’
to fhew, that by a Rudy of painting, only wild
ideas are acquired. Such a general notion not

authorifed by the Works of-painters—exempli- '

'_ fied in ,thofe of Claude and N. Pouflin - -

In giving the title of “ The New Syfiem of Im-
provement; by Negleé’t and Accident,” Mr. R.
has tried to ridicule his 0an practice - -

The utility of that praé’tice and method of Rudy
difcufléd—illufirated by a paffage from Helvetius
’ " A 2 Its

 

24

28

3O

31

.32

 

 

my} 4

iv' CONTENTS:

Its efl'eé’r in gardening - 7 - _

Page

33

Not attended to .by Mr. Brown, and one hhief I '

caufe of his defects—It is' a method of Rudy
very generally purfued by painters in their ftudy
of nature, but not by improvers - _

Mr. R. however had purfued it according to his
own account - p - - ..

Mr. Price had taken the liberty of recomrriending,
in addition to it, the Prudy of the higher artifls ;
but is glad to hear Mr. R. had anticipated his ad-
vice, and that he acknowledges it a {tudy efl'en-
tial to the profeflion 7- - ‘— I -

In their party down the Wye, Mr. R. treated
lightly the idea of taking hints from a natural
river, towards forming an artificial one.—He
had found by practical experience, that there is
lefs affinity between painting and gardening,
than his enthufiafm for the piéturefque made
him originally fancy ~ - - -

The principal aim of Mr. R. is to weaken that
affinity; buthis own method of proceeding,
proves the clofenefs of itnthat method difcufl‘ed
and compared with the painter’s - _

In all this, convenignce and propriety are not the
objects of'confideration, though not, to be me-
gleé’ted — i- - - -

The beft landfcape-painters Would be the belt

landfcapea

35'

37..

739

4-3

45

   

' ifuqx‘fWflit $25.:

$3

rig» 1.;-
a -x—

u ~f;§a;:§;$-a:4§1itx} at» .

.x ':-~.~r‘:“‘_.- _
\4 , -. -,

532322 a

are,

'3“
«A

 

”J‘Qéq A {jgi'é‘iii-isjvi“;‘71.?“5:.",- 13%;; I: 31:7.

\«ngg‘ gimp“ "a, <'

» mix

CON-TENTS.

landfcapeggardeners, were they to turn their
minds to the pxaétical part 3 confequently, a {tudy
of their works the mofl: ufeful Pcudy to an im.
prover - - .. - -
Mr. R. has endeavoured to confine his readers’
ideas to mere garden fcenes, and to perfuade
them that Mr. P. wifhes that every thing {hould
be facrificed to piaurefque effeé’r - -

That notion refuted by references to the Effay on
the Pié‘turefque - - - .-
Mr. R’s. illuf’tration of a garden feene, by a didaé’cic
poem, examined a- . .. ..
Alfo his quere, whether the painter’ s landfcape is
indifpenfible to gardening ?--as likewife the

g meaning of both thofe terms .- 9 -

Infiead 01‘:th pamter’ s lanaiycape, Mr. R. ought, 1n
candour, to haVe put a fludy g“ the principles of
fainting. All painting not rough—inflances of
too great fmoothnefs - r —

Such a painter as Van Huyil'um would be a much
better judge of the merits and defeé’ts of the mofl:
dreffed {cene—eof a mere flower-garden—than a
gardenér; and from the general principles of
the art, his and the wildefi: painters—even S.
Rofa’s judgment, would probably agree —

The more the {cence was extended, the more it
would belong to the painter, and the lefs to the

A 3 , gardener,

Page

46.

47

49

52

54

‘55

 

 

.Jw-r. : v 1 ‘

 

I l , _\

C ONT‘E firs;

   

' ‘ 1 Page
gatdener.-$Mr. R.’ has addrefl-‘ed himfelfto the ‘
fears of his emplOyers, and alarmed them for’”

their health 1n pié’rure‘fque fcenes‘ -: — ' 57 I

Dirt and. rubbifh not pié’turefque, as fuch '- x - 58
Many pleafing {Genes which cannot be painted— '
that notion, and the argument Mr. R. has drawn '

‘ ' ., from it, examined _ . _ _.. 7'60

Mr. P. had been Warned, that 'the BrOwnif’cs 1n I
general would take advantage of his (1111111611911;
\ and give up the pié’turefque, and keep to beauty . I
. only—the advantage it would be of to him,
{h'ould they do fo—his furprize and regret that
Mr. R fliould have done ”what nearly amounts ,
to it , ‘ ' ~ . 4 - — - 63
Befo're he lays any thing furthet on the ufe of the
piéturiéfque in landfcape—gardening, Mr. P.
vvifhes three points to be confidered—Ifi.1the 1
dii’cinét charaéter of. the pié’turefque- . 7 - . 65
iadly} The vague meaning of the term gardening ‘66
And 3dly. The'general mixture of the pié’curefque '
with the beautiful.—-—Mr. R. has always chofen
to confider the piétur'efque in its roughei’c fiate,
but has avoided any allufion to piéturefque
[emery - - - — - _. 67
He therefore transfers the pié’curefque to gipfies, ‘
E ‘ &c. not to cafcades ano foref’c feenes. —-Mr. R.’ s

criticifm of Mr. P.’ s obfervatiax, on the street of ,
deer 1n groups, examined _- ~ . - 68

The

 

 

 

 

 

1‘1 .

 

'.'

' The‘-ju{tne{s' of" that obfervation defended, by the r “

€IQ'NT‘ENTS. :Vii
‘ Page.

pifiureS of 'Claude'and Betchem - , ,. 70
The piéturefque applied to landfcape-gardening- A A 1 71
Piéturefque parts in the molt {imply beautiful

rivers — _ -. _ - .74
‘Thofe parts mufi be d‘efiroyed or concealed, if the ‘

picturefque be renounced. Beauty no more the

’ immediate refult of fmoothnefs, &c. than- pic- :

turefquenefs rs of roughnel's, 8ch _. ' — —:~ 75

. Should Mr. R. allow 'of a mixture of roughnel's m

his idea of beauty, it is no longer unmixed—no 7'
longer feparate from the piéturefque; and in

‘ that cafe, all he has laid about renoun'cing th:

‘ latter is no'objeé’t - 1 1 - - - _-‘ 76

,Propofed alteration at Powis Callie, by a profell'ed T.

improver ‘- ‘“ - ~ 1‘ ‘ “ t 77

‘That infiance fhews the danger of trying to ridi-

‘cule the fludy of painting, and of the pic- -'
turefque " ,. ., ., - - - - ‘73

The difl‘idenCe Mr. R. flIewed in confulting Mr. '
Knight about the unprovements at Femey Hall,
firfi gave Mr. P. a defire of being acquainted

, with him. —The charaéter he had heard of his
drawings, added to that delire - - ‘ 80

The improver not lefs in danger of becoming a

mannerifl' than the painter.——Kent an example

(\Ffl' _ . , - - "' 4 -> 82

M t.

 

 

 

 

gr.

 

 

viii CONTENTS.

Mr. P. did not intend to call in queflion the re-

fpefiability of Mr. R.’s profeflion; but on the t

contrary, to give it a refpeétability it hi-
therto had not deferved .. - -
Parallel drawn by Mr. R. between the painter’s
fludies of wild nature and the uncontrouled
opinions of favagcs -. vn , .—

By wild nature, he probably means fimple nature
unimproved by art,—How far fuch wild na-
ture, when arranged by the painter, may ac-
cord with dreffed fcenery - - i -

Many {cenes in unimproved nature highly beauti-
ful in the firié’tefi fenfe, and which are of courfe

produced by accident, not defign - ..
Mr. R,’s parallel between modern gardening and
the Engliih conflitution l—. - -.-
A more apt and inf’eruéiive one might have been.
drawn between it and the art of painting -
Mr. R.’s defence of the detail of Mr. Brown’s
praé’rice—the clump -.- — -.- -

Mr. Brown fiudied difiiné’cnefs, not conneé’tion.-—-
Conmflion the leading principle of the art,
and the molt flagrantly and fyf’cematically vio-
lated - - ., .. 9‘ \ -

The two principal defeé‘cs in the cbmpofition of
landfeapes, that of objeéis being to ocrouded or
too fcattered. Mr. R.’s condemnation of fingle
trees in heavy fences very jui’c - -

The

Page

83

84

92

93

94

‘95

 

C O N T E ' N T 8. ix
r Page
The ground mul’c be prepared, fenced, and planted ‘

too thick at firl’c. Remedies propofed for the
defects that method, though the belt, will oc-

’ ‘ cafion - - - -' " 97

‘The belt - - _- ‘ - _ - loo
Caufes afligned for its introduction and continu-

ance — - - — - 10?.
Nothing {0 convenient as to work by general re-

ceipts, fu'Ch as clumps, belts, 25cc. - #- 103

The belt a gigantic hedge—difi'erence between
thatvand the accidental fcreens to old parks—-
thofe are true objeé’ts of imitation to the land-
fcape—gardener. Mr. R.’s improved belt not,
properly a belt; certainly not Mr. Brown’s, &c. 105

Even that improved belt {hewn to be tedious
from his own account '- - - 106

Mr. P.’s‘ recommendation to ’gentlemen' to be-
come their own landfcape-gardeners not likely
to injure the profefiion, and {till lefs the art - (107

No art more adapted to men of liberal education
who have places in the country; its praétice
not difficult - - - - 103

.Lefs danger in quacking one’s felf than in trui’c-

ing to a bold empyric — - .. 109
Parallel between the education of a phyfician and

la landfcape~gardener - _ - - no
The molt perverfe and ignorant improver of his

’ ,own place will {eldom do fuch extenfive mif-
* chief

- "t , wFWFWV‘“ 'V “T“:

111' CONTENTS.

torture in the inquifition, compared With the,
cruelty of favages * - . - -

No plan or medicine proper in almoi’c every

cafe—neither Mr. Brown’s plan or James’ s _

powder.——Profpeéts - - -
Why profpeé’ts 1n general are not proper fubj eé’rs
for painting - .. .. _
The fame caufes equally Operate on :21"! views -
Profpeéts are to be judged of, like any other
vieWs, on the principles of painting -
But however exquifitely painted, will not have the
“ effect of thofe in nature—~they are not real,
_ and therefore do not excite the curiofity which
reality excites - - - ..

This accounts for what Mr. R. relates of the vi-

fitors at Matlock. Mr. P. had called the two '
- arts ffle/‘s, but has no objection to adopting _

Mr. R.’ s idea, and calling them hufband and

wife - - - - - .

Mr. R.’ s illufiration of the habit of admiring fine
pié’cures and bold fcenery, by that of chewing
of tobacco . - - V _ _ _

In the fame mannerthat Mr._R. has reprefented

t .Mr.~ P. as liking nothing but what iS'rough and

pifiurefque, a wrong-headed friend of Mr.
3 ‘ ‘ Gilpin’s

V _ . Page
chief-as’is produced 'by the; regular fyfternv of-
clearing and levelling—alluiion to the flflem of:

".71 :I 2

.113

115
116

118

119

120

122

 

 

 

6? 61:11? E“ N; T 5: 3:1.
{I Page
Gilpiri’ s might very plaufibly reprefent him as ‘
loving norhing but {moothnefs ' .. — 123
Mr. R.’ s examples of fubjeas he fuppofes Mr. P.
to defpife, beraufe they are incapable of being
painted - .,.- - - — 125
They all may be painted ' —"j - - , 126
Except the immediate defcent down a fieep hill 1-2.8
éPhat ”deficiency of the ’art, and the argument
draWn from it, confidered ’ - - 129
Recapitu'lation Of the contents, and the defign of
Mr. R.’ 3 letter - ‘— — - 130
Remarks on the general and confined fenfe of the
term beautiful - - - - 135
lllultrated by that of virtue - - - 137
A piéturefque fcene, without any mixture! of the
beautiful - - - ~ - ' 14o
Contrafied with a beautiful fcene, unmixed with
5' “any thing pié’turefque - - - 14.1
Effeé’t of the different charaé’cers of light and flu-
dow- on thefe two fcenes - - - 14.4.
Effeét of mixing the charaé’ters of the two fcenes
-—effe8c_of Mr. Brown’s 91er of improvement
; on them both - - - — 14.5
In; what points the defign of the Ellay on the Pie 1 '
turefque has been mifconceived 7 — , - 146
On gravel walks and paths - - - 148

 

. uni—W»: ‘4 . -< r—

 

xii CONTENTS.

The effeé’t of difiinél: cutting lines, illuftrated by a
remark of A. Caracci, or Raphael and C orrcggio
Gravel walks accord more with beautiful than
with piéturefque fcenes . ‘ — -
On by.roads in a dry foil, as objeé’cs of imitation,
. at forne diflance from the houfe a- -

On the different efl'eéts of the foythe, and of the
bite of {beep -. ~ - .. -

Page
« 149
I so
I 52

I53

HOW banks in pleafure—grounds might be made /

to have the play of Wild, and the polifh ofdrefled
nature.——On difiinét lines, when applied to the
banks of water_ - .. .. .. _
Efl'eé’t of difliné’tnefs in the lines of gravel walks,
and in the banks of water, confidere'd _

The piéturefque and the beautiful as feparate as
their refpeé’tive qualities—butzthe art of improv-

154 i

, 155

ing depends not on their confiant feparation, ’

but on their proper mixture—{till more on the
higher principles of union, conneétion, 85¢. -

Controverfy compared with the ancient tourna-
ments - - ~ - — -

The efl'eéts of conneé’tion in a more important

{phere - — _ _ ,. _
Note on 1V.[r. Mafon’s expreflidn of S )‘Z’Udfl grace

Pofifcript - - .. .. - _

I57

159
161'

162

A LETTER

 

 

 

A
LETTER

UVEDALE PRICE, Esq;

 

 

 

\
3
(
J

 

,l.‘

’7 I « '
LA’ ‘mfir
x ‘

u.

 

 

aim v

111:1; ‘

 

 

A’ LETTER, 8rd.

 

SIR,-

Am much obliged by your attention, in

having direéted your bookfeller to fend
me an early copy of your ingenious work
It has been my companion during a long
journey, and has furnithed me with en-g
tertainment, fimilar to that which I have
occafionally had the hOnour to experience.
from your animated convcrfation on the
fubjeé’c. In the general principles ‘and
theory of the art, which you have confi-
dered with to much attention, Iflatter my-

felf that we agree; and that our difi‘erenee .

of opinion relates only to the propriety, or,
perhaps, poflibility, of reducing them to

praf’tice.
I am obliged both to Mr. Knight, and
to yourfelf, for mentioning my name as
B 2 an

cl

new-«aw»...

 

£11

£11 exception .9" to the taf’telefs herd of M11.)
iBrown’s followers. But while you are
pleafed‘ito allow me fome of the qualitiea
I neceflary to my profeflion, you fuppofe me

,, deficient 111 o- the‘rg, and therefore If’crongly

itecomrnend the (Indy of “ what the higher

‘.‘ artifis have done, both 111 their piétures .
f‘ and draWings: ” a branch of knowledge ‘

whiCh I haVe always confidered to he not
lefs eflentil to my profeflion than hy—
dranlics or furveying , and without which
I {hould never have prefumed to arrogatc

*to rnyfelf the title of “ Land/cape Gar-

“ denar,” which you obferVe is, “ 22 title
'“ gf 720/7224]! prétwyzanf’

h It is difficult to define GOOD ITASTE in
any of the pOlite arts, ‘and arnongft the
refpeétiVe profeITo1s of them, I am forty

* Should the new 1'}; Item of improving, “ by negleék
and accident, ” ever pievail {0 far as to rende: this,
beautiful kingdom one huge pifiureltlue forefl, I doubt
whether fuch mention of my name may not be attri-
buted to the fame dtlicate motives which you {0 mge-

nicufly aflign in excufe for Mr. Mafon’ s praife of
Brown.;

a

" I
.i‘fl 1

W

‘9.

 

 

 

 

 

[1 3' 1

t6 obi‘erve that it is feldom allowed in;

Qrival ; while thofe. who are not profefl'ors,
but, being free from the bufincfs or difiis

pation of life, have found leifure to excel
in any one of thefe arts, generally find
time alfo to cultivate the others 3 and be:
caufe there really‘does’exil’t forn‘e aflinity
betwixt them, they are ’apt to fuppOfe it
{till ' greater 9*.

During the pleafant hours we paired to:
gether amidfi the rbmantic fcenery of the,
Wye, I do remember my acknowledging
that an enthufiafm for the piéturefque, had
originally led me to IfanCy greater aflinity
betwixt Pazhtiizg and Gardening, than I
found to exift after more mature confider—
ation, and more practical experience; bre-

* Thus Muflc and Poetry are often coupled toge-
ther, although very few infiances occur in which they
are made to aflimilate; becaufe the melody of an air is

lfeldom adapted either to the rhyme or meafure of

the verfe. In like manner, Poetry and Painting are
often joined; but the canvas rarely embodies thofe
figurative perfonages to advantage, which the poet’s
enthufiafm prefents to the reader’s imagination.

\ B 3 , ' caufe,

 

)“ia._.' , 1

I‘ 6 3
caufe, in wlvatemr relate: to Mampmfri'ety
and convenience are flat Zq/Ir‘ oéjefr’: qf good
m/le, 1/1422 pifiur‘g/gue Qflfi' ; and a beauti;
ful garden feene is not-more Idefeétive'be-
‘cane it would not look well on canvas,
than a' didaétic poem becaufe it neither
furnifhes a fubjeé’c for the painter or the
muiician. ' There are a thoufand {Genes in
nature to delight the eye, bcfi‘des thofe
which may be copied as piétures {and in-
deed one'of the keenefi obfervers ofpié‘cu‘é-
refque fcenery (Mr. Gilpin), has often
regretted that few are capableof being f0

'reprefented, without confiderable licenfe

and alteration.

If therefore the painter’slandfcape be
indifpenfible to the perfeftion of garden-
ing, it would furefy be far better to paint
it on eanvas at the end Of an avenue, as
they do 'in Helland, than to ‘facrifice the
health, cheerfulnefs, and comfort- of a
country refidence, to the wildbut pleafing
ifcenery of a pain‘ter’s imagination.

‘ v There

 

{7'73

There is no exercife fo, pleating to the V

inquifitive mind, as that of :deducing
theories and fyflems from favourite Opi-
nions; I was therefore. peculiarly inte-

rreficed and gratified by your. ingenious

difiiné’tion betwixt the beautiful and the

pifiurefque ; but I cannot admit the pro-~

priety of its ‘Pplication t0 landfCaPe. gar,

clening; beeaufe beauty, and not “ pic-
“ turel‘queuefs,” is the €th objeét of

' moderhyimprovement: .far although fame
inurferymen, or labourers in the kitchen
gardenmiay have badly copied Mr; Brown’s -

manner, yet the unprejudiced eye will (iii-
cover innumerable beauties in the works of
that great {elf-taught mafier -: and fince
you have {0 judicioufly marked the dif’cinc-

.tion betwixt the beautfu/ and the pic-

z‘urcfgue, they will perhaps difcover, that,
Where the habitation and convenience of
man can be improved by éeauty; “ pifiu-

‘rg/guemfi’l may be transferred to the rag-

ged gipfy, with Whom “ the wild afs, the
POmeranian dog, and {baggy goat” are
B 4. more

gm}: 7 , , ,V,

 

Eg:-_vfl<

.,___ -. .... 4.“..- "4‘ -_o~-—-..v~

w Wn—vvw *7 .7‘

z [8']

,rmore in’hai'mon’y, than the fleck-coated .
~horfe,” or the dappled deer*, which have

.neverltill lately been difco'veted, (when
.“_in gtbups, to; be meagre and {potty}? ..
Amidft the feverity of your. fatiref‘ on
a Mr”. BroWn and his ifolleWers,’ I. cannot be
.ignora-nt- that many pagES are directly
.pbinted "at my opinions; although with ‘
mere delicacy than your friend Mrr. Knight
has fliewn, in the attempt to make me an

object of ridicule,: by mifquoting my un-

publifhed MSS.

It is the misfortune of every liberal art
.to find amongf’c 1ts ptofelfors fome men of
uncouth manners ; and fince my profefiion
has more frequently been practifed by mere
,day labourers, and perfons of no education,
,it is the more difficult to give it that rank
amongfl the polite arts, which I conceive
it ought to hold. Yet it is, noW’ become

, * The continual moving and lively agitation obferv-
able in herds of deer, is one of the‘circumflances which
painting cannot reprefent; but it is not lefs an objeét
pf beauty and cheerfulnefs in park fcenery.

‘ . my

-'...A~.1 ILA. ‘V “.3“... AAA

[' 9 '1
i-‘iuy duty 't'of‘uppmt ‘its refp‘eétability, fincé
you attack the very exiftence of that pro«
9 fefiion; at the head of which, both you
and Mr. Knight have the goodnefs to fay
that I am defervedlyi placed.

Your newytheory of deducing land/bapt-
gardening from panting is f0 plaufible, '

’ that, like many other philofophic theories,
it may captivate and miflead, unlefs duly
examined, by the tefi of experience and
praé’cice; 7' I Cannot help feeing great afli—
nity betwixt deducing gardening from the

A ' :painter’s fiudies of Wild nature, and de-

ducing government from the uncontrouled
opinions‘ of ' manin a favage flate. The
'neatnefs, fimplicity, and elegémceofEng—
lifh gardening, have acquired the appro-
bation of the pre‘fent century, as the-happy
inedium betwixt the wildnefs of nature
and the {tifi‘riefs of art 5 in the fame mam
ner as the ‘Engliih conflitution is the

’ happy medium betwixt the liberty of fa;

. vages, and the refiraint of defpotic go—
vernment3-and {0 long as we enjoy the
' benefit

[ io ]
benefit of thefe middle degrees betwixt
extremes of each, let experiments of un-
tried theoretical improvement be made 111
fome other country. , - «

So far I have endeavoured to defend
Mr. Brown with re peét to the general
principle of improvement. But it is ne—
cefi'ary to enter fomething farther into the ,
detail of his practice of what/has been lu-
‘dicroufly called clumping and hiring. N 0
man ‘of talte can hefitate betwixt the na~
tural group of trees, compofed of various ‘
growths,vand that formal patch offirs which '
too often disligure a lawn, under the name
ofa clump :/ but the molt certain method of
- producing a group of five or fix' trees, is to
plant fifty or fixty Within the fame fence 5
and this Mr. Brown frequently advifed,
with a mixture of firs .to protect and lhelter
the young trees during their infancy; but;
unfortunately, the neglect or bad fafle‘of
his employers would occafionally fufi'er the
firs to remain long after they had com-
pleted their office as nurfes ,- while others

2 have

 

 

 

 

 

~“'"

__J§&&ani

[“1

have afiually‘ planted fir: only ‘in .{uch
clumps, totally Inifconceiving Mr. Brown’s
original intention. Nor is it uncommon 19
fee thefe black patches furrounded by a.
painted rail, a quick hedge, or even a {tone
wall, inftead of that temporary fence which

_ is always an object of neceihty, and not of

choice. .
If a large expanfe of lawn happens una-

V fortunately to have no fingle trees or groups

to dive-rfify its furface, it is fometimes ne'-
ceflary to plant them , and if the fize and,
quantity of 'thefe clumps or mafl‘es bear
proportion to the extent of lawn, Or fhape
of the groUnd, they are furely lefs ofl'enh-
five than a multitude of flarving finglc
trees, furrounded. by heavy cradle fences,
which are often dotted over the whole
furface of a park. I will grant, that where
a few old' trees can be preferved of former
hedge-rows, the clump is feldom neceflary,
exCept in a flat country where the furface

of the lawn may be varied by thick mafles,

whofe effect cannot be produced by fingl’e

trees.

 

[ 12 ]

frees. The clump" thereforeh'is hever to?

be confidercd as an object of prefent beau-3'

137,- but as a more certain expedient for

producing future beaUties, than young

“trees, which very feldom grow when eX-‘

pofedfingly to the wind and fun. _

i l I Ihall now proceed to defend my pro-‘-
decefi'or’s belt, on the fame principle OfCXe’
pedience; Although I perfeétly‘ agree", that;
in certain fituations, it has been executed
in a manner to be tirefome in itfelf, and
highly injuribus to the general {cenery ;
yet there are many places in Which no '
method could be more fortunately. devifed,
than a belt or boundary of plantation to
encompafs the park or lawn. It is often
too long,- and always too narrow, but from
my own experience I am convinced, that
notwithfianding the obfiinacy and pref-
fumption of which Mr. Brown is accufed;
he had equal difficulties to furmount from
the profufion, and the parfimony of his em:-
ployers, or he would neVer have confente'd
to th‘ofe meagre girdles of plantation which
21’6“

 

 

E :34 '
are extended for many miles in length,
althOugh not above twenty or thirty yards

, in breadth.

Let me briefly trace the origin, inten-J
‘tion, and ufes of a belt. The comfort and
pleafure of a country refidence requires,
that fome ground, in proportion to the
fize of the houfe, fhould be feparated
from the adjoining ploughed fields; this
inclofure, call it park, or lawn, or pleafure
ground, muf’t have the air of being appro-
priated to the peculiar ufe and pleafure
of the proprietor. The leve of feclufion
and .fafety is not lefs natural to man than
that of liberty, ,and I conceive it would be
almofi: as painful to live in a houfe without
the power of {butting any door, as in one
with all the doors locked: the mind is
equally difpleafed with the excefs of 1i-
berty, or of reitraint, when either is too
apparent. ' From hence proceeds the ne—
ceflity of inclofing a park, and alfo of bid-
ing the boundary by which it is inclofed;
and a plantation being the molt natural
' means

 

 

[14,]

means of hiding a park pale, net-hing can:
be more obvious than a drive or walk in.
fuch a plantation. If this belt be made of
Jane uniform breadth, witha drive as. uni-
formly ferpentinin g through the; middle of
it, I am readyto allow that the way can
only be interefting to him who wifhes to ..
‘EXamine the growth of. his youngitrees ; to
everyone elfe it mufi be tedious, ,and its
dull—nefs will increafe in proportion ‘ to its
length. On the contrary, if the plantation
be judicioufly made of various breadth, if
its outline beadapted to ithenatural theme
of the ground, and if the drive be conduéted
irregularly through its courfe, fometimes
totally within the dark fhade, tome—times
fkirting ifo neaaitséed-ge as to {how the dif‘
ferent {Genes betwixt the trees, and fame.-
times quitting the wood entirely to enjoy
a the unconfined View of dii’tant profpeéts,-~
it will furely be allowed that fuch a plan-e
tation is the heft poflible means of conneé’t.
ing and difplaying the various pleafing
points .of view, at a dii’cance. from each

other,

 

 

{- Is 1‘-
other, within the limits of the park 5—;
and the only 311% objection that can be
urged, is—Where fuch points do not occur
often enough, and where the length of a
drive is fubl’tituted for its variety.

This letter, which has been written, at
various opportunities, during my journey
into Derbyfhire, has infenfibly grown to
a bulk which I little expeaed when:
began it; I {hall therefore caufe a few
copies to be printed, to ferve as a general
defence of an art, which, I truf’t, will not
be totally fupprefied, although you f0 ear-
nef’tly recommend every gentleman to be-
come his own landfcape gardener. ‘ With
equal propriety might every gentleman
become his own architeft, or even his own
phyfician: in Ihort, there is nothing that
a man of abilities may not do for ,himfelf,
if he will dedicate his whole attention to
that fubjeét only. But the life of man is
not fuflicient to excel in all things; and as -
“ a little knowledge is a dangerous thing,”
['0 the profeffors of every art, as well as

' that

 

[a 6 41

molt difficult cafes are thofe,"where.- the
patient has begun by guacéihglbzhzfef
, The general rules of art are to be age
quired by ftudy, but the manner of apply?
ing them can only be learned by praéfice, .
yet there are certain good plans which, like ,
certain good medicines, may be proper in;
almofl every cafe 5 it was therefore no
greater impeachment of Mr. Brown s taf’te
to anticipate his belt 1n a naked country,
than it would be to a phyfician to guefs,
before he faw the patient, that he would
prefcribe James’ s powders 1n a fever.

In the volume of my works now in the
prefs, I have endeavoured to trace the dif-

' fe1ence betwixt pamz‘flzg and gardemfig, as

Well as to make a diitinétion betwixt a
land/Mpg anda prwcéi; fuppofing the
former to be the proper fubjeét for, a
painter, while the latter is. that in which
every body delights; and, in fpite of the
fafiidioufnefs of connoifl‘einfhip, we mull:
allow fomething to the general voice of?

I i .. mankind,

 

 

137]] ' 'i

,mankind; I am led to this remark from \
QbICTVia’g'the eEe& of pié’curefque fcfinery‘

on the vifiters of Matlocli Bath (where
this part of my letter has been written).
"In the valley a thoufand delightful fubjee‘ts
prefent themfel-ves to the painter, yet the
yifiters of this place are feldom fatisfieii till
they have climbed the neighbouring hills,
to take. a bird’s-eye View of the whole {pot,

which no painting can reprefenth—the‘

love of profpeé’t feems a natural propen~
{“235 an inherent paflion of the human
‘mind, if I may ufe f0 firong an expref—
:fion.

This confideration confirms my opinion
that painting and gardening are nearly con-
nected, but not fo intimately related as you.
imagine a they are not fifter arts proceed»
in g from the fame flock, but rather conge-
nial natures, brough; together like man
and wife ; while therefore you exult in the
office of mediator betwixt thefe two
“ imaginary perfonages,” you fliould re-
collect the danger of interfering in their

‘ C occafional

 

.— vw‘wv v-w—‘u. "ywwv‘vu-‘ .. .-‘~»1 7—- .w ‘7

[‘18]

becafional differences, and efpecially how,
you advife them both to wear the fame
article of drefs. ‘

I [112111 conclude this long letter‘by an
allufion to a work, which it is impofiible
for you to admire more than I do. Mr.

«Burke, in his Efl'ay on the Sublime and

Beautiful, obferves, that habit will make
a man prefer the tafte of tobacco to that
of fugar; yet the world will never be
brought to fay that fugar is not fweet. In
like manner both Mr. Knight and you are
in the habits of admiring fine pictures,
and both live amidft bold and pié’turefque
fcenery: this may have rendered you in-
fenfible to the beauty of thofe milder
fcenes that have charms for common ob-
fervers. I will not arraign your taf’re, or
call it vitiated, but your palate certainly
requires a degree of “ irritation” rarely to
be expeéted in garden ’ fcenery; and, I
trufl, the good fenfe and good tafie of this
country will never be led to defpife' the
comfort {of a gravel walk, the delicious

fragrance

 

 

.mmltr'm.‘ “4.3.431” mam-4'; 2,112" "" m
, “WWW...“ , I

I '19 1
fragmnée Of a fhrubbery, the foulegpandz‘
_ ing delight of a Wide extended profpeé‘t ’1‘,»
or a view ddWfl a f’c'eep hill, beeaufe they
are all fubjefts incapable of being painted.

Notwithflanding the oceafio'nal afperity
of your remarks on my Opinions,- and the
unprovoked fally of Mr.- Knight’s wit, I
‘ efteem it a ‘very pleafant circumfia-nce of
my life to have been perfOnally known to
you both, and to have witnefl'ed your good
taf’ce in many fituatiOns: I {hall beg leaVe;
therefore, to fubfcribe myfelf; with much.
regard and efteem;

81R;
Your mof‘c obedient;
humble fervant';

. , , H . REPTONJ
H’argylree’f, near Kmfirdi

.7“? I: 1794"

4* An extenfive pnflwfl is here mentioned as one of
the {ubjeéts that may be delightful, although not pic-
turefquew-‘But I have repeatedly given] my opinion,
that however defirable a profpeét may be from a tower
or .belvidere, it is {eldom advifeable from the windows
ofa‘ eonfiam refidence;

C2 PAS.OHC

 

 

 

 

I 29 5]

« . P. 8.0126 of the etchingein Mr. Knight‘fi ,,

' poem has been reprefented as copied from

a work of mine; an idea which I believe
MrL-Kni’ght. never intended to 'fuggefiz‘;
”the fame thing may poflibly happen with
refpeét to the place mentioned by youht
page zoo, and'the other “ two places on

Jan very large feale (page 215), as laid out
~by a pmfefled improver ‘of high reputaa'

tion.” Now this being the. title; under
which I frequently feel myfelf alluded to
from our occafional converfations, I truth
to your candour to explain, in 'a future

‘edition, that thefe places are not wotks of

mine.

 

 

 

 

 

A LETTER

TO

H. REPTON, Em

ON THE APPLICATION OF THE PRACTICE AS WELL

AS THE PRINCIPLES OF

Landfcape -Painting to Landfcapc-Gardening;

I

INTENDED A3

A SUPPLEMENT to the Ejay on the Piflurefque.

BY UVEDALE PRICE, Eyck

 

 

 

   
  
    

 
 

 

‘1‘; »
“N“?flfiwfiz
4‘ 9 , "1‘ r. ‘

v“

mafia; '
tw‘W. ’ ,

  
  

 

 

   

 

 

‘« ’ " v ‘ 4 I . ,
.‘ , ‘ ‘ . t fl, ,,
u AM . ,m.‘ mm mm

 

 

A LETTER, 6m.

8 I R, ‘

TH E printed letter you have addrefl'ed
to me, I could wifh, on fome accounts,
had been a private one ; upon the whole,
however, I am glad you have made it
public. I am thereby enabled freely and
openly to difcufs the points of fdifi‘erence
between us; to enforce fome principles
and enlarge upon others, on which I had
touched but flightly; on the other hand,
had it been a private letter, thofe points
might have been more amicably difcufléd;
explanations and corrections might have
taken place, which, had you afterwards
thought it right to appeal to the public,

‘ C 4. might.

 

“7
1
y“
‘,
l

 

 

.1 "an.” 116”? m 7—1

W X

[24]

might haVe fo changed the nature of the
appeal, as to make an anfwer from me lefs .,
neceffary, 01 at leaft lefs controverfial. ’
Had fuch a letter been addrefled to me
by a mere theorii’c 1n improvement, Pfibuld
have been much lefs folicitous (however

" high his reputation) to aaner his objec—

tions in detail 5 for were I ever f0 com-
pletely to vanquifh fuch an anytagqnifi, it
might Frill be faid, that the frflo‘i’ibdl im-
provei only, and Whole praé’c‘ice was ex-
tenfive, mould point out the 1110?: efl’ential,
defeé’cs 111 my book as far as it related to
improvements; for that whatever prim-p
ciples’could not be applied praétically, and
yet were intended to be [0 applied, were
Worfe- than ufelefs; they were: likely to
miflead. It is therefore no little fatisfacé
tion to me, that I am now probably ac;
quainted with the chief bent of the argu. \
ments againft my principles of improve-
merits, and in favour of Mr. Brown’s
praél'ice- , for no perfon is likely to be lb

Well

 

    

 

fir

I 25’)"

well prepared with thofe arguments as

yourfelf.

I do not confider this letter merely as
an anfwerto your ’3, but as a {upplement
(and perhaps a very neceffary one) to my
efl‘ayjand I will own, that without the
aflif’tance your letter! has afforded me,
Without the hints you there have given
nieyand-themodes of defence and attack

.Which you have fuggei’ced, I could not It)
IWelIJhave ma ade it.

v You have, however, in the courfe of
that letter produced feveral opinions as

' mine, none of which; as far as I can judge,

the «starranted by What I have written;

9fome~ directly contrary to the Whole tenor

’of my-Work. There I muf’c neceffarily
point out; and there cannot be a greater

' advantage in any cuntrovczfy, than to be

able to fhew clearly that your opponent
has miftated your opinions, and then ri—
diculed and argued againf’c his own mif-
flatements. Had you thought proper to
cummunicate your letter to me before it

was

9

.o
~ \

a .
EMVV:

‘5

\.
..
« 1.4» V

  

f
i

\
._ a-w

«5mg. 1.1

A. .Jugfii‘, .ngfiififl'LJ

-—~<A A,,_ I'm i

w‘

.- - #WM
AA _..__,. - “rm—.— ~ .. ”‘C'K. ~

t 26 1
was printed (though I do not mean to in--*
finuate that I had any right to exPeét it)
you would eafily have been convinced of
thofe miflatements by references to my
book ; this would have faved me from the
unpleafant tail; of pointing them out“)
the public, a talk which it is‘ diflicult to
perform without fome retort, and appear-
ance .of afperity ;/ it would alfo have faved
you from (what I am fure you will very
fenfibly feel) the mortification of being
convicted either of want of candour or of
common attention, where, for your own
fake, the clofe'i’t attention, and the utmofl
fairnefs and accuracy were required. It
is true, I {hould thereby have loft a very
great advantage in cafe of a controverfy;

abut I_ lhould by no. means regret it, being

much more defirous of union than of tri.

umph.

From the time’I had firfi the pleafurofl

of being acquainted with you, I Wiflied to

be your ally, not your opponent; I flat... '

tered myfclf, that, having confidered the
~ fame

 

l

l

i

/~1

‘9
W

“i
as.

I 27 I l f

fame {ubjeét in’ different lights, and by” :\;
- r. . 53

means of a different courfe or ftudy, We - {2?
might have been of reciprocal life to each :52
other. I felt great hopes that you might ' E
employ your talents (which I thought ' f
would naturally lead you that way) in i
making experiments in landfcape-garden-
ing on‘ the principles of _ landfcape-paintq 3
ing, and of that art in general. Your re- I;
putation would have jui’tified you insmak- j
ingxthofe experiments, and they in return 1

(if performed for fome time under your
own eye), would, I am convinced, have i
increafed that reputation in no flight
degree. You have however ehofen ,toi
take, what I may well call the oppofite 'f
fide—L—to fland forth the defender of Mr. l
Brown; a circumf’tance that, I afl‘ure you,
is fincerely lamented by many of your
friends and well—withers, among whom I '
may, with great truth, reckon myfelf:
they, were defirous that you Ihould fland
on your own merits, leaving yourfelf free
to avoid Whatever, on more mature re- ' *

fleétion,

 

 

 

t 28: '1

'fleé’cion, might appear defeé’twe in any ~

{yfiemr ‘ - ~ >

‘ 1' {ball now 111.111.1111 to 111517111- tne‘ dif-
12%: 13:11" parts of your letter; and midi begm
by 1; making '10:; fer \OUi C1V111-t'? in fifea‘p;
3110' '10 favourapjéy 01 my 515001411 iI-a 11,-imuch
pieafia'd to 11 ad t21atjr.u 21. grecii 1111.311141- in

tfie gene; 111 primiiples 01' the a;1't;'that is‘afl

gm: point gained; the pro-'iéi‘Eety ”or'pof-
fi’bilit; of reducing then-1'. t0 pragf’cfcev 51111.13?
be an objeé’cww' gum-e, find; I trufi, of
'a‘mic;;bl3'di”wfl¥<,n; The tiiai— 'as yet has
116%: £1132 73-; n ream , and if it 11101116,
{I 5.11.1 P61133de0-1‘c W111 3 found,~ti1at the
hfllltity between 511.. 0 p1 nu p115 0f »2't nting
03116 01 1111 grow is 111131 £10123me you
{66m 1.511111% t0 “110w. ; and t..:a't the ap-
1p11e110n 11 51116-111:- 13111111511211;23111111111111};
With I'e'fpe‘l t0 W21 “61', will 1151";~t¥ttce Vania-‘-
ties and 1&1 5‘13 11 Irch V1 1} {hams the 00161
monotony 0fP/I1.~B1'own s Welks. ' 5 ‘9

-"--' The “ new-1 fiei 10:5:1mpr01'cmeni” 37011

'have taken the Mouths of formmg f0: 1116',
tooether with the iarcafiic title you have
given

 

1.291

given 115, aCCord but ill with the approba-
tion you had juft b1?" 101e befiowed, and. in
{b flattering a mannei, on my general
p1inciples. 1 as little does the confequence
of that 1yftem accord With1 1 y ideas of
1mm ovcment, for the 1e is {0 great a plea-
fine azifing fiorn fin: verdure, fiom neat-
nefs, from the marks of habitation, of eafe,
‘ .and opulence, 111.1“. rather than this beau-
ltiful kingdom {hos-ii be. rendered one
huge, though pititurefque, foreflz, I fhoul—d
‘ almoft ‘hcfitate (had I'the choice) Whether
i might not C en piefer its bein 1g fingflwa’
by Mr. Brown; “and tl-at, for a lover of
.piétures, and whofe palate, as you after—
' wards obferve, 1‘equires a degree of irrita-
tion, is going a {5 cat length *1.

It

* An anecdote I heard fome years ago of Mr.
(luin, and which I believe 15 not {0 much hackneyed
as many others, .eeins to me not inapplicabl3. When
grown old, and quite broken down, he one day crawled
out to fun himfelf on the fouth parade. A conceited young
1 fellow {kipping up to him, cried out, Mr. Quin! I am
ferry to fee you look {0 old and infirm 5 now what

would 1

I “a I--.‘ 1

 

[sél

It feetns to me that your principal air?!
through the whole of this letter, is to
thew, that by an attention to pictures; and?
to the method of fiudy purfued by paina
ters, "only wild and unpoliihed ideas are
‘acquired. I cannot but wonder, that a
perfon whofe talents for drawing might
have led him to form a more juft opinion
on the fubjeét, fliould have conceived that
the flzudy of an art, which flippofes‘ the
highefi degree of refinement, and which
has been employed in tracing whatever is
mofl: beautiful and elegant, as well as what,
is Wild and romantic, fhould convert its
admirers into {0 many Cherokees,and make
them lofe all relifh but for what is favage‘
and uncultivated, I will beg you to refleél:
on what fame of the higheft artifls have.
done both in their pictures and drawings,
and on the character of their productions;

Would you give to be as young, and as aftive, and as}
full of fpirits as I am? Qlin looked at him very flerna.
1y 5—Young man, {aid he, I would bid very high in--
dedd,—-I think I could be content to be as {00“th

you

1“

 

 

 

[ 31,].

you muf’: be fenfible that» :he mixture of
gay and'highly cultivated nature, with the
inoft {plendid and finifhed works of art in
Claude Lorrainuthe fludicd and uniform
grandeur of the landfcapes of N. Pouflin,
‘thc fiyle of his compofitions, fometimes
approaching to formality, but from that
very circumfiance deriving a folemn dig—
nity,—-—are both of them (and many other
examples might be given) as difiinét from.
the wildne'fs of mere forcfi fcenery, as
they are from the tamenefs of Mr. Brown’s
performances. Many painters, it is true,
did principally fiudy the wild and un-
polifhed parts of nature; and from this
circumflance, and from my having men-
tioned in my efl'ay the efl'eé‘ts of neglect
and accident, together with the me all
painters bad made, and improvers migbt
make ofthofe effects, you have formed a
~ [yflem for me ; and have called it “tbe new
“fl/fem 9f ingbraw'ng by neg/e157 am! ami— ‘

“ dent.” You will, perhaps, be furprifed if '

I {hould thew, in the courfe of this letter, ’
that you have been trying to ridicule (and

very \

 

 

 

 

 

 

v .mumjai' ’ :1 '

 

i 32 1
”very undefervedly) your own "practice;
.while you thought you Were laughing

' at mine. ‘ Had you confidered. what I

have written, with the attention which

.ievery man ought to give ‘to what he
means to csiticlze, and candidly taken

the fplrit of it, you mm“: have felt:
that I never could propof: f0 prepof;

'tcrous a plan as you afépea: to have formed -

for me ; that I never could mean that the
improver {hould abandon all defign, and

leave every thing to chance (the idea you
clearly intend to convey by“ the new
i “ fyfiem of improving by neglect and ac-

“ cident,”) but that by f’tudying'the efieéts

~which [24d been produced by them, he

ihould learn how to defign, Lhat is, how
to produce fimilar effects; with as gregt a
degree of certainty as the cafe will admit
of, for frill a great deal mufi‘, and ought to
be, left to accident *._ i ’ '

“This

‘ I was {truck with a pallage I readlately in Helve-

ltius, which illuflrates this idea, by {hewing its appli—

cation

 

 

 

 

~.[ 3.3. .1

i 'This may appear like a contradiction,
but it .muf’t be remembered, that what
would be abfurd in many‘other arts (as for
infiance,‘ in architecture) is proper in

your’s, where vegetation is the chief in—‘

firument in'your operations. Trees and
plants of every kind (confidgred as mate-
rials for landfcape) Ihould have room to
fpread in various degrees, and in various
directions, and then accident Will produce
unthought-of varieties and beauties, with—
out injuring the general defign: but if
they are allowed to fpread 1n one direction
only, you in a great meafure prevent the
operation of accident, and thence“ the
famenefs and heavinefs of the outfides of

cation to a higher purpofe. “ Le hazard 21, et il aura
donc toujours part a notre education, et furtout a.
celle des hommes dc genie. En veut on augmenter 1e
nombre dans une nation? Qu’on obferm les moyen: dent
feflrt [e hazard pour infpirer aux hommes 1e defir de
s’illufirer. Cette obfervation faite, qu’ on les place

, a defiin, ct frequemment dam 1e: memes 120/ 11072: on [e

bazard [as place raremem‘. C’el’c 1e feul moyen de les

, multiplier.” Helvetius de l’Homme, chap. 8.‘

D ‘ clumps,

 

§

i
,1

 

ALE” Mm, A

 

[34]

clumps, and all clofe plantations. The
old gardenersof the Dutch {chool total/y

. prevented‘its operation, and imitated ar— .

chiteéture ; and thence the ftill greater
formality and fiifi’nefs of vegetable walls,
and of all that is called topiary work, It has
been {aid in defence of Mr. Brown,.that

, allowing the1 clump to be had, yet {till it;

is better than an obelifk or pyramid of
lime or yew: this defence would be'good,
had fuch pyramids and obelifks, and all the
ornaments of a Dutch garden, been {tuck
upon the fides. and'fummits of hills, and
all the moft confpicuOus points of a whole
dif’trié‘c; the clump would then have taken

j the place of more glaring pieces of formality,
and therefore would comparatively have
' been an improvement: but as the cafe

fiands, while Mr. Brown was removing

old pieces of formality, he was ef’tablifh-

ing new ones of a more'extenfive and mif—
chievous confequence,‘ Befides, thofe old
formalities were. acknowledged as fuchz

. @1151. sonfincd t9 the garden only, but thefe

new

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. east ‘ . 2/ er.-
..g... A,-XJ.,J,~,, a , t, . A A

. [ 35 l _
thew oneshave no limits; and are not only
cried up as {pecimens of pure, genuine
nature; but of nature refined and embel—
lifhed‘; and from whence the painter, as

: well as the gardener, may learn to correé’c

and enlarge his ideas and his praétice.

As I have attributed much of the de'fe‘ét
in Mr. Brown’s fyflem to his not having
attended to the efl'eéts which [24d been pro-
duced by'accident, and to his having, in a

1 great degree, prevented its future opera—

tion in his own works—as thisis in my
opinion a point of no little confequence,
though (as you have flaewn) extremely
Open to mifre’prefentation; and as it is a
point on which I have touched but flightly
in my efTay, I will beg leave to dwell
upon it a little longer.

Every {nan will allow that painters and
improvers ought to fiudy nature, and

nature in contradiflinétion to art: are

then all parts of nature to be fludied in-
difcriminately? No one will make fuch an

allertion. , But from whence do thofe

D 2 various

 

 

 

_..,,4_-,- wwww V
W A“ w . 1-,?

‘ mermr,”

 

 

[36]

various combinations arife, of trees f6 \

happily grouped and conneé’red with
ground, buildings, and water; of open
lawns, of clofer gl‘ades, and flcirtings, in
planting and forming which no art has
been employed? As it cannot be from
defign, it mufi be from accident. Of
thefe lucky accidents painters have made
the greatef’t ufe ; wherever they meet
with them they eagerly trace them in their

flmtch—book; thefe they ftudy, arrange, '

and combine in a thoufand different ways ;
thefe are the Proms from whence their
greater compofitions are afterwards formed.
But of thefe accidents (if we may judge
from their works) improvers‘ have as yet
made but little ufe;

,Again, wherever art interferes,- the efa-
feet of thefe beautiful and {triking acci-
dents is generally fpoiled to the paint-'-
er’s eye 5 for the prevailing tafie for clear—
ing either indifcriminately, or in dif;
tiné’c clumps and patches, def’troys their
conneé‘tion, their playful varietyand in—
triCacy. Neglefi, therefore, as well as

9 ' accident,

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ 37 1
accident, is necefi’ary to furnifh thefe can.~
amples of nature inher moft piéturefque
flate, that is (according to the common,
ufe ,of the word) the {late in which pain.
ters do, (and improvers ought to ltudy and
imitate her _; but, in the latter cafe- parti.
cularly, with fuch modifications as the
character . of the fcenery may require,
Accident and negleé’t are therefore two
principal caufes 'of thofe beauties ‘(and
they often deferve that name in' its firié’ceft

fenfe), which painters, lovers of painting,

and many whofe natural judgment has
not been vitiated by f‘alfe ideas of refine.
ment, admire; and whoever means to
ftudy nature, muf’c principally attend to
the effeéts of negleé’c and accident. But,

as er. Burke well obferves, “ there is in.

“ mankind an unfortunate propenfity to
“ make .themfelves, their views, and their
“ works, the meafure of excellence in

“ every thing whatfoever.”
Left you fhould think my arguments
for Inch :1 courfe of fiudy not fufiiciently
D 3 convincs ,

 

4L:;A-—-“..vf—-F-—‘r" ~4 \ » -« y r

' “-V --—n-rwsr

-‘1'383.

convincing, I can produce an authority for

it, which you cannot well difpute; I »

mean your own practice. I learnt from
your own mouth, and with much fads,

faction, that you had gone repeatedly into .

Epping Forefl; for the purpofe of Rudy—
ing': of Ptudying What? not the efi‘eéts. of
art or defigne-not of nature indifcrimi‘
anately, but peculiar effects, peculiar dif-
pofitions of trees, thickets, glades, lawns,
openings, and ikirtings of various form
and charaéter, which' you might after-
wards transfer with a higher degree of
polifh, but without injuring their loofe
and varied fhapes, to more ornamented
fcenes. You were therefore fiudying the
effect of neglect and accident, and it is a
fiudy, which, joined to [that of the {elec-
tions which painters have made of thofe-
, effects, every profeflbr of your art fhould
perpetually renew ; not merely in forefts,
but univerfally wherever they occur. He
fliould, by the ftudy of pictures, accuf’tom

his eye to catch them, and to fix them in
hie

 

.1
.3
I?
11
V

 

 

 

“If 39 l
hismemory -as fources of natural, finafl
feéted variety; or he will certainly fall
into, the wretched famenefs of him, whom
you have dignified withthe title of “ that
“ great {elf-taught maf’cer,” and whofe
Works (if he Was {elf-taught) fully jui’rifyt

the Italian proverb *.

I cannot quit the fhort note of yoUr’s, -
which has occafioned fo largea Comment;
without 'Obferving, that it feemS to‘ be
meant as a fort of correé’cive both of the
praifes you have given and received; With
regard'to myfelf, I Can freely faythat I
{poke of your talents as I‘ thought of them,
and I praifed them becaufe it is always
pleafant to give praife where it is due.

"I did take the liberty of recom‘a
mending to you the fiudy of what'-
the higher artif’cs have done both in-
their pié’rures and their drawings, for I
will frankly own, that from all the conver— '

’ fationsrwhich have paired between us,nI.

. * Che s ’insegna ha u_n pazzo per maef’tro. Vide‘
,Efl‘ay on the Pié’turefque, page 4.

D 4.- had-

\

 

v‘ ;<\-..~ .
x " _

 

 

 

 

.7 3w. _,,7___‘_,_.‘_,, h._ 1.,._ 3,;..,..,_. ,-, N

[40]

i had (perhaps rafhly) conceived, that you”

were not very converfant in them: I can-
not recolleét, amidf’c all the romantic fcene's
we viewed together, your having made any
of thofe allufions to the works of various
matters, which might naturally have oc-
curred to a perfon who had {tudied'or even
obferved them with common attention.
I did therefore take the liberty of recom-
mending What I thought would be of the
greatef’c ufe in your profeflion, but am’ex-
,tremely glad to hear that you had, antici-
pated my advice, that you had ftudied' the
great matters, and that you allow (a con-
ceflion of no flight importance) that it’is a
branch'of knowledge eerntial to the pro-
fefiion. - ..
That there is a certain affinity between

'all the polite arts, has been, univerfally ac-

knowledged, from Arifiotle and Cicero

"down to the prefent ”time, and it feems to

me that good talte and good judgment
confii’t in finding out in what circum-
Itances, and in“ what degree, that affinity

holds

. -‘v.3:3 ‘m

 

  

- wwwwtrww' . ,_ 1 ‘E , 7,7" u.
, \ «w ,41

[ 4:1? ]

holds good, and maybe practically a’japlied.
General aflertions are eafily niade, and‘ as
they carry no conviction they require ’no
anfwer; whether thofe (who are 7702‘ pro-
feiTors are likely to] fuppofe greater affinity
between the arts than thofe who are, I
really cannot tell,“ but I am pretty certain
that this oblique compliment to the latter,
at the-expence of 'us' Dilettanti, will not
bring over the prOfeITors‘loflpainting toad-
’mire clumgs,’ .belts, 86c; and that they
will at leaf): be of opinion, that there is
greater aflinity‘between landfcape painting
and “landfcape gardening than appears in
«Mr. BroWn’s wOrks; A

V I Ihallalways remember with pleafure'

the hours we {pent together on the Wye,
and the perfect good-humour and cheer-
‘ fulnefs of the whole party; i but I could
not help obferving at the time, and with
much concern, how lightly you treated the
idea of taking any hints from any part of
a natural river towards forming an arti-
ficial one. You tell "me however that an

enthufiafm

-, x!

L .1 ‘qu ‘

 

 

‘W‘avxaw- I.“ _..

:.

 

[42‘]

enthufiafm for the. piéturefque had orifi
ginally led you to fancy greater aflinity be-

tween painting and. gardening; than you
found to exit): after mature deliberation
and practical experience. As I cannot
guefs how far that enthufiafm may ori-
ginally have carried you, f0 neither can I
guefs in What degree mature deliberation
and practical experience may have altered
your ideas: your profeflion, it is true (as it

i has hitherto been exercifed) may be confi-

dered as a certain preventive againfl: any
fuch ,enthufiafm, and as» a mofl: radical
cure for it Ihould the infection have taken
place; but I {till mufl; hope that year’s,
though lowered, has by no means been ex-
tinguifhed by it. 7 .

Though your principal aim throughout
the whole of your letter has been to coun-
teract my endeavours, and to weaken: as
much as poflible the connection between-
painting and landfcape gardening, yet your
own mode of proceeding affords the {trong‘
efi proof of the clofencfs of that connection.

Confider

 

{1 43 l .

. Confider only what your procefs is when youi
are confulted about the improvements of a,
place; One of the firPr things you do is to.
make reprefentations of the principal points
in the Rate in which you find them, and
other reprefentations of the Rate in which,
you hope they will be hereafter. In reality,
you'make the befl: pifiure: you can. with
the materials you find there, and alfo with
thofe frefh ones you mean to employ, and.
to which time muft give effect. Confider
the Whole progrefs and aim of your opera-.
tion, and compare it.With that of the pain«
ter. ‘ .

According to my notions, were a land‘
{cape painter employed to correct the de-
feéts of a fcene the owner wifhed to im;
prove (an employment that without degrad-
ing his profeflion WOuld ennoble your’s)
he w.,‘.:1d begin by examining the forms
and 11:25 of all the objects, and their cons
neé’tion, by the principles of his art ;. if
he found the trees too crouded, and too
‘heavy, he would vary' and lighten their

mafl'es

\L: 1 .: ~--'§'«r

[ 44 ]
mafl'es in his drawing; if too flattered,“
conneé’c them ; where parts were bare he
would place fuch ’mafl‘es or groups as he
thought would beft'fuit the compofitionp
If the houfe was of a harfh colour, he
would make it of a more harmonizing
tint; if the ferm of it Was flat and without
any relief, or too much in one lump, or (in
the oppofite extreme) the parts too much
disjoined, he would give to the Whole,
more lightnefs, more mafii’venefs, more
Variety or unity, as the cafe might re—
quire: If there was a riverior'a piece of I
water, he would make fuch alterations in the
{hape and the accompaniments, as might
have'the happief’t mice): from the principal
flations. This I Conceive would nearly be
the painter’s aim and method of proceed-
ing: in What points then does t‘hat'aim and
that method differ fromyour’s? If in none,
what clofer affinity can there be between
any two arts than .betWeen painting and
landfcape gardening? {o'clofe indeed, that
with refpeét to the latter it can hardly be ‘
called

 

 

 

[ 45' "fl

Called aflinity, they are; or ought to be,
and I hope will be, perfectly incorporated,
I In. all this _ we‘ve/meme and propriety
are not the objects of confideration ; not
- that either of them is to be neglected,
but that they are objects of another kind;
objeéts of good fenfe, and good judg-
ment, rather than of that more refined
and delicate fenfe and judgment, called
tafi‘e: any glaring ofi’ence againf’t either of
them is difgufting, but the firié’tef’t-ob-
ferVance of them will give a man but little
reputation for tafie, unlefs the general
effect of the pie/“fare is good. In thefe
pictures you, as an improvemdifplay your
{kill in uniting what is prefent, and what
is future into compofitions, in arranging
the forms and tints as they will beft ac—
cord ; they give the firfi imprcfiion of your
talents, and they are in a great degree to be
your guides in the execution. It is true,
you are not a Claude, a Gafpar, a Pouflin,
or a Titian, but you do as much as your
powers “Till. enable you to do, and which I
by

 

 

' [ 46 I
by no means intend to undervalue, when]
place them at an immenfe difiance from.
fuch matters, as well as from others I
could name, who, by a fuccefsful fludy of
their works, have transfufed the fpirit of
them into their own. I am perfuaded You
have not the vanity to compare your forms. \
and difpofitions of dobjeé’ts (and I fpeak
not of effects) to theirs; and that you '
, muf’c be fenfible, that were the minds of ,
artif’ts fuch as thofe ‘I have mentioned,
turned to the praétical part, the fame feel-
ing and experience which guided them to
the happiefi choices in their piétures,
would equally guide them in nature; how,
indeed, Ihould it be otherwife? Such men ‘
Would quickly fee how groups might beft
be improved by cutting down, by pruning, .
or by planting; they would‘difcover the
Whole connection of the different land-
feapes, and make the belt ufe of the ma- "
terials they found in; real nature, juft as
they would in transferring them on the
’ Canvas. The more you {tudy their works,
2 ’ and

 

 

 

‘ "i 47 ]
andthe lucky accidents of , nature, the
more you Will, bring your pictures and
your places to rei‘emble the variety and
connection of their forms, and the union
of their tints: and praétice Will always r
fuggeft thofe foftenings which fituation
may require, and fuch facrifices as con-
venience and propriety may demand.

I mufi: here .obferve, that through the
whole of your letter you have very fiu— ,
dioufly and dextroufly endeavoured to con-
fine your reader’s ideas to mere garden
fcenes, and what is near the houfe, though V
you Certainly would not wifh your own
praé’tice to be f0 limited: you have alfo
endeavoured to perfuade them, that I think
every thing fhould be facrificed to pictu-
refque critter. I had forefeen the probabi-
lity of fuch mifreprefentation, but thought
it'lefs necefTary for me to guard againf’r it,
as the obfervations I have made in my eflay
relate almofl: entirely to the grounds, and
BM to What may properly be called the

garden.

 

 

’[ 48 2]

garden*. Still, however, I will beg leave .

to refer you and’your readers to page .26,
in which it is mentioned, that near the
houfe piéturefquebeauty muft in; many
'cafes be facrificed to neatnefs, SEC. ’ alfo to
page 241 , in which the charaétei'ifiic beau—
ty of lawns is mentioned 5 alfo to page I 50,
, where the delights offpring, its flowers
and blofl'oms, are defcribed 5 all which,
with many other paiTages, 'I think will

' {hew that ”I am by no means bigotted"

to the piéturefque, or infenfible to the
charms of beauty, though I have tried to
diferiminate‘the two‘charaé’cers. I muflc,
indeed, take the liberty of referring you to.

the whole book 3 for it firikes me, as I will '

fairly own, that if you did read it through,
it muf’t, have been in a very curfory man—-
ner, and with a View of obferving what
was hof’tile to. fuch parts of modern gar-

dening as you adhered to, and what were _
the parts of my oppofite principles mofl:

* Efl'ay on the Piéturefque, page 268.~
' open

"rymwgr w' . » v.1.“

 

 

 

 

 

, ' ' t 7+9 1

.open'to attack; but as to the general chair:
of reafOning, (fuch as it is) and the con-
neétion and dependance of one principle
on another, I am Very clear that you either,
did not attend to them, or had totally dif-
carded them from your memory before you.
Wrote your letter. -

You have obferved, that a beautiful gar-
den fcene 13 not more defeétive becaule it
Would not look well upon canvas; 'than a
didactic poem, becaufe it did not furnilh
a. fubjeé’c to the painter, Sec. You will
‘ forgive me if I do not think this a very

happy illuflration. , The principal objeél:
of a didafiz'c poem is to infiruét; to be
ufeful; the’ ornaments are fubordinate:
» , it therefore bears a much nearer refem~
‘ blance to What is called a firme- arm}?
than to] a garden 5 and nothing, in my opi-
nion, would more happily illuf’crate the
' ‘ Various degrees and Pryles of ornament
which might accord with what is ufeful,
than the various charaéters of fuch poems.
A didaétic work in pro/Z), is a men farm:

E ,_ it .

< ”any"

 

V[5°]

it pretends only to be 'ufeful; though in
fuch works, as in mere farms, interef’ting

and amufing parts will often prefent them-
felves even to thofe who are not interef’ced

iii the general fdbjeé’t; and the more agree— .

ably fo, as they are notintended. Many
didactic poems are fermoni propiora': they
differ from mere profe only by a certain
arrangement, and a few poetical orna-
ments; either the/ groundwork of the

a poem itfelf, or the genius of the poet not

leading him to higher effufions: thefe an-
fwer very much to an ornamented farm in
a country where the foil is good and well
cultivated, but where there are no great na-.
tural beauties. On the other hand, there
are didactic poems where the molt firiking
imagery is mixed with] the inf’trué’tive
parts, and fo happily, that the ornaments
feem to arife out of the fubjeé’t, and fink as
naturally into it again; but rarely appear
(as they almof’t always do' ~ in imprbved
places) like patches of ornament that
catch the vulgar and offend the judicious

eye.

 

 

, ‘W"?

 

w “[31] 1

eye; Of this defcription are the two mof’c

renoWned of all didactic poems, thofe of
Lucretius and Virgil ; and they ‘are the befi:
illuftrations of the manner in which the,_
ufeful and the ornamental, 'in places. of
great natural beauties, fhould be com—
bined together. '

Thofe who wifh for as great a degree

' of elegance and high polifh as ,is compatible

with, grandeur and energy, will imitate
Virgil; but, like him, they will avoid all ,
flat eficeminate fmoothnefs ;' like him, they \
will leave thofe mai‘terly touches which
giye a fpirit to the ref’c, though they will
give to the whole oftheir fcenery a more
general appearance of polifh than thofe V

\ who take Lucretius for their model. i In

him certainly the contraf’t between what
anfwers to the piétutefque, the fublime,
and the beautiful in landfcape ; that is, be—
tween the rough, and feemingly neglected
parts, the forcible and majefiic images he
at other times prefents, and the extreme
foftnefs and voluptuoufnefs of his beauti, ’

E 2 ful

 

 

 

[ 52 1 ‘
ful‘ paflages; is much more firiking than in
Virgil; and therefore by many his fiyle
has been preferred to that of his more;
equal but Iefs original rival : both, how-
ever, are far removed from coarfe and;
flovenly negligenee, and from infipid
fmoothnefs. But though neither thefe,
nor any other didaétic poems have the
leaf: analogy to a garden fcene, yet there i
is enough of modernpoetry that will per-
feétly fuit many modern- pleafure- grounds. '
Who is there that has not read, or tried‘to
read, under the name of poems, a number
of frnooth, flowing verfes, equally void of
imagery and infirué’tion. P ' . i
As your letter 13 addrefled to me in con--~
fequenee of my book, I could with to know
from What part of it you have colleéted, ‘
that, in my idea, the painter’s landfcape is»
indifpenfible to the perfeétiOn of garden-4
ing? I ‘mui’c own, at the fame time, that"
I do not perfeétly underfian‘d what is
meant by it, though I conclude it means
in general. a la‘ndfcape with rough and ‘
broken; .

, \

 

I 53 1
broken parts: fiill, however, there islfome-
thing extremely vague in the term of the
painter": landfiape, as; alfo in that of gar-
dening. In its enlarged fenfe and practice,
gardening may extend over miles of coun-
try; and painter’s landfcapes differ. from
each other as much as the {Genes they
reprefent ; a Salvator Rofa,or a Mola, for
inf’cance, differ as much from a Claude, ‘as
" a garden from .a piece of rough paftnre.
Wo.verman"s, and many of the _Dutch
mailers, often introduced parts of gardens

{into their landfcapes; Rubens fometimes, ,

land Watteau very frequently, painted gar-
den fcenes only 3 in Claude; orange-trees
’and- flower-pots are mixed with his build;
ings: hardly any thing in nature is f0 po-
liflaed, f0 formal, fo flat, nay fo ugly; as
" not to have been fometirnes made into a
landfcape, and by fome painter of repua-
tation, To afk, therefore, Whether the
painter’s landfcape is indifpenfible to gar-
dening, is to all; Whether all that is rug-
gedand favagg all that is highly culti—
' E 3 I vated

 

[54,]

‘vated’ and embellifhe‘d, an that is folemn

 

land‘majef’ric, all that is light and fan- \

‘ tafiic; in fhort, Whether all the different

charaéters of art and nature are indifl-
penfible to the perfeé’tion of gardening.

Now, if inflead of we pairzte‘r’r [arm’- ,

' ’fiape, you had put, a fludy qf 2‘66 prin-

czf/er grpaz'fltz'ng, as in candour you ought

, to have done, the Whole would have

been perfeétly intelligible, the whole fairly
fiated according to the author’s words and
obvious meaning: and you yourfelf al-

low z‘lzczt ftudy to be eflential to your pro-"

feflion'.
I mutt here obferve', that as with regard
to improvements, you have wifhed to

‘confine your readers’ ideas to mere garden,

‘feenes, f0 with refpeét to painting, you

have direéted them towards the rudef’t
flyles ‘of landfcapes 3 in order tofeparate
the two arts as widely as poflible, and
Weaken their afi’inity. You mutt be fen-
'fible, however, that all landfcapes are not
rough , that for inflance, Adrian, Vander-

Velde,

 

velde, and \rWovermans are often tOO
‘ fineoth, and I forbear mentioning hil’tory
.or portrait painters, fuch as Carlo Dolce,
&C. being lefs {triétly to the prefent ob-
ject. As ilandfcapes may be confidered'1
(independently of figures and buildings) .
i as copies of. the gene-ml efl'eé’cs of vegeta- ‘

-tion, and of the foil it fprings from; {0
may flower-painting as an imitation of the
near and dg'flz'lzfz‘ efi'eé’rs of the .mofi beauti-

i ful parts of it ; and you will own, that nature

herfelf is hardly more loft and delicate in!
her molt delicate productions, than the
copies of them by‘Van Huyfl'um: to the

‘ greatefl: delicacy and exaé’cnefs he joined
the choice of forms, the effects of light
and fhadow, and harmony of tints; in

fhort, he knew the principles of his art.
Take then the mof’c drefled and polilhed
of all garden fcenes, and what may be
fuppofed leaf): to inter’efi a painter—a mere
flower-garden furrounded with fhrubs

r and exotic trees. If we fuppofe two fuc’h

flower- gardens were fhewn to fuch a pain-
E 4. ter— '

 

 

 

r [56]

ter—that in the one, "the grouping of the
Ihrubs, the flowers, and their ornamenn
tal~ accompaniments—their general effect,
harmony, and connection-«the variety of
their forms, and their light and fhadow
were fuCh as his‘ judgment approved;
while ‘in the Other, every thing was‘com.
paratively flattered, in patches and dif-
cordante—had neither the fame variety or
conneé’cion—would he not be a better

judge of the degree of fuperiority of the ‘

one over the other, and of the calf/E’s Of
that fuperiority, than a perfOn who had,
not ftudied his‘ art? would not his criti.
Cifrns and his direétions be‘more likely to
improve fuch fcenes, than thofe of a gar-—
dener? and were he to paint them, is it
not probable that the one, he preferred:
Would be the more beautiful, both in
reality" and \on the canvas 3 ‘T he quef’rion
therefore is not, Whether the Caracci,
Francefco Bolognefe, or S. Rofa,‘ would
fiucly landfcapes in a flowerygarden, but
Which of two {Genes of. the fame charac.

'tcrr

‘.:"<.,,4 3.,-,;.‘. ‘1. ': -.<-~vv'»~‘; w . _ V
, sxhiidf‘brb’ 'fiwv . I) Tiaf‘t,‘1_~—-gww‘

 

. .3.

 

1 Ame; m‘ ‘ I

 

 

 

' * [ 57, l, ,

tor, (Whatever it be, from the Alps to a P31,-
terre,) had molt ofthofe qualities that acCord
With the general principles of their art.
Confidered in this light, I am perfuaded,
that if inflead of Van Huyfl'um, S. Rofa
h‘imfelf had been fhewn two fuch flower-
gardens, the‘fame general principles would
have made his and the Dutch painter’s
judgment agree. If this ~ would be the
cafe in a mere flower-garden, the more
the {cene was extended and div'erfified,
'the more it ’Would get out of the pro-
vince of the gardener and into that of the
painter.

But you are fo alarmed, left anypof \

your friends and employers fhould be in-
feé’ced with an enthufiafm for‘ the'pic-
turefque (and you feem to confider that’
and the art of paintingxas nearly fynony—
mous) that you have not only endeavoured
to feduce them by the allurements of
beauty as a feparate quality, but have alfo,
addrefiEd yourfelf to their fears. You

have alarmed your valetudinarian and hy-p

pocondriacal

/‘ 1‘.»

 

 

 

'[ 58 ]

pocondriacal patients for their fpirits' and
'conflitution, by telling them,” that the
confequence of having that myi’ceriOus
bug-bear, the painter’s landfCape,linrtheir
places, is a facrifice of the health, cheer-

fulnefs, and comfort of a country refidence.

.Do you really‘ think that rocks and cafe

Mcades (when a gentlemen is (0 unfortu-

nateas to have them within the circuit of
his walks, or even near. his manfion) are
more aguifh than grafs and fiagnant water P
or is a made river, with its formal {weeps ,
and naked edges, more cheerful and en—
livening than a rapid fiream, , .
.VChe rompe il corfo fra minuti falli?

Is a fandy or gravelly lane, with broken
ground and wild vegetation, lefs healthy
or varied than a gravel walk between
banks fmoothly turfed? \

I believe there are many people who

imagine that dirt, rubbifh and filth, are

effential to the picturefque, and that a
true connoilfeur‘can judge of objects of
that charaéter by their fmell, as an ‘an-
tiquarian is fuppofedto know by the tafte,

3 . . ‘whether

 

[59]

whether a medal has the true ancient
,wrugo. It mul’c be allowed, that filthy
objeé’cs are often piéturefque‘, but not’.

becaufe they are filthy; on the contrary,
fuch ideas always muf’c take ofic from
pleafure of any kind. All dirt, mud, and
filth, as fuch, is fimply ugly *6 ; f0 is mere
rubbifh; thifiles and docks may have a.
rich effect in the fore-ground of a wild
'fcene, butwground covered‘with docks,
thiflzles, or nettles, is merely ugly; fo is
ground that has been dii’turbed and-thrown
about, though time and vegetation may add
pié’turefquezcircumf’cances to uglinefs and
deformity 1* 5 and though painters are fond
of what is; called broken ground, yet, when
improperly introduced, it offends the

‘painter’s no lefs than the \gardener’s eye.

All land that is boggy, rufhy, or in any,
way holds wet, and-has the appearance of
it, is equally adverfe to 'the- piéturefque
and. the. beautiful; and that in-forei’rs

9* Ellay on the Pié’turefque, page I66.
’f DittO, pt i680 _

many

\
ammoiwuhmv i «‘ ~<

{60]

many fuch parts are found, is no argument ‘
that they are piéturefque ; but, perhaps,
befides your anxiety to preferve yonr friends
from theft/(1% gerons enthufiefm you your.
:{elf were once fei-zed with, the defire of in...
{reducing that ingenioue’exp‘edient of the
yifiture at the end of the avenue; may have
been no flight aciditional motive for attack?
ing the painter’s landfcape. ‘
You have obferved (what I have often
beard-remarked) that there are a thoufand'
[cenes in naturete delight the eye befides
thofe that may be copied as piétures, T his ,
appears to me a very common, but fiery
fellgcious argument againfi the affinity be-
tween painting and improving: .all fuch
icenes, with hardly any exception, may be
.‘copied as pié’cnres, and thofe which make
the heft pié’cure‘s will probab1y be the mofc
[beautiful and pleafing fcenes 3 but then
the comparifon muf’t not 'be‘ made between
a lawn or a pleafure-ground, and a piece of
foreft fcenery; but between two lawns, or

twol‘pleafure-grounds ; for the efl'eét of all
- ' ' high

 

I ,6: ‘1
high poli’fh on the chat-after of fcenery, as
on that of the human mind, is to‘diminifh
variety and energy; and it is hardly necef.
faryto fay,- of What confequence thofe two
qualities ,are in painting. You yourfelf
are often employed in copying, not only
fuch polifhed {cenes as are generally pleat;
ing,‘ though lefs fuited to the canvas, but
,alfo fuch as have little to delight either the
common or the pittarefque eye: “By copy- "
ing them, their beautiesfif they have any)
and their defeéts are made more apparent,
as Well as the additions and corrections
which may be made. In making thofe
, additibns and corrections what is your

a principal aim? certainly; I believe, to
make the belt pifiarw, the bef’c compofi~
tions‘ you can: convenience and propriety
are to be the checks, the correétives ;
they, are to prevent you from facrificing
too much to What might pleafe the pain~
ter only ,5 but fubjeét to that check, your
aim (as I laid before) is to make pictures,
and in principle as nearly approaching as
I pofiible
I .

l 62 ]

poflible to pamter s landfcapes; for I think
you will acknowledge, that thofe fcenes (of '
Whatever kind) which have mof’t of a
Whole—of union, connection, and har-
mony, that 1s, haVe mof’c of the requifites
of a picture, are molt to be admired.
You will alfo acknowledge, that where
any of thofe requifites are Wanting, you
with themfl to be there. ' i ‘

Mr. Gilpin’s regret (if I underf’tand him
right) is, that there are f0 few perfect
compofitions in nature—«f0 few, where
either in the fore-groundéthe difpofition-
of the trees—~the forms Of the hills—the,
manner in which the dif’rance comes in
between, the nearer objects, 56C. a’great
painter would not feedefeé’ts, or_at leafl-
_ fomething that might clearly be changed.
to advantage. But what does this regret
prove? furely, that we {hould [highly
value fuch compofitions where they exif’c,
or where they mof’t \nearly approach to
perfection, and that we fhould endeavour
to form them as far as our powers, and

the

 

K [- 63 l

the f’cyle of the fcenery will allow; in
fliort, that we {houl d not attend merely to
a confined. notion of beauty as a feparate
quality, but to a more enlarged and {gene-
ral idea of it.

Before I publifhed my efl'ay, I was told

by a fi‘iend Who had read it in MS. that‘

’ the admirers of Mr. Brown’s fyl’cem would
certainly take advantage of my diftinétion,
and profefs themfelves fatisfied with beauty

‘alone, and ready to give up the pié’curefque; -

notwithf’tanding my “friend’s prophecy, I
can fearcely hope that they will give me
fuvch an advantage. In the firi’c place,
before they give'up all pretenfion to one
object of improvement, it would be pru-
_ dent to ePcablifh their title to the other;
'and I hope‘, in the courfe of this letter, to
exhibit fome glaring proofs how great their
imprudence would be in that point of
view. In the next place, I fuppofe it will
be allowed, that there are (in every fenfe
of the words) highly pifiurcfgue fcenes
near many gentlemen’s houfes in this king-

\ ‘dom,

/

a
“My /

A. - . “A“... -r -

 

, _»[ 64 l ‘
dom,and that it alfo will be allowed, that'- to.
deftroy the peculiar character of any fcene.

\ is not the way to improve it: from hence

it ‘naturally follows, that tokenablefiither
the owner himfelf, or the profeiTor, to make.
any real improvements in fuch items, it ~
is necefiary, not Only that they fhould not «
defpife or renounce, but that they fhould
fludy,’and obtain a thorough knowledge of
the charaé’rer to which it belongs. Should
therefore the Brownifis— in general re‘
nounce the picturefque, they "certainly"
ought to do What I hardly expect—re-
nounce improving all fuch fcenes {and with l
regard to the profefi'o’rs, {hould they only
renounce the firf’c, they willat leaf’t give

.fair Warning; and thofewho, after fuch a

declaration, {hould employ them, would
have no right to complain of the mifchief

they might do 9'6. Still, however, Mr.

Brown, and thofe whom you have very

, juftly, though feverely,‘ called “ the tafle-

* Eilay on the Piéturefiiue, page 27.
i " lefs

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, E551”

" lefs herd of his followers,” have been
univerfally and profefledlyr, fmoothers,
fliavers, clearers, levellers, and dealers in
diflinét ferpentine lines and edges; they
have alfo been fatisfied with the equivocal
name of z'mprovem, and'from them a de-i
claration of fuch a nature would be lefs
furprifing; but that you, a [anafiafe-gar-a
,dener, and the firf’c, I believe, that has, all
fumed that title—that you fhould fet‘ out
by giving up (or What nearly amounts to
it) the pifiurefque, and by endeavouring
to weaken the aflinity between painting
‘ and landfcapeagardening, is what I am
equally grieved and furprifed at. 7
Before I fay any thing farther on the
ufe of the piéturefque in' landfcape-gar—
dening, I 111119: beg leave to call the read-
er’s attention to a few points in this con-
trov-erfy. I wifh it to be remembered,
that, according to the difiiné’cion I have
made (and Which you have paid me the

compliment of calling judicious) the pic—- '

turefque, by being difcriminated from the
beautiful and the. fublime, has a feparate

F character,

~w‘1-Lk. is I»-

 

m _._. 1-; r

- A?‘N;'.bnf/:—£4_d‘ , -. ,

[66]

. charaé’cer, and not a mere reference to the

art of painting. The piéturefque, therefore,
in that fenfe, as eompofed of rough and

abrupt objeé’ts, is in many cafeanot appli-

cable to modern gardening; but the prin-
ciples of painting are always [0. This is,
in my Opinion, a very material difference,

.and which I have tried to explain and

eflablilh throughout my book “gyet it feems
to me, that either from defign or inat-
tention, you have not made the difiinétion.
In the next place (as Iobferved before).
the term of gardening is extremely apt to
miflead. What would be proper in a
park or {beep—walk, would be equally im-
proper very near the houfe, or in fight of
the windows. New I have obferved, that

upon all occafions where you renounce the \

pié’turefque, or with to make your readers
renounce it, you aét like troops or vefl'els
that retire. under the guns of a battery;

you always keep clofe to the manfion, you ,

talk of the baéz'z‘czz‘z'oiz ' and convenience qf
man, of a garden fcene, 860. one might
fuppofe that all the talents of a landieape-

gardener

 

 

 

 

 

[ 67 l v

gardener Were to be difplayed Within a few
\ hundred yards of the houfegwhere (as I
obferved towards the Beginning of my ef-
fay *) the piéturefque‘ muf’t often be {acri—
ficed to neatnefs, and to things of comfort,
as gravel walks With regular borders, 85C.

In the third place I mufi beg it to be
remembered, “that [I haVe taken no {mall
pains to fl’iew, that though a difiinét cha-

raéter,~ the pié‘turefque is generally mixed,

with the beautiful, and that it is for Want
’of obferving hOW nature has blended them
that fo’ much infipidity has arifen “I“. Now
you haVe, throughout your letter, confider—
'ed the pié‘turefque as to be applied in its
‘rougheflz‘ Rate; as a hatth difcord without
being prepared or refolved—a dole of
crude antimony without any correétive,—-——
all by Wayiofi deterring your patients from
mixing fuch (harp, {timulating ingredients
with the {oft emollients of Mr. Brown.
It is ’alfo curioUs to obferve, how you haVe
aVOided mentioning Whatever might lead
the imaginatiOn toWards piéturefque foenes,

4" Eflay on the Pié’curefque, p. 26. ”r Ib. p. 62.
F 2, ~. left

I681

left your readers fhould be feduced by the-
bare recital of them : you therefore, after
having, by a fort of pmxy, made choice of
unmixed beauty . (and what that beauty is, , l
‘ 'fhall afterwards be confidered) have re-
marked that pié’turefquenefs may be tranf-s ‘

 

ferred—not to rocks, deep glens, and ca-
|verns 3 to cafcades, to rivers dafhing
among fiones,,to wild forei’t glades, and
thickets—but to the ragged gipfey ; with
whom [not with the rocks, cafcades,~\&c.],
you. obferve that the wild afs, the Pome-

,a$;v ' :

ranian dog, the {baggy goat, are more. in
harmony than the fleck—coated horfe, 85c. ‘
The natural thing was to flqew that thefe
wild animals were in harmony with Wild '
fieizery, no———for fear of alluding to what;
might endanger the caufe, they are made I
in harmony with the gzpfl’y; not with thofe . . .1
[gulf/84pm in which both they and the; .

gipfey would be the mofl: proper figures. :9

You have, in this place, {omewhat far-

.cafiically alluded to: an obfervation in my
eflhy, namely, “ that the effect of deer in. ‘ E;
“ groups is apt to be meagre and {pot-l

“; ty.” E

 

 

. I 69 ]

*8 ty 91‘. ” This obfervation (which I be-
lieve Is not a new one) I have no reafon
- to think unfounded. Animals which, like
deer, are of a flender make, Whofe flender-
nefs is not difguifed by fleecy or {baggy
coats, and Whofe coats (like thofe of many
deer) are. mottled, mutt fur‘ely be more apt
to be meagre and {potty when in groups
than fuch as are of a fuller make and ap-
‘ylpearance, and of a more uniform and har-
monizing tint. The 63736: in trees would
be obvious : thin trees, thinly clothed with
,foliage, and that foliage of a variety of
tints, you mutt allow would at leaf}; be apt
to be meagre and {potty in groups, and I
went no further. The obfervation in my
eflay does not {tand alone, as might poll
{1ny be fuppofed from yOur allufion; it
was put there to thew the dif’cinét quali—
ties of deer and {beep confidered as ani—
mals fuited to piétures, it was to {hew
' (what Was very much to my purpofe, and
'what I am'very‘glad hereagain to incuL-
gate) that an object may be highly fuited

f“ Efl'ay on'the Piéhtrefque, page 63.
F 3 «to

 

 

“,..__._.A‘d._:

[7.0]

to the painter without being on that ac...
count picturefque in my fenfe of the
word; nay, {0 far from it, “that the
fuitablenefs may, and often does arifee

' from fome oppofite quality to thofe I have

afligned to that charaéter *3 as for in-
fiance, from, uniformity of {hape and of
tint. From that uniformity often proceeds
what both in colour, and light, and fhadow,
is called érwa’tb, and which quality of
breadth (as I have {hewn‘ in my efTay 1*)
will often render an objeé’c, in itfelf neither"
grand, beautiful, nor piéturefque, extreme.—

ly fuited to the painter. This principle is -

in fome degree exemplified in the {beep
and the deer, which laf’c,I think, muft be
allowed to be comparatively meagre and
fpotty’r,‘ and efpecially the dappled kind,
which indeed I had not mentioned, but of
Which, you, like a generous adverfary, have
given me” the advantage.

Claude, who often introduced {deer into
his pictures, , avoided thofe of the mottled
kind, and made his of one uniform, quiet

i‘ 'Efl‘ay on the Pié’turefque, p. 44.. 1~ lb. p. 127,
tint;

Ania-.M‘i’xfimh.‘ , , 2.4 m.n.._«.l.‘c < w, new,

 

 

 

[ 71' l ’
‘ tint: he would equally'have avoided the
Nova Scotia breed of fheep, and all pied‘

animals 5 for no painter was more attem .

tive to'general “harmony." Berchern, who
aimedat great brilliancy, both in touch
and colour, painted cattle with their vari-
ous marks; and his piétures ‘(though ex-
cellent in other refpeéts) are remarkable
for their fpottinefs, and the want of that
fullnefs of form and repofe for which
Claude’s are to dil’tinguifhed. ‘
Though you have not directly and in
your own name renounced the piéturefque,
yet no man who did not with it to be re-
nounced would {peak of transferring it to
' goats and gipfies. But do you really think
it has little to do (in whatever fenfe you
take it) with landfcape gardening? Suppofc,
for infiance, that even within View of
the houfe, in a place you were improv-

ing, there was a riyer, ’in one part of ,

which the banks confided of foft and frefh
q meadow. and pafture, either level or gently
Hoping to the water; and whofe na—
tural turf extended to the brink, unlefs

‘ F 4. when:

 

E 72 l .-
where the-current had flightly worn it
aWay, or where a low fringe of wood, or

‘ flgurifhing trees overhun g it and broke the

continuation of 11:3 outline. That 1n other

parts the banks were of a rude and pics ' I ,

turefque character , high and abrupt, With

rugged old trees projecting from them, and. ,

extending their twifled limbs over the
flream; that the ground had crumbled
away from among their {baggy roots, and
had left them, and bits of rock, or rude.
flones arching over the coves beneath them;
that both, thefe banks; ifnot within View
of the windows), were within the circuit of

the home walk: Would you, by way of 1

making the two parts‘of the fame character,

and the Whole more firié‘tly handful, de- _
{t1 oy thefe rough projefiing trees, the rude ‘

itones, the broken ground with its accom-
paniments, and all their Varied reflections
in the water? Were you to hint that fuch
a thing was pofii ble, you mufl: abdicate the
firf’c part of your title. You might fay,
however, that firing there you would not
(lg/fray them. But could you with a with

make

4W.M7;h_‘. t . “Lac: .1,“ adjust“. LA.” 4 . ~w-.«m;&.‘.3 ’

 

‘ '-4-...-_m...w
-- . ¢ .‘m

 

 

[ 73 1
make the whOle foft and beautiful-cou1d
you make it fo without the expence of
,new work, and the rawnefs of its effect,
but at once give it the/fringe and mellow.
nefs of the other part; would you do it?
would you give up the variety and contrafl:
of the tWo characters, and the relief they
would give to each other? would you not
rather preferve to each its difiiné’t ftyle',
and be careful how you introduced too
much foftnefs and finoothnefs into the

rude’r fcene? would you not c'onfider how ,

to make the molt both of the effect of con-
trait and of connection, by fometimes going
abruptly from one fcene to the other, and
by fometimes? gradually fofte'ning the pick”

turefque into the beautiful, and infenfibly ~

blending the one with the other?~would
you not do the fame by any other fcenery
of the fame kind? Were a wild entangled
din-gle with rocks, and a headlong torrent
near the houfe, would you not be cautious
how you~deprived it in too great a degree
of its rude, and even entangled look? and
WQuld you not, While you facilitated the

V ' commu-

7 "WW I'

[‘74]

' eommunication, aVoid the appearance of

doing [0, and the confiant parade of a
walk P Would you not think you’rfelf
lucky iffrom a drefled part of the pleafure-
ground—from out of' a, fiowefigarden—J
you could fuddenly bu fit into a‘fcene of this
kind P—Should you tell me that near the
houfe, and where the walks extended, ”you
would with all this to be {mooth and un-
dulating, and every mark of roughnefs and
abruptnefs dei’croyed, I fhould freely fay,
that no profefled improverloiight ever to'
be admitted except where a profefi'ed im-

- prover had been before; and Where the

Cofl'acks had been rifling, the Pandours
”might be allowed to plunder..

Thefe, however, are fcenes in which the
piéturefque firongly prevails; but there are
a number of others, where the whole is in

,9. high and prevailing degree beautiful, but

where there are touches of the other charac—
ter which give fpirit to its foftnefs; and this
is what in many points of my eflay I have
endeavoured to point out. For infiance,
in the molt fimply fleas/iffy! river the cur-

rent

 

 

 

 

 

 

[7s]

rent will partially undermine the banks, and
in places difcover the foil, the roots of trees,
or' beds of rocks ; there will be places
where cattle come down to the water,
.and where {tones and broken gravel will
be left on the (here; there will be various
interruptions to foftnefs and fmoothanS,
Which‘inf’tead pf defiroying or weakening
enhance their charms: but if you renounce
miXed beauty only, all thefe muf’t either be
deftroyed or in a great meafure concealed:
and after all, we fhould never forget
that the beautiful is no more the imme-
diate refult of fmoothnefs, undulation, and

ferpentine lines, than the pié’curefque is of ,

roughnefs,‘abruptnefs, and fudden variation;
and that beauty, the moft free from any
thing roughgis {till very different from what
Mr. Brown intended for beauty, as I hope
to fhew more fully towards the end of this
letter. ' \

Perhaps you will tell nie I have mif-
taken your meaning‘; that by beauty you
do not mean to confine yourfelf to what is

V merely

the picturefque, and make choice of 'un-r ‘

1,3. Weryarwae' W V
\r

[76]

merely {month and undulating, nor to ex~ _
elude many of thofe natural circumflances ,

which though rough and abrupt, yet when
not too prevalent accord with and add to the
geneial effect, which effect is beauty.

1 Should you fly f0; you-Will fay precifely

whatl have {aid throughout my book:

But 1n that cafe what 18 the difpute about 9
You agree with me in my dif’tiné’tion be-

tween the two charaé’ce1s, they mull be
either mixed! or unmixed: if you take

beauty alone, feparated from the piéturefque, ’

you mufi: not admit of any thing rough or
abiupt with what 13 {mooth and undulating,
(except where natu1e has indivifibly mix-
ed them together, or where they are
{oftened and difguifed by other cir-
cumfiances) or it is‘ not unmixed beauty

“according to our notions. If you Once
admit of a mixture of the pié’curequé,
' the whole queftion will be about the degree

of mixtiire, which mutt of courfexdepend
on the general character of the place, that
of the particular fpot, and its fituation. But

; then all you have {aid about beauty in con-

1 . tradif’rinfiion

l...‘ 1)»! MW. :9!— “jg-TH

 

 

[773

tradifiinétion to pidturefquenefs, as fai as I

can judge, has no object, for Who ever/

thought (unlefs 1n {ome very particular
cafes) of introducing pié’turefquenefs ex-
“lc/zyz’veof beauty into gardenfcenes, or near
the manfion? '

No one indeed can doubt, but that the ‘

beautiful onght chiefly to be attended to
near the houfe: yet there are fituations where
the prevailing character of beauty, that is,
a greater proportion of foftnefs than of
”abruptnefs would not to well accord with
the f’cyle of the place, but where that falfe
beauty of Mr. BroWn Would totally deftroy
it. The fir ongefi infiance I ever met with
of the truth of this pofition, 18 an alteration
that was propofed b f a p rofeiTed 1mprover
{ at Powis Cafile. One of the moft {trik-
ing points in that noble place, is a View
through an arch—way after pafling through
an inward court: the mountains which di-
vide Shr0pfhire from Montgomerylhire,
(and which from the grandeur of their cha-
racter, if not from theirheight, well deferve
that 112111163) appear almoft 1n the center of

.
19-,

1‘ ‘

l 80 ]
fent and future profefl'ors from fuchblind
, undiftinguifhing attachment to fy/iém,‘
have rather fanétioned it by your precepts,
though I truf’t you would not by your
practice.

I remember your being confulted about
the improvements at Ferney Hall, a {mall
place in the neighbourhood of Mr. Knight,
and whofe mof’t ftriking feature is a rocky
dell near the houfe. I was extremely
pleafed to hear that you had aiked Mr.
Knight’s advice with regard to the manage—,
ment of that part, acknowledging that you
had not been ('0 converfant as himfelf in-
that f’ryle of fcenery.

This inf’tance of your diflidence, and
of your with to draw knowledge from
others, not merely to imprefs them with
an idea of your own, was what . firfl:
made me defirous of being known .to
, you. The character I heard of your
drawings added to- that defire; and as I
was perfuaded that the fame .diflidence
and readinefs to liften to advice, would '
lead you to correct any defects they might

have,

 

' g [ 81 ] -
have, I felt great hopes, that the art of
landfcape-gardening Would be I fixed on
better principles than it had hitherto been;
.for I little imagined that you would firive
to leITen the confequence of that art, to

which you are indebted for your fuperi- ‘

ority in your own.

~Thofe drawings of your’s, which were
fliewn {to me, (efpecially when confidered
as thofe, of an impvaer‘, and not of a
profeffed artif’t) manifef’t‘ed talents which
made me~ with to know their author; You

will forgive me, however, if I mention in

my own juftification, and by no means
with an intention of hurting you, that
they fiill (according to my conceptions)
pointed out reafons for recommending to
you what I did, and do firongly recom-
mend—a Prudy of the higher artifis ; for
it is a Pcudy which never fhould be remit-
ted, either by the painter or the improver.
In the fame note *6 I alfo mentioned whatI
thoughta veryneceffary caution to all

* 12an on the Piéturefque, page 255. L
G profe fi‘ors

<a‘, ~_ A‘ _,‘n 1,... y. ,._,,_.»‘__ b... «.‘t‘ wr-

[32]

profefi'ors of your art 5 not lefs fo than to
thofe of painting? I mean the danger of
becoming mannerifis. The improver par-
ticularly, Without the fiudy of the higher
artifls, joined to that of varied nature, is
fure to get into a habit of common-place
forms; of rounds and ovals, and difiinét
clump-like mafles. Thefe, by general
efl'eéts of breadth and tinting, he may dif-
guife in his drawings, but they will ac-
cuflom his oWn and his employers eyes to
acquiefce in them, nay, to be partial to
fuch forms ; and it fhould always be re-
membered that Kent, a painter by pro-
feflion, (a bad one it is true), had {0 ufed
himfelf to confider objeéts as an improver,
that at" laf’t he could only copy the little
beeches he had planted.

I am forry you Ihould fuppofe that '
many pages in my diary are pointed againft
your opinions 5 I can fay with great truth,
that there is fearcely one whole page pointed
at them. I have, indeed, canvafléd with
great freedom allopinions that appeared to
me erroneous, Without enquiring who might

have

 

 

[83.]

haVe adopted them; and if I have unin.
tentionally wounded you through Mr.

‘Brown, I am, on every accOunt, fincerely

grieved that you flood within the line offire.
The refpeétability of your profefiion I
never meant to call in queflion, though I
will frankly own, that, from what I have
faid, there was fuflicient reafon for your
{landing forth in its defence: I was
anxious, on the contrary, that it .ihould'
have a refpeétability which it hitherto had
not deferved, by being founded on more
juft, more enlarged, and liberal princic.
ples. It was partly with that View (and I
hope I may fay fo without prefumption)
that I wifhed to cultivate your acquaint-
ance, and I fhould not have courted the,
profeflbr had I withed to lower the profef.
fion. You are the firf’c of that profeflion
Whofe acquaintance I ever did defire, for
you are the firfl I ever thought likely to do
honour to it by honouring and cultivating a
higher art, and by confidering it as the true
road to fame and excellence 1n your own.

G 3 There

'“‘W‘ ”“73””V73T ‘ : . ~ .W,:. ,V
.

\

[84:1

. Thereis only one way in which I can
accOunt’for the defire'you have f0 firongly‘
mianifef’ced, throughout this letter, of lower- ’
ing the art of painting: you find yourfelf
at the head of your Own art, .but Withino
mean talents for one branch of the art of
painting, you in that are far from! having
the fame pre— —eminence. You therefore
feem to me to have ufed your endeavours
not only to thew that there is much lefs
affinity betWeen the two arts than I ,have‘
fuppofed, but to degrade the art itfelf, and
to exalt your own upon its ruins , for no-
thing furely but fuch a jalozgfle d3 matter,
. could have induced you to have made any

fort of allufion, any kind of parallel, be»-
, tween an art whofe principles had been
invefiigated with fuch care, whofe praé’cice
had been enlarged and refined by afuecef-,
fion of {0 many illuf‘crious men, on which to
many volumeshad been written, and the un-

controuled opinions of favages. To make
this illui’tration the more plaufible, you
have oppofed gardening [not landfcape-

- I gardening}

 

I 8'5 I
gardening] to the painter’s fiudies oi"
szdnature. But wherefore of wild nature
exeiuiively, when, as I obferved before,
the fiudies of many of them are taken
from the mofi highly embellifhed na-
ture? I am willing to fuppofe, that you
mean no more by wild nature than fimple
nature—nature untouched by art 5 and
that, perhaps, would have been a more
accurate and candid manner of Rating it ;
but then flmple nature would have raifed
ideasof a variety of foft and delightfuI'
feenes, whereas wild is often ufed for
What is rude and favage, and/you might
not be forry to give that bias to the
minds of yOur readers. As this wildnefs
and rudenefs of painters landfcapes is
confiantly brought as an argument againi’t
the affinity between painting and- even
land/cape gardening, it will be of great
ufe towards clearing up this difputed‘

point, to' examine in what this wildnefs‘

confif’ts—how far it extends—what parts of:
fuch wild nature, when arranged by the
painter, may be imitated by the gardener,

G 3 even

l 86 1

even in drefi'ed fcenes, and what may
nOt. In order to do it in the faireft
manner pofiible, I will put out of the
quef’tion Claude Lorrain, and all who
fludied highly ornamented nature, and .
will take ,fuch painters as M013. and Gaf-_
par Poufiin. Examine the forms of their
trees—rh=,..irgroapes—the general difpofi~
tion ofthem—the connection—the manner
in which the difiance is introduced be-
tween them—and in which they accom-
~ pany buildings and water. All this I be?
l-ieve you will own would, in many of their
pictures, not ill accord with any kind of
feenery, and that many of thefe forms
have much real beauty as well as piétu-
refque efl'eét 3 that they have a Variety of
highly pleating outlines, flowing, and blend-
ing into each other, and giving a *9 foftnefs
to the water they accompany; very different
both frotn the aérupmd} of clumps, and
from the naked bardmfr of artificial rivers.
If this be true, much the greater and

! Vide 15an on‘ the Pié’rurchuc, page 89.
more

,Mwa- mm $MM *

i 87 l

more confpicuous part of a mere painter’s
landfcape might, without impropriety, be
allied with, nay, even make a part of a
drefied fcene: What part then of fuch pic-
tures would be out of character in highly
polifhed fcenery? It is in an extended
fenfe the fore-ground, or what might be
termed the ground- plan of the picture,
this often confifis of rough and broken
ground, and of other rude objeéts that give
play, variety, and efi'eét of light and (ha-
dow, as well as variety and richnefs of
tint; {hould it be poflible, h0wever, that
in certain cafes the variety and efi‘eét of a
painter's fore- ground could, without rude-
nefs, be imitated in a, garden fcene, I ima-
gine you would think it no {mall advan-
tage. ‘

But are all unimproved fcenes in nature
rude? are there not in the 11109: piéturefque
diflriéts~are there not in forefis—lawns
and openings of the foftei’c turf, divided
from the general fcenery by an intricate
ikreen of thorns and hollies, mixed with
7 G 4. larger

(88]

larger trees and enriched with tufts of na-
tuial flowers, which have altogether not
only a beautiful, but even a drefl'ed ap—

, pearance? What 18 the difference between

fuch a piece of wild nature, and one of
Mr. Brown’s garden fcenes in Which he
has bef’c fucceeded? In his, the ground is
mowed; it is more eXaétly, and therefore
more fiiffly levelled, and has not the fame
undulation, or (to borrow an expreflion
from Mr. Burke) “ that change of furface,
“ continual yet hardly perceptible at any
“ point, which forms one of the great

' “ confiituents of beauty.” Infiead of thofe

tufts, thickets and groups, whofe playful
outline and difpofition create that damn-

‘ ful 1ntricacy which leads the eye a kind of

wanton chace—that deceitful maze through
which it wanders without knowing where
to fix itfelf ,——his are clumps regularly
dug, and confequently with a hard out-.-
line: inftead of that varied furface, where
the mixture of broken tints gives fuch
value to the more uniform green, and fuch

delight .

 

[89]

delight to the painter’s eye, the unvaried
colour and furface of dug ground, abruptly
{ucceeds to the no lefs unvaried furface
and colour of x’nowed grafs , inftead of the
eafy bends of a path—the regular and con—
fequently more formal and edgy fweeps of
a gravel walk. Xe has indeed the advan-
tage in diverfity of plants, in gaiety and
brilliancy of colours; an advantage, how—
ever, that from abufe, not unfrequently '
operates the contrary way. But let the
'- fame kind of {eerie (and there muft be
thoufands of them) be placed in a warmer
climate—in the fouthern part of North
America 5 there fuch groups and thickets
would be compofed of the various oaks or
maples; of tulip trees, or acacias mixed
with magnolias, cedars, kalmeas, rhodo—
dendrons', andromedas, &c.‘; the Wild vines,
and Virginia creeper climbing up the
larger trees, and loofely hanging from their
boughs : Would the making all thofe tufts
and groups feparate, and clump-like, and
digging round them—would levelling the x
8 Whole

I 9° 1
Whole ground, and mowing what flowers
the (beep had {pared—would the making
a. gravel walk acrofs’ 01' around the whole
Opening improve its éeczmjy .? for the con-
venience of walking, and the look 0f neat—i
nets, and habitation, are feparate confider-V
ations. Can any one doubt that there are
in wild, that is,‘ unimproved nature, fcenes
more foft, more beautiful, than any thing
which modern gardening has produced?
Nay, that the peculiar beauties of fuch-
{cenes have been ill imitated, and the true
principles of thofe beauties ill underflobd‘?
In-the fame proportion that Ithefe naturaf.
groups and thickets are intricate yet
beautiful, clumps are ‘ abrupt, without
being piélurefque ; the line of digging
is hard, and renders the roimd, the oval,
0r Whatever be the thape, difiinét and for-
ma]. All thefe appear to me clearly to be
defects, and they may be avoided, in a great

degree, by endeavouring to follow, not to

improve by counteracting, the happy ac-
cidents of nature 5 and'the flit? manner of
V levelling

 

 

[91/]

levelling the ground, (though perhaps an
objeét of greater difficulty) might be cor-
rected from the fame model. I with,
however, not to be mifunderflood, as if I
condemned levelling, digging, mowing,
and gravel walks: where, in a part meant
:to be pleafure-ground, the furface is rough
and uneven, it mufl: of courfe be levelled
and made finooth ; where plants will not
otherwife glow luxuriantly, the ground
(for fome time at leaf’t) muf’r be dug, and

where fheep are not admitted, it mui‘c be

mowed; and a gravel walk, befides the
great comfort and convenience, has a look
of neatnefs and high keeping that is eX-
tremely pleafing, though upon a different
principle from the natural path. What I
mean to thew is, that there are fcenes in
Wild, unimproved nature, 9f 2‘66 fame Hm!
as thofe in which modern gardening mofl:
excels—Jeenes produced by accident, not
defign—more foft, more truly beautiful

in every refpeé’t, than the imitations of

them 3

[92]

them *5 they are alfo beautiful on the
principles of painting, got of gardening,~
though thofe principles ought to be, and
I hope will be, the ’fame. ' I will here juft:
flightly mention, what I may perhaps en-
large upon fome future time, that in the
old Italian gardens, Where architeéture and
gardening were mixed together, effects
were produéed to which nothing flmz'lar
could be found in unembelliihed nature. A
As you have tried to degrade the pain-
ter’s fiudies by comparing them with the
opinions of favages, f0 you have {trove to
exalt modern gardening by comparing it
to our glorious confiitution. That the
Englifh cohftitution is the happy me-
dium between the liberty of favages and
the refiraint of defpotic government, I do

* I believe, however, that thofe who have been
ufed to confider Mr. Brown’s works as perfection,
think a little like the Chevalier Taylor, the famous
oculif’t-z he ufed to fay, that there was as much difi'er-
ence between an eye he had brufhed, and an unim-
proved eye, as between a rough diamond and a bril-
liant.

not

 

 

I 6‘3 51]

.not merely acknowledge—Pl feel it" with.

pride and 'eXultation; but that pride and -

ex’ultation would fink into fhame andxdeo
Afpondency, {hould the parallel between it
and moderngardening ever become? jnfl';
{hould the freedom, energy, and variety of
our minds give place“ to tamenefs and

menotony; {hould our opinions be' pre- i

‘fcribed to us, and ‘1 they like our places
moulded into one form. A much aptei‘
and more infirué’rive parallel might have
been drawn between our conf’titution and
the art you have f0 much \wronged.
That art, like the old feudal gOVernment,
meagre, hard, and gothic in its beginning,
Was mellowed and foftened by long expe-
rience‘and fucceflive trials, and not lefs
_ improved in fpirit and energy. Such'was
the progrefs of our confiitution, fuch is its
charaéter; fuch alfo was the progrefs of
painting, fuch the eliaraéter of its highefl:
produé’tions-at its’ brightef‘t period. ' The
later artifis from Carlo Marat loft that
firmnefs, variety, and energy, and became

mannered,

[94]

mannered, cold, and infipid. Such indeed is
the natural progrefs of human arts and in-
flitutions: the progrefs from oppreflion to
anarchy, (of which we have feen fuch an
awful eXample) is not more (natural, than
from the cafe of freedom and fecurity to
indolence and apathy: let England beware;
let her guard no lefs a‘gainfl the one than
againl’t the other extreme; they generate
each other in fuccefiion, for apathy in-
vites oppreflion, and oppreflion rouzes
anarchy. . ‘1 a
Having {aid thus much with refpeél: to
your general defence of Mr. Brown’s '
fyl’tem of improvement, and your illuftra-
tion of its excellence, I will next confider
your defence of the detail of his practice.
If, as you fay, no man of tafie can he—
litate between the natural group of trees

, compofedof various growths, and aformal ,

patch of firs (and I will venture to'add of 4
any othertrees) which, as you well obferve,
“ too, often disfigure a lawn under the
“name of a clump”——why not {trive to

I imitate

 

 

I 95 ]
imitate thofe natural groups, by attending
to the principle on which they pleafe? The
flrong‘argument againlt Mr. Brovvn, and
which I {iated in my eliay *9, is, that in the
courfe of a long practice, and therefore

‘with many opportunities of feeing their

effects, he never made a clump like a na.
tural group, though he” did make many

i natural groups like clumps 5 I therefore

may fairly conclude that he preferred the
latteri and as he never (as far as I have
obferved,) connected one group with ano-
ther, but always detached them as much
as pofiible, I may alfo infer that he fiudied
difiiné‘tnefs, not connection.

Now, unlefs I am totally wrong in all
my notions, CONNECTION is the
leading principle of your art, and it is the
principle that has been, of all others, the
molt flagrantly and fyftematically violated...
It is by means of this fl/Zem of making
every thing diftiné’c and feparate that Mr.

* EH21}! on the Pié’turefque, page 262.
Brown

“l 96 l

Brown, has been enabled‘to do fuch rapid
and extenfiVe mifchief; froml‘ thence it is“
that he is fomuch more an object of the

painter’s indignation than his {trait-lined
predece‘flors. He was a mere gardener,

but he chofe to‘ be a landfcape-gardener,

without knowing the firl’c Principles of as

landfcaper the confequences haVe been
fuch as might be expected; for as nothing
is f0 eafily, f0 quickly deftroyed as con-
nection, fo nothing is reftored with greater
difficulty or by a more tedious procefs.
Two of the principal defects in the
compofition of landfcapes, whether real or
painted, are the oppofite extremes of ob-
jeéts being too crouded or too fcattered:
your cenfure, therefore, of fingle trees
dotted over the whole furface of a, park, or
any other ground, is perfectly jufl: fuch
{cattered trees are rendered much more

difguf’ting by heavy cradle fences, and un— -

lefs in very'goodvfoils they alfo (as you
obferve) are generally fiarving. I can
{peg}; very firongly as to the bad COnfe-

' quence

 

 

 

 

 

[97 l

quence of this. praétice in every point of
View, from its having been in too great a
degree my own 3 and it is by no means the
only infiance in which I could ofi‘er my own
I former practice (for I do not perfevere in
what I think wrong) as a warning to
others. . ,
There cannot/be a doubt, but that the
molt certainexpedient for producing fu-

ture beauty is to prepare and fence the '

ground, and ‘ to fet more plants than are
meant to remain; for the young plants

mufl: .neither be flunted, browfed, nor‘

Ptarved. But if thofe malTes (as is ufually
the cafe) are formed of trees of equal
growths, 'and, left clofe together in one
thick lump, the variety they will give to
any ground fcarcely deferves that name.
The remedy I_ propofed *9 (after flating the
defefis of the ufual method) was to mix a
large proportion of the lower growths in
every plantation; this, in my opinion,

?* Elfay on the Piéturefque, page 227.
H, would

 

1. ‘ ,
: 4—4 ’ .,_. -""‘I .' e ‘- .4 .a.‘ a.-._.__.mkiM __ Q 615*

.' Hi

 

._~\_._W. *-

[ 93 1
would not only prevent their flat, heavy,
11nif0rm appearance, but 117611111 alfo furnifh
means for varying ‘aih‘d {offening the
abrupt lines of their outfide bonndaries,
and CO'rreEting that 1b]it'ary, 111111111th 1061:
they flill Wo111d have. The method 61'
doing it which I fhould recommend, Wofiid’
be to téke trees both 6f the larger and
{maller gr6Wths from the pladtat'iOn itféi‘f,
(dfter they are grOWn f’crong enough to re-
1111 2165612113) and to tranfplant them on 'the
manic of the fence , Where a 11111" 11111111
outline is apt to remain, even When the
fence itfeif has been taken away. As
thefe piants Wonld be to be Catried f0 {h'Ort
a way, though’ large, they might be re-
moved With fi’f’éty,iahd Wou‘ld ’Wa‘fit‘ho
fence, but theirer to be {faked till they

"had taken mot. Their e'fi'eé’c W6‘1fld alTo

be immediate ; they WOuld at mice break,

"vary, ' £1116 'foften the ‘l‘ha'fd fine of Tithe

éhirnp by partially éoncealing it, Which
trees alone Would not efl‘eé’c ; but by fuch
a mixture of thorns,lhollies, &c. with

4 \ forefl:

. V ’ V
: ”~w._,...,4.._....~.._._.-....a_..._.,.....‘_.~~~1_,._...«-A..4--.L4~..-..-..uV...“ ”amiawz-sFNnfln 1 , ,7 —,.. 71.. .-~__1 ~Mfi—‘LE—m'r he

’ ' l «9,59 1 ~ ~
foreft trees, the molt pamter-hke groups
and thickets might be formed. '
This feem's to me the true ufe ofplanting
'trees and bufhes detached from the larger
' maflcs; and thus much it may be fuflicient
to add to what I had before faid In my efl'ayt
with refpeé’t to thofe folitary lumps of ~
various fizes *- , Whofe principle indeed is
g. b the vent};r oppofite to that ofCOnneétion, and
by Which at this moment the greatefl;
part Of the parks and grounds of improv-
ed places throughout the kingdom are
" I , - disjoined from the furroundihg landfcape;

w

 

. It requires no acquaintance with the
prinVCiple's of painting, to make any Uni-
formly, thick plantation from a clump to
a large Wood; to vary and to connect thofe
plantations with others, and With the more

1‘ detached trees and groups—to compofe and

' arrange the different parts of the different
lan'dfcapes of «a'wh‘ole place, without in-

‘ juring the unity of that Whole, certainly

does, and ‘no flight acquaintance with _

 

,1; * Effay on the Piéturefque, page 21L
H 2 thofe

 

 

rt‘k’vl‘

_,.-....~'-._., .w 7777

[ loo]

thofe principles: the firl’c is, the province
of. the mere gardener, the latter of the.
landfcape—gardener only. .

.. As to the belt, I thought it had been.

quite extinét, , and never likely to revive;
; but under your proteiétion it may perhaps
again crawl about the ground ; '

“ And_1ike a wounded fnakc,"‘drag its flovv length along.”

' As “ I have fcotched the fnake not killed it,”
- I muf’c renew the attack. You very truly

obferve, “ that the love of feclufion and
fafety is no lefs natural than that of liberty,

.and that the mind is equally difpleafed
. with excefs of liberty or of refiraint if

either are too apparent.” .But why is this

. addrefl'ed to me? to me, who have in the

firongefl: manner cenfured the pafiion for

' mere extent *——for the removal of boun-

daries Without any other objeét—for ex-
tent that is to beadmired, like virtue, for
its own fake—to be apparent and mea-f

3* Efl'ay on the Piélurefque, page 217.
fured

.. ..- M. -..-.—-;n1—... $3.17?“

 

 

[101]

fured with the eye as well as with the

chain. No one can doubt the neceflity of -

. cnclofing a park or a pleafure-ground,
and of hiding (at halt in a great meafure)
that enclofure 5 the only queflzion is about
the mode of hiding it.

There are two different Ways in which
the owner’s vanity (a very powerful and
common agent) may Operate on this occa-
lion, according to the extent of the ground
' inclofed.

If it Ihould be fmall, he will mofl: fin-
cerely with that it {hould not be known
’ , where the boundary goes 5 though he may
not take the proper method .of conceal-
ment.

Ifi‘on the contrary, the extent fhould
be very great, the owner may as fincerely
with to mark that extent, by dif‘riné’tly
marking the pour/é ofthe‘boundary; though
he would be equally defirous of conceal-
ing the fence z'gfi/fi .

But if the owner happens to be a lover
\ of painting, and has neither the dread of
H 3 difcovering

 

[ 162" ]'5

difcovenng a [mall nor the ambition 6'?
d1fp1ay1ng a large extent he will wiih the

concealments 111 any cafe 16 be 111611 as

W111 ac‘cerd with the 1611 of.‘ ‘6 landihape
1161 Will he be fli6eked if n6W afiid then
part of the W611 01 the pales 11161116 ap-
pear.

I The perfon Who has a [7441} eXténtJ WilI
Wifh t6 have a fereeh 6f uniforrii thicknefs
as an impenetrable difguife , npt 6611111161-
\ing that the 4nj5rmz'zjy of the d1fgu1fe he-
trays it, and that the i’Cranger {6611 gueffes

What 13 behmd
Then‘, again, the vanlty of him Wh6 has
i11c16fed an immenfe c6111p'21fs, Wiil I16 pleitfe
ed that it fhould be marked out drfhné’dy
by an unifo1me high plantatmh {6 that
all the neighb6urs r6u116 may n6t 6111‘)?
have to 1elate I16W many miles thé Wh6I6
circuit eXt6nds, but may be 21616 to {th tIié
eXaéi; line 6f it t6 the W6nderi11g’ fifdr‘iger,
and to make h1m trace it With his Eye, '
If to theft: 1116tives of vanity in the
1161161161, We add the 1116'rives of {elf-i114-
" terei’c

 

 

[ ‘ 1931,]

remit in the profeflot. it willvbc Can- to
account» for the "introduétion and. Contine—
ance, o£ belts, The invention of them (a
term nCVCI‘ more mifufed than in the. pre- \
fent inflame) is beyond all others obvious,
and the thing being onee eftablilhed, it
faves all refleétipn on the Prer and? charac-
ter of the part it; is to pafs through}, then
it might, be bot-h laid, out. and executed;
not- only by a common gardener. but. by 3'
common labourer, without the profefler’s.
having eVer feen the place 5 for it is only
to meafure a, Certain number of yardsfirorri
the fence to the ioutfide 0f the planeta—
tion, and , to, fluff it with trees, leaving
a certain. {pace for the drive. It is
therefore highly the interefl: of every
profcflbr, who is more defirous of; gain than
reputation, to Work by general receétqtr;
fuch as clumps, belts, and ferpentine .ca-
nals with uniformly levelled banks, as
lohg as their employers are {0 good as to
be fatisfied with them; and I will own,
that {hould my diary have the influence,
which, as a very zealous author, I muf’c
H 4. wifh,

[104]

Wifh, though I do not expcéi: it to have,-
many an honeft profefi'or of improvement
mull, for want of education, feek his bread
in frame other way.‘

The drive through fuch belts you allow
to be tedious, and that the dulnefs in-
creafes with its length: their infides are
therefore condemned 3 and What is the
effect of their outfides with refpeét to the
general landfcape? which, after all, ought
to have fome weight with the landfcape-
gardener. They prefent one confpicuous,
uniform, unvaried ' {creen ; meagre and
drawn up, and differing in character from
all that is on either fide of it ; in reality, a
gigantic badge, ~that wants to be hid; as ‘
much or more than the fence it hides.
Obferve the difference of thofe accidental
fcreens to many of the old' parks, Where
thickets of thorns and hollies, groups and
fingle trees are continued quite to the wall 4
or the pales; and where, till you fee the
boundary, (which however from its mofies
and ivy is at leal’c a very pié’rurefque ob—
ject) you might fuppofe yourfelf near the

center,

 

 

 

I 165 l . ’
cénter, not at the extremity bf the park.
Thefe furely are the fcreens which ought

V ' to be imitated by landfcape-gardeners, for

 

 

 

they accord with the refl: of the fcenery,
and at every Prep form lan—dfcapes; and if
perfect concealment is the object, they are
heft calculated to produce it Without dif—
covering the intention. Still, however, if
the owner fays, I don’t carerabout land-
fcape and variety, I like uniformity and .
continued thade, he is quite in the right to
pleafe himfelf, though it may be dull to
others ; it anfwers his purpofe, and a very
good one 5 but don’t lettwo fuch different
ideas, as convenience and beauty, be con—
founded. ‘ L i 7

‘ ~ The belt you have to accurately de- __
fcribed, “ of one uniform breadth, With a
drive as uniform ferpentining' through
the middle of it,” is, I believe, What,
with little difference, has been mofl ge-
nerally made, and anfvvers perfeétly to its
name. But fuch a plantation as you af-
terwards ' have propofed, ff of- various

H 5 ‘ breadths,

 

1 m6 :1
bneadths, and its outline adapted to the,
natural thape of the ground,” is hardly"
a belt, or at-leafl: not Mt.~B£OWD’S:bel't,
and I critieifed What had been, not What
1 might be, made. ‘ learn very ready .to aca-
: knowledge the great :fuperiority of Inch a
belt 5 a fuperiority which encreafes as it
grows more Unlike the thing it is named
from. :But flill zyou .muf’t excufe me if I
{uggefl (not indeed by way of fltiét a131-
gument) that you have 'fhewn the .dulnefi
of my belt .in .a way which will have much ,
moreefi‘eé’c than any thing [have written,
as prefenting a1mudh more lively image 10f
, its 'tirefomemonotony, You, the defender

of belts, can fo little bear the idea] can--
finement, even of your ..OWn~2highly im-
proved belt, that after fkinting near the
edges, and looking wififullyout of it, at
laft finding an opening, you fairly efcape
from it entirely, “ to enjoy the nuncon...
fined View of dif’tant vplfOfpeélZS :” an ex.
, ample that, I 'i'believe, would be followed
ed by molt pe'rfons in the fame ’fi'tuation.
' i It

 

 

 

. E 107 1.
It' is "true; that I :have very-2 earneftly‘ and
‘ generallyt'recommended'to gentlemen who
/ haife' Places to qualify themfelVes-for-b‘ea
Corning their own 1and‘feape-- gardeners by
one of’the molt pkafing and» liberalfofé all
finches“; that of the principlesoff painting,

the works of- painters, and, of naturefi*;7

Thisvyou think (perhaps with too much
pa-rtiality: tOWard’S profefl’ed drnprovers)
might-fend to fupp‘refs—not- the profeflion
g—B'ut the micrelf. I cannot help think—
i‘n‘g',that fo far from fuppr-efling or injuring
either,- it Would, on the contrary, be of
great" advantage to both. As to {upprethng
the: art, you muf’t recolleét that there was
a time When there were profefi'ors of e10-
qri‘e‘n‘ce ; there are none now: is the art
. [appreffed-E' Would the great orators of‘
this day, who rival thofe of Greece and

Rome—would they have had more variety, 7

energy, and efefl, had fome profeflbr
taught them the routine of eloquence, its
tropes and figures, and endeavoured to
mould their minds‘to his conceptions?

9* EfTay on the Pié’turefque, page 276,
' Of

 

[ 108 ]

Of all the arts, none is more adapted to
men of liberal education, and who pafs
much of their time at their own country-
feats, than landfcape—gardening. They -
mutt be continually among la ndfcapes, (for
there are few difirié’ts, unlefs very much
zmpro'ued, that do not furnifh fornething
for the painter), and with the leaf): atten-
tion to pié’ture’s and to compofition, the
principles of landfcape- gardening would in-
fenfibly prefs themfelves upon their minds ;
and in moft points the praé’tice is far from
diflicult. Not {0 with architecture, though
a fiudy highly becoming every man of
taf’te and property, and intimately con-
neé’ted With gardening: models of archi-
teéture are. thinly fpread ; the occa’fions of,
imitating them are-rare, and the practical
part requires a very difi‘brent degree of ac—
curacy. There are alfo many arts whofe
theory is curious and' interef’ting, but in
which the method of acquiring practical
knowledge 15 tedious o1 difgufiing: fuch
is medicine, a fcience that often illuf’crates

8 the

 

[109]

the art of gardening more happily than
one'might fuppOfe. >No man voluntarily
Vfrequents hofp’itals and ink rooms as he
'does woods and rivers, and all the parts
‘of landfcape: yet every man would do

well to know enough of the general efifeé’c

' of drugs, and of their particular eECé‘t‘Oll

his habit, to guard againit the haf’cy deci-

"fionfof, perhaps, an able phyfician, but

who has neither the fame opportunities of

‘f’tudying thp co’nfiitution of his patient,
\nor the'fame motives for fiudying it. This

will be very readily applied to the other
arts ‘

All quackery I allow to be bad in either
of the arts, and much fhould in both be
left to nature; but he who quacks him-
{elf has an extreme intere‘fl: in his patient,
and will be afraid‘of violent remedies; not‘
fo the bold empyricp, who undertakes to
improve a place or a confiitution. As-
you have {tarted the idea of this illuftra-
tion, I will carry it on a little farther.
Many places, like many confiitutions,

want

[ no ]

want but little to be done . to 3them,; and ad
~honefi. and. able ,-profefi‘or. in either 'art- will
.do': but little. 2 Ignorance,:on :the other
zhand,r.~is£always rth- and *mfiddl-ing, and-
thedefign of myrworkisito guard. againfl:
‘the rafhnefs and aétive ign'orancel-ofquacks.
«But were the—mafsofprofefl‘ors in your‘jart
.to mix theory with praétice ;,VVGI‘€ they. to

«.fiudy the works of painters, and. to com— I j

pare them: with nature as diligentlyaa the
eminent «profefTors of medicine. ftu/dy;.the
works of former phyfic-ians‘ of reyeryvrage
. and country, and compare. «their doctrines
and experiments with the varying charaCa
terrof difeafes in real fubjeéts~the re-o
' fpeé‘tabilitypf the profeflion wouldbeief-
, feétually efiablifhed, and awefh'ould con-

. fult the profefl‘ors.~ of either. art with equal

a confidence in their flaill. /
. Whatever » effect my ~ recommendation
may produce, believe me your profeflion
is in no danger. Should the profefl'ors- of
= it in general (as indeed muft be the cafe)
improve in proportion to the tail-e and
knowledge

nigh“) ‘ '

 

. q: 51’151 B .
knoWleflgrOf ‘iheir :éfiifilbyeps, Mien-

breafe’dtaif’c'mand 5the 'kn’dWI‘edg’c‘Of? theory '

j'diricd " to ' praé’cice,' will 3&6er them $111-
filoymefit' even--‘ambhg~ the imofi knowing,
and 111ch ‘ capable of direfiitfg ‘ '»t'heir~ OWn
Works; for Wh’enei’rcr ‘jufi l‘an’dnew idea-s
‘Qr‘c tb ; be ’ réqfiiféd Rom 4% profefl'or, J ever-y
affluent “man -‘ Who ”has bitterjfive ifilan‘s "(if
improvement, "will C’eftahfly'wnl’efs ‘p—rex-
‘veIIfedibyx'bbfibéit ’ori‘av‘ari'cc) "Be-defifeus
‘ 613 édrifiiltingihim. Bfit-‘i‘n any cafe there
‘Will always‘r‘cmain a “fufiici‘erit number «(5f
. "riéh and‘h'élpléfs 'perTOns, Who‘mufi: ‘en-
7 ‘gjdeavom‘topuréhafe What 't’hcy‘haVC "‘né:
"ih‘émfétves. ‘ FIt'iS‘I‘lDt to-fuéh*‘men (whiz
fmuf’c‘always be‘direé’cedg) that -I "have a’d-
"flréiféd "my aflvice ; ‘yet "filll ‘th‘ey are net
“ ‘uninfe'féfie‘d‘ in its % fucoefs ; for, as I' befofe
"bee‘fv‘éd, the‘téfie an‘d',3knoW1ed'ge of. the
"genéral mafs of 'préfefl'ors, ‘Will naturally
' 'é'ric'reafé ’in‘ prdportion to that of thegenérél
”méfs’ 6f theirzemployers, "and’rco‘nfequently
thofe‘Wholare uuable‘to a8: t‘hemfclVes,
”Will at 1621?: be direé’ced by more fkilful
uidc .
g , 8 After

[ 1712 ]

After all, fhould any perverfe, ignorant,
and dgflberdte amateur: (as they have hu.‘
mourouily been named) take one part of
my advice only; and, contrary to its
fpirit and obvious meaning, boldly aé’t
for themfelves without any previous'i’cudy
or reflexion—they {till would feldom oc-

‘cafion fuch extenfive and irreparable mif-
chief as the regular fyi’cem of clearing
and levelling; and as they probably would
have no imitators, their improvements
‘ would be confined to one fpot, and
one point of time. Their extravagan-
-cies alfo, though mifchievous, might be ,
,amufing; and like other wantonlicentious
eflreéts of freedom, as pumping, ducking,
—tarring and feathering, have a mixture Of
the barbarous and the ludicrous,—at once
{hock and divertyou. Even the revenge-
ful and ftudied cruelty of favages, horrid
as it is, yet Frill is lefs odious and difguf’ting
than the cold, fettled, regular flflem of op-
, pzeflion and torture of the inquifition.

The

 

 

"I II3. l ,

The method‘of applying general rules;
(as you have remarked) can only be
learnt by praé’tice ; but I {hould much
doubt whether there be any plan or any
medicine “ proper in alxnofl; every cafe.”
I have read indeed of a panacea, but I be-

.lieve it to be as rare as a plan of 1mprove-

ment of the fame accommodating nature, '

certainly the character will neither fuit'

Mr.’ Brown’s plan, nor James’s powder;
and'it would, in my idea, be no {mall im‘

_ peachment to a phyfi‘cian, could it be fore-

told, before he had feen his patient, that he
would prefcribe that excellent medicine

‘ whatever the diforder, or the fort of fever
~ might be, for that 13 the true parallel With.

Mr. BroWn’s anticipated plan, which was
not to be executed .(as you have fuppofed)
in» a naked country. But indeed a phyfi-
cian Who, like Mr. Brown, had but one
plan of ‘operations, muf’c treat all diforders,
fangrado-like, in the fame manner.

Thofe who affect to defpife all profpeéts 1

as beneath the notice of lovers of painting,
I deferve

I 1:4 17’

deferve the title you have indirectly bea-
flowed upon them (and perhaps defigned
for me) offaf’cidious connoiileurs. 51 mufl:
obferve on this occafion, that there is a
wide difference between defpifing‘r profpeé’cs
onefelf, and rallying thofe who defpife every
thing elfe,-——the mere profpeét-hunters. I
mufi alfo obferve, that my attack was not.
directly made even upon the exclufive love
ofprofpeé‘ts, though a very‘fair fubjeé’t for
raillery ; it was levelled againi’c the .paflion
for whitening objects—the pafiion for difa
tiné’rnefs—and 'the profpeé’c—hunter was
brought in to illuftrate the efl’eé‘ts of that
_ paffion 9". If I do defpife profpeéts, I am-
conflzantly acting againf’c my inclination by .
climbing up not only high hills, but
towers and churches, certainlynnot for the
painter’s landfcape. In my own place
I have three ’difliné’t profpeftsr—bird’s-
eye views feen from high hills, of which
I am not a little proud,vand to which I

i d Ifi'ay on the Piéturefque, page 138-
' Carry

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ Us 1

'earry all my gUef’t's of every def‘cription; if
they like nothing elfe in the Place, ’I do
not COnverfe with them on pictures, or
landfcape-gardening; but if they have the
afl‘ectatio‘n Ihave fometimes been Witnefs
to, that of holding all profpeé‘ts in’ contempt
as unworthy the attention of a man of true‘
tal’te, I do not feel very eager to converfe
With them on any fubjeét;

, -- A profpeét of mere extent, if that ex-
tent be very great; has,- without any ftriking
features, a powerful effect on the minds
if to extent you add a richly wooded
and cultivated country, with a Varied
boundary of hills or mountains; and to
that again, eficeé’ts of water and. buildings,
-it is enchantment. If from a high fum-
mit you look from mountain to mom--
tain, acrofs their craggy breaks, and down. »
unto their recefi'es, it is awful and fublime;
Yet neither fuch grand nor fuch beautiful
, profpeé’ts as thofe Ihave juft deferibed,
together with many others of intermediate

fiyles and degrees, are in general proper
I' 2 . fubj-eéts

 

 

.. .e‘ — wmwmw—

[ 116 ]
fuhjeéts for pié’tures. This I imagine to

arife, not from the height whence they ,
. are viewed, but from another caufe which
equally operates on all views, namely, the ' ‘

want of any objects of importance either
in the fore—ground or the middle dii’tance.
Apply this to any View, even to {uch as are

taken from a low fiation, and where the

extent is ,limited; if it want thofe
nearer objefts it will feldom fuit the
"painter in. point of compofition, though

from the refources of his art, (by means of 'V

broken tints—of breadth and eEeét of light
.and {hader—by his management of the flgy,
66C.) he may in his piéture fupply or make
amends for other defects. With regard to

, profpec’ts, they are for the mof’t part taken

from the highei’t and openeft part of a
hill, where there is the leafl; obfiruétion,
and confequently where there is feldom
either fore-ground or fecond dif’tance , on
that account they do not make good land—
fcapes; and on that circumftance,ast I

‘ conceive; is founded‘the principal difiinc-

5 tion,

_' ,7 ".‘V

 

 

l II7 ]

tion, not merely between a landfcape' and:
profpeét, but generally between what is,
and is not proper for a picture in point of
compofition. Any View that is unbroken,
unvaried, undivided by any objects in the
nearer parts, whether it be from a moun-
tain or a plain, is generallytfpeaking lefs
adapted for a picture.

Confider for a moment what would be
the effect in any good compofition of the
[baited kind, either real or painted, were all
the near objects fwept away, and only the
diftant ones left.‘ Try the fame experi-
ment on any admired compofition of a
great maf’ter, in Which an extenfive dif-
tance is introduced: let all that in ,any
way intercepts, breaks, divides, and ac-
companies that dif’cance—all that throws
it off and marks the gradations—all the
firong maffes, the powerful tones of colour,
the difiinét and forcible touches that con-
traf’c with its foft fading tints,——let all be
removed—it becomes a mere profpeé’t,
and nothing elfe. Again, (to prove, as

I 3 they

 

.....

1 [118 ]

they do in arithmetic, fubtraé’rion by ad;
dition) let the objects taken from fuch

a picture he added to a mere profpeét,

it becomes a compofition, a painter’ s
landfcape. ‘

With refpeél: to the point of fight bee
ing taken high, war has frequently a very
grand effect, and that Titian thought {o
is plain from the numerous prints after
his compofitions; in many of which (per-1
haps the greater part)'he has fuppofed
himfelf on a confiderable eminence, as the
horizontal line is Within an inch or two.
of the top of the paper._ Where beauty is
the painter’s object (as was the cafe with
Claude) it is certainly more judiciOus to
place the horizontal line lower, which he
accordingly does, 1 ’

All this 'feems to point out, that though
profpeé’ts are not in general fuch compo-
fitions as painters (1:11:61, Vet that both the
feparate parts and the general e11e£t of each
profpefl—its mafTes—its boundaries—its
compolition as apiece of difiahce, are to

129

‘- _Jygwmtuhus.1h_. .' “amsu'm w__n., :1

 

 

 

it-II9]

bcjudged Of likerany other fcene on the
principles of painting; and I can have no
doubt, if two fuch painters as Claude and
Titian were obliged ‘to paint two mere
' profibefis, but . that the profpeél: which
Claude chofe for his picture would be the
moft generally pleafing among the pleaf.
ing ones, and that which Titian chofe the
moi’t firiking among the fublime. In

fact, the fame difiance, the grandeur ‘of-

‘ whofe boundary, Whofe aerial perfpeé’cive,
whofe gradual diminution of tints we f0
much admire in a profpeé’t, forms a very
principal part of many of Titian’s, Claude’s,
and other painters landfcapes; they only
frame and accompany it. I .

There is, however, an obvious reafon
Why mere profpeé‘ts, however exquifitely
g painted, cannot have the effect of thofe

in nature; they are not real, and therefore -

do not excite the curiofity which reality
does, both as to the particular {pots and
the circumfiances attending them; as to
the real geography of what is really fpread

I 4. ' out

 

[izo]

out before us, and the many doubts, enqui—'
ries, and obfervations it fuggel’ts to the
curious traveller, and alfo to the painter in
his own line; Who from fuch eminences"
can bef’c remark what diltrié’rs promife‘ the ..
molt interefting fcenery. Thefe are the
circumf’tances which, independently of their
beauty, make the love of profpeéts \a natu-
ral propenfity; you therefore need not have -
apologized for making ufe of too firong
an expreflion, when. you called curiofity
an inherent paflion of the human mind;

. that paflion will very naturally account ‘for

the Vifitors at Matlock having done Whatyou
and I, and every one in the fame fituation,

would probably 'have done ; but Why this

' Confideration fhould have confirmed you

in your opinion, that painting and gardening
are lefs intimately related than you at firfl;
conceived, them to be, it is difficult to
guefs. '

Thefe two arts, according to a very ufual
figure, I had called jflem‘; but,I can have
no objeé’cion to adopting your idea, and

calling

 

 

 

[121]

calling \them huiband and Wife; for the
union is {till clofer. You have not indeed

afligned to your new married couple their
refpeétive fexes, but I can have no doubt
about them. Landfmpe- gardening is
clearly the lady,andI muft fay that you have
taken a very unfair advantage of your inti-
macy with her ; you have tried to make
her elope, and you have proceeded, as. fe-
(iucers generally do, not only by flattering
her on her own peculiar charms and ac.
compliihments, but by. endeavouring to
degrade her hufband in her eyes; one of
the moft powerful, but not the mofl: ho-
nourable means of fedué‘tion. He that
aéts fo, more than interferes between
hufband and wife, not he who with equal
love and regard for both, fincerely tries to
promote a lafiing union—whofe aim it is-to
raife, not lower them in each others efieem ;
but at the fame time to convince the Wife
that {he can never appear fo amiable, or‘fo
refpeétable, as when clofely united to her

hufband 5

 

”we“

 

I '7 “’"F’ ”" “ "M'WW WV“ ;—7W'ww~m 7.1:“ ~ W1“,

[ 'Izz ]

hufband, and I may add 1n this cafe, to
{uch a huiband. ,

When I came 'to the illufiration you
have taken from Mr, Burke, and which
in his efl'ay is perfectly juf’c and in its
place, I, was curious to fee What ufe you
would make of it ; and I was greatly fur-'-
prized to find how you had applied it":
I hardly believed it at firfi, and fome of
my friends had the fame hefitation, till.
they had read it a fecond time. A lama!-
fiape-gardener, who 18 alfo an artii’c, can
find no apter way of illufirating the habit
of admiring fine piétures and bold piétuu-
refque fcenery, than by the habit of
chewing tobacco. You fuppofe fuch ad-
miration may have the fame kind of eflreéi
on’mem‘ai tafie, as the ufe of fuch a naufe-
ous herb has on the fig/e of tafling,—-
that of making it infenfible to the beauty
of milder fcenes: you therefore, by a kindof

 

negative affirmation, infinuatethat my tafle

\ is vitiated, not feeling that a habit of ob-
ferva .1on and feleétion, (even fuppofing it
in

 

 

[1 123 l
”in a great meafure direéted towards the
higher Ptyles of painting and of fcenery,)
aé’ts very differently on the faculties of the

mind, from what a firong and perverfe‘ '

tafte does on the palate; and that far from
deadening the organs, it makes them more

alive to every finefenfation in every ft le. ‘

Sir Jofhua Reynolds’ enthufiafm for M. ~

Angelo, and high admiration of Titian’s
landfcapes, did not make him lefs delighted
‘vvith Correggio and Claude, with Watteau
and Teniers; and he who felt all the {3,-
-vage grandeur of Salvator’s fcenery, equally
enjoyed the View from his houfe on Rich.
mond terras. ,
Whoever reads your letter without
having read my book, mutt probably’con—
clude that I am a fort of tyger, who pafs
my life in a jungle, with no more idea of
the fofter beauties of nature than that ani-
mal. I 'fear I am not lefs expofed to an
imputation of a very different kind, and I
(hould not be furprized, were fome wrong-
headed friend of Mr. Gilpin’s to reprefen;

6 ~ me

[,124]

me as a man fo in love with frnoothnefs,
_ as to have .no relifh .for what is rough,
abrupt, and piéturefqu’e. He might very
plaufibly fay, that not. contented with op-
pofing Mr. Gilpin,‘ my enthufiafm for
beauty and its diffinét qualities, had led me
much farther; that I had gone beyond Mr.
Bufke, and as if his arguments and illuf—
trations on that fubjeél: were not fuflicient;
had added Whole Chapters, of my own: he
might ' treat m’e as a falfe friend, and
afk whether a man can be a true lover of y
the piéturefque, who allows that near the
h’oufe it ought to be facrificed to neatnefs
and convenience—who talks of thefcha-
raé’teriflic beauties of a lawn, of its {month-i
nefs and verdure ;——Who dwells with rap—
, ture on the fofter beauties of nature,—on
the fiagiance and colouis of flowers, —-—
on the profufion of blofibms, and all the
Charms of fpring.

I might thus be convié’ced of having no
tafte or feeling for any thing ,unlefs (as is

fometimea

 

 

 

,—- .A ,.r:\ A
_V-\1
.«Ayu. u.h.~i ‘ ,i , -

mu.mn_ao " ,gi‘ , ~ t

I 325‘ 1 ,

lbmetimes fuppofed’to happen) the one

"poifonfhould expel the other.

I now come to the examples you have
given, of different fubjeé’ts which I am fupa

, pofed to defpife myfelf, and to with others

to defpife, éecaue they are incapable of
being painted. Before I make any re-

marks on the examples themfelves, I will

beg leave to ail; you, whether you ferioufly
think that any perfon was ever fo abfurd
as to declare, or even to think, that objects
of fight which were incapable of being
painted, were therefore to be defpifed.
Should you difcover any perfon who had

'declared that, (or any thing which nearly

approaches it,) to be his opinion—treat
him as Dogberry defired to be treated—{ct

. him down as an afs—but no more think of

arguing with him than with Dogberryor his
reprefentative. If it is merely a phantom
you have raifed in order to combat it, I muf’:
fay your talents might have been more
worthily employed: it is never reckoned
very creditable to difplay one’s Wit on a.

butt

 

m."— a-o ‘-
\

m 47011:: im:‘;"-:v

I 126‘ ]
butt who cannot retort; and thefe poof ‘
fatherlefs opiniOns, that nobody owns, and
nobody defends, muf’c ‘be confidered in
that light; the victories obtained over
them both, are alfo mtlch alike in point of

‘ glory and difficulty.

As to the examples themfelves, ‘ I ima-
gine thata gravel walk and a fhrubbery;
not only may, but often have been painted,
thOugh they will not make good pié’tutes;
f0 have wide extended profpeéts, and there
is one mere bird’s-eye view‘ in Claude’s’
lz'éer verz'taz‘z}. It might be thought unc
candid to fuppofe, that you mean to red
preach the art of painting With not being:
able to exp-refs the fiagmnce of a fhrubbery,
though your words will bear that confiruc-a
tion: fuch a confiruetion might alfo be

. fupported by a note in the former part of”

your letter 9*. You there obferve (what a

' lefs keen obferver might have difcovered)

_“ that the continual moving and "lively agi-v

3 Page 8;
tation

I 42.7 J

tation obfervable in herds of deer, is one
' of the circumf’cances 'which painting can-
not reprefent, éut that it is not le'fs an ob-
ject of beauty and cheerfulnefs in park
fcenery.” The fame obfervation might /
have. been made with equal truth and no-
velty on the _warbling of birds, and its
cheerful died”: in garden fcenery ; for ac‘
,tual audible found is not more incapable
of being painted, than aétual continued
motion; and real fenfible fragrance is jufl:
upon the ‘fame footing.

After all, for what purpofe is this cir—
cumf’cance mentioned? is it to eftablifli the
‘fuperiority 0f nature over painting? I am
very far from denying it. That of land-
{cape-gardening over landfcape-painting?
there has been no quei’tion about their re.-
fpeétive fuperiority; but if there had, how
does it affect that quef’tion 3 does the
landfcap‘e—gardener claim any. merit in the
grouping of deer as he does in that of trees?
does he difpofe and drill them, and direét

their

[ \128 ]

their continual motion and lively action?
Were there occafion it might be fhewn, on
the contrary, that 1n this refpeét the art of
paintingis much fuperior; the painter does
Catch and record momentary aé’tion, it is
the pride and the difficulty of his art ;’ the

improver can only prepare the; fcene. in

.1 general, and leave it to Chance how the

figures may be difpofed. This circumflzance

of continued motion has, in my opinion,

asrlittle to do With the affinity between
painting and gardening. What does it

then prove? What I am forry to fay there
are but too many proofs of already-4a
defire of pointing out, on every occafion,
What might in any way be thought to
depreciate What you have unfortunately
chofe to confider as a rival art. ,

The only example you have given of a

mere objeé’c Of fight incapable, at any mo—
ment, of being painted, is a View dovvn a
iteep hill, that 18, (if I comprehend it) the
immediate and umizz‘errupz‘edprogrgfi of the
dcfcent, for the general efi'eét of looking

down

 

[129]

down from a height on loWer objects has
been" perpetually expreffed in painting.
This deficiency of the art (fuch as it- is) has
been frequently cited as an argument againl’c
' the affinity between pain ting and landfcape—
gardening , but in what manner it applies,
I have not been able to difcover. If it
‘COuld be proved, that in the eye of a lover
of painting, What was incapable of being
exprefled upon canvas was 1.6erey‘bre inca- .
pable of giving pleafure, the ' argument
WOuld be unanfwerable ; it‘ otherwife hardly
deferves an 'anfwer. As lovers of paint—
ing (unlefs I am firangely miftaken) never
judge by f0 abfurd a rule, but by the ge—
neral principles of the art the only quef—
tion will be, Whether thofe general prin-
ciples can be applied to a view down a
fieep hill, though it be incapable of being
actually reprefented. Can it be doubted,
Whether the Peyle of the immediate fore—
ground and every part of it—the difpofi-
tion and character of the trees quite down
to the roots—the efi'eé’cs of light and tha-
- K dew—,-

 

 

 

* - ‘<-‘-WQ\-‘,—tr~/ n." ur‘ r“’

A

I 1’30, ]
dew—the harmony of the colours, the
whole of the compofition may not be.
judged Of in that,. qut as in any other
landfcape? and let me afl< you, whether
you would not think a painter tolerably
afe&ed, who, if his opinion was defired
of all thofe particulars, was to anfwer,
that he could not judge of them at all, nor
of any View in Mm! direflion, for it was in-.
Capable of being painted.- Had I not
heard f0 often this circuml’tance mentioned,
with great~ttiumph, by the adverfaries of
painting, I’llmuld be afhamed of having
{aid-f0 much about an impoflibility, that

 

feems to have no more to‘do with the ap~
plication of the principles of painting to
objeé’ts of fight, or- to the afiinity between
painting and gardening, than the impofiiw
\bility of painting real founds, real finells,

or real motion. ‘ ' ~
When I refleé’t on the whole of your
letter, I cannot help being {truck with
the very fingular contralt‘ between your
profeflions at the beginning of it, and the
Whole

 

 

[-131 ]

whole tenor of it afterwards. You flat out
by agreeing with me in the general prim-1

"ciples of your art, which general princia'
ples, according to my doé’crine, are pre—
cifely thofe of pa1nt1ng you alfo allow, that ,
the Ptudy of What the higher artif’ts have
done (in other words, the fiudy of thofe
principles in their works) is efl'ential to
_ your profeflion. After this exordium, I
, hoped and expeé’ted that you would briefly
have given a general idea (which you
might explain more at large in your great
work) in [what points this f’tudy‘would'be
ufeful, and 1n what it could not be applied,
with the reafons deduced from practical
experience; and this (if you entered upon
the fubjeé‘t at all) would have been a li—
beral and candid manner of treating it 5 and
without obliging you to go into a long de-
tail,-might have enlightened your readers.
Infiead of this, in the very next page,
you feern to dread the force of the con-
ceflions you had made, and begin your at-
tack on the aflinity between gardening and

K 2 painting,

 

 

 

 

[ I32 '1
painting; the ftudy of which laf’c you had
juft confidered as {0 efTential. In the fuc-

‘Ceeding page, the attack proceeds with

i more violence; the painter’s'landfc’ape, ,,

' infliead of being fiudied for the purpofe of

improving the landfcapes of the place, is -.
to be hung 'up, a [a Hal/andoyé, at the end '
of the avenue 5 it is made ufe of as a fort of
fc‘apeygoat, on, Which all the picturefque fins
bf the place are to be difcharged; and by
means of which the reft of the grounds may
be freed from all painter-like efie&s,'and
the pollefloi' fecured from colds, agues, and
the blue devils. Soon afterwards the 1111-.
controuled opinions of favages are brought

1 in to illul’crate therf’cudies of painters, an

acquaintance with which (and no flight
one) you acknowledge not only to be efi-
"fential to your art, but that Without it you
'fhould never have ,prefumed to arrogate to
‘yourfelf the title of Landfcape-Gardener. ,

' The attack upon painting is then fullnend-

ed during fev'eral pages, the offenfive war
being changed to a defenfive one, in {up-
‘ port

 

[133]

port of your ally Mr. Brown. But in the
18th page you open your battery again,
with an illuf’cration {till more degrading to '
the art than'that of the favages: I need
. not put our readers 1n mind of it, they will
immediately recolleét the comparifon be-

tween the love of pictures, and of tobacco.
You clofe the whole argument (in which,
after the two firl‘t pages, not a fyllable is
- lfaid in favour of an art to which you are {0
much indebted) with an account of its
deficiencies, in not being able to reprefent‘
a gravel walk, a fragrant fliubbery, an ex-
tenfive Profpeé’c, or a View down a fieep

hill, to which catalogue may be added,

continual motion. 7

I muf’t fay, that, according to your repre—
fentation of the art of painting, its powers __
and effects, as an improver you have totally
thrown away your time in fiudying what
the higher artif’ts have done in their pic-
tures and drawings, and {kill more {0 if it
be confidered, that the piéturefque is to
be banifhed from improved places, If
K 3 ' ydu

 

‘ Ww’we‘q; .- _ ;

 

I 13+ ]
you take ”the term piétur’efque in a very
ufual fenfe, as fignifying former—like, that
is, as gzivzhg' an idea offucll comoz'no'z‘z'om of
form, colour, and 12gb! and flzczo'ow, or of .
any one of Mom, arflrz'ée art/ls, tbougfi toey
may not p/erfi a common oéfl’r'ver, (and
which therefore might not be ill dif’cina
guifhed by fome fuch ward as painter— _
like) the banifhing fuch effects muft make
the fitudy of the higher ’artifls totally ufe-
lefs. If again you take piflurefque in my
'firic’te'r but far from coritradiétory fenfe of
it—as defcribing what is rough and abrupt,
'w 1th {udden deviationSa—the banifhing all
iuch objects will render the above- men—
tioned Ptudy of almof‘c as little ufe; for even
in the Works of thofe painters who have
inoft ftudied the beautiful, you will have
difi‘iculty 'in finding many infiances of it
totally detached from'the pié’curefque,
\ '; As, according to my notions, your art
"very much depends on mixing in proper
degrees, and according to circumf’cances,
the'two charaé’ters, and in forne cafes on
preferving

 

 

gar—fur. wwrvvw .- .V, x W,
,”V,'1“‘W . I m,~

_ [, I35 1

preférving them nearly unmixed,L-eand‘
as fome confufion is likely to ar-ife from
, the term beautiful being made ufe of both
ina general and a confined fenfe, I Will here
add a few remarks to what I have faid in
my eflay, and which may help to clear up
a fubjeét, whofe chief difficulties (like thofe
of many others) have arifen from the un—
certain and licentious ufe of words.

It feemsgto me, that the term beauti-
ful, in its molt general and extended ac-
ceptation, is applied to all that allures,
attracts, or pleafes the eye in every fiyle:
it is applied to rocks, precipices. rug-
~:ged old trees, torrents, &c. as well as to
Ihfubs, flowers, meadows, and gentle

fireams, and that in the mof’c indifcrimi- ,.

._ nate manner: to gay and brilliant colours,
however difcordant, for they are highly
attractive; and for the fame reafon to pc-
culiar and firiking, though unconnected
and incongruous forms.

Its general acceptation among painters
and lovers of painting is, I believe, no lefs
K 4. extended,

 

if”
F

 

[136]

«extended, but withthis difi‘erence, that
they apply the principles of painting to
thefe various fiYles, and‘call beautiful, in'
its extended fenfe, Whatever has a connec—
tion and union of form, colour, and light

and fhadow.

0

’Tis {till one principle through all extends,

And leads thro’ different ways to different ends, i
VV'hate’er its eflence or whate’er its name,
.VVhate’er its modes ’tis fiill in all the fame;
’Tis juil congruity of parts combin’d,

_To pleafe the fenfe, and fatisfy the mind 9*. i

This union, this harmony, this conneétion,
this breadth, this congruity of parts, may
be confidered as one principleyand it feems

‘ to be the grand principle neceflary to/all

fiyles; and therefore what poiTefTes it,
though purely fublime, or purely piélu~
refque, is called by that title of highcflf
and moft favoured eXcellence, Beauty, :as
Well as what is more firié’cly beautiful.~ On
this account objeétions have been made to
my difiinétion, and even that oer. Burke,

i“ The Landfcape, page 2. verfe 35.
as

 

 

 

\

[ .137 1'

as too narrow and confined: but I believe
the difpute is as ufual about names.

Beauty is, in one fenfe, a colleéiive idea,
and includes the fublime as well as the pic-
turefque: ‘in the other, it is confined to par-
ticular qualities, which difiingui-{h it from
the two other characters, juf’t as t/bez'r
particular qualities diftinguifh them alfo
from it, and from each other. Virtue, in
«the fame manner, is fometimes a collec-
tive idea of many qualities ; fometimes,
gas with refpeé’t to women, confined to the
,fingle one of chaf’rity 5 or, as anciently,
with refpeé’t to men, to that of fortitude;
in fhort, to what was molt ef’ceemed in
either fex: virtue therefore feems to be
in a moral and metaphyfical light, pre—
cifely what beauty is with regard to {en-
fible objefis- , and no one, I 111121 bine, who
.underf’tands modem or ancient languages,
will Venture to afTert, that becaufethere is
a collective idea of virtue, therefore there
*is'no confined idea annexed to the word.
The qualities of union, harmony, con-

neé’tion,

v ’v'I-Vr—W—‘r

[ I33 3
neé’cion, Sac. are not peculiar to the beau— ,
tiful as difiiné’t from the fublime or the
piéturefque 5 they are qualities common
to them" all ; they are general, net dif.
criminating qualities; they are necefi'ary »
to giveefi‘eé’t to the diltinét and peculiar
qualities of each of thofe characters, but
do not therefore defl'roy or confound
them.

For infiance, a number‘of broken rocks
and rugged hold trees, with a {tony torrent
dafhin g among them, are all zhgrecz’z'emr of
the piéturefque—pf the fublime—or of
both: thefe, perhaps‘, may be to unhappily
mixed together, as to produce little or no
efl’eé’c 5 but fhould they be ever {0 happily
united, either in nature or painting, will
they tberafare become beautiful in the cone-
fined fenfe? In like manner, finooth un-
dulating ground, frefla Verdure and foliage,
tender blofloms and flowers, are all ingre-
dients of the beautiful 5 thefe alfo may be
fo ill combined (and of examples there is

, no feareity) as to have but little effect; yet

fhould

 

 

1 I39‘ 1
fhould‘ thefe alone be ever fa happily
united, will they therefore become piétun
refque in the confined fenfe? or, I may
almef’t fay, in any fenfe?

As thefe are very material points in this
difcufiion, I will requeft your’s, and my
other readers indulgence for what always
has need of it~~defcription of fcenery. I
will endeavour (though well aware what
I rifque in the undertaking) to exprefs a
certain combination of natural objeéts,

 

which, as nearly as the cafe will allow,

may anfwer to my idea of unmixed beauty ;

and likewife to point out the difference

between that and a {Gene merely pic-

turefque, as alfo the difference between

- both of them and a fcene of Mr.
Brown’s.

It muf’r be remembered, however, that

‘\ many of the melt firié’tly beautiful objeéls

in nature, have a mixture of roughnefs in

I fome parts, which of Courfe cannot be {61

parated from them, and which mixture,

2 as

. u. «firming ,AVL‘A‘ITA

 

“(Map/3‘ mik >,.-.t “5,7; -.

[I40]

‘ as'I remarked in my effay are, {hould‘ rave

as a leflbn to improvers not to aim at fuch
‘a {eparation in their general fyfiemw I
mutt therefore premife, that the fimply
beautiful fcene~ I~ {hall attempt to defcribe, is
by no means intended to recommend an af-
feé’ted feleé’rion of fuch objeé’rs as have moi”:
of the feparatc qualities of beauty, but" to
fhew that even wit/2 fuch an afeéted felec-
tion, and with as fiudied an exclufion of
whatever has any of the‘feparate qualities of
the pié’rurefque "h afcene might be formed,
to which, I truft, the painter would not have
the fame obj eé’tion as to one of Mr. Brown’s ;

though he might not C2111 it pié’curefque, 0r

chufe it for the fubjeé‘r of a landfcape.

I eafily conceive, that a perfon who is
very much {truck with the variety, and
firongly marked effeéts of broken ground,
with fudden projeé’rione, and deep hol-
iows—old twif’ted trees, with furrowed

'7‘ ‘Efl'ay on the Piétur‘efque, page 92 and 94.
1» Ditto, p. 44. .
bark,

 

E 1+1 1

bark,—-——water tumbling in a deep—worn
channel over rocks and rude f’tones, and
half loft among fhaggy roots, decaying
/ fiumps, and withered fern—the whole
Viewed in fome favourable moment of
light and~fl1adow,—-—may very naturally call
it bedutzful ; for he gives to what f0
much pleafes him, that epithet which con; ,

veys the highef’t commendation.
But fuppofe that at the extremity of fuch
a fcene he was to enter a glade, or a. {mall ,
valley of the foftel’t turf and fineft ver-
dure; the ground on each fide fwelling
[gently into knolls, with other glades and
irecelTes ftealing in between them; the
whole adorned with trees of the fmoothef‘r~
and tendereit bark, and \mof’t elegant
forms, mixed with tufts of various ever-
greens and flowering fhrubs: all thefe \
growing as luxuriantly as in garden mould,
yet difpofed in as loofeand artlefs groups
as thofe in foref’ts, whilft a natural path-
way led the eye amidi’: thefe intricacies,
and towards the other glades and recedes.
Suppofe a. clear and gentle fireamto flow
‘ through

“Mmor‘m .. ,

 

[ 142 i 1
through this retirement on a bed of the

‘purefl; gravel pebbles ; its bank fometimes
fmooth and level, fometimes indented and

Varied in' height and form, and in parts even
abrupt and the foil appearing; but all rude-
nel's concealed by tufts of flowers, trailing -
plants, and others Of low growth, hanging
over the clear water 5 the broken tints of
the foil feen only through their boughs as
through a veil, and jui’t giving a warmth,
and variety to the reflexions. Imagine
that foon after, this brook (according to
that beautiful image in .Milton)

............ - . . . fpread
Into a liquid plain, then flood unmo‘»r ’,d
Pure as the expanfe of heaven:

that over this lake, in forne parts, trees of
the moft pleafing form and foliage ex-
tended their branches, While the vine, the
honeyfuckle, and other climbers, hung
from them 1n loofe fefioons, 2111110112 into
the water: that in other parts the trees
retired farther back, and the turf came
quite to the brink, and almofi level with
. its furface; that farther on the bank
{Welled

 

[ 143 -]
fwelled more fuddenly, and was partially
fringed and crowned with fuch plants as
are molt admired for; beauty of leaves and
flowers; and that amidfl: them, fmooth
{tones of different forms and fizes, but
their furface fometimes‘ varied and foftened
by the rich velvet of inoffes, mixed their
mellow and brilliant tints with thofe of
the flowers, and the general hue of vege-
ration ; while the whole was rendered
more {oft and enchanting by the clear

mirror that reflected them
After having viewed fuch a fcene, let
him return at once to the former one;

Would he then give; it the fame epithet he .

had before? I think he would fenfibly
feel that the character of each was as dill.
,tinét as their caufes, and that a {cene
compofed almofl: entirely of obj eels, rough,
rugged, abrupt, and angular, with various
marks of age and decay, and without
one frefh and tender colour, could never
be clafled with another fcene, where {oft—
nefs, flow of outline, luxuriancy of vegeta—

tion,

"es. “Mam.

we a. ewe—7W- “Emmy-rvv-

t :44 1

tion, and-frefhnefs endtendernefs of colour
characterized every objeét. ’ ;

.‘ Again, to {hew how much the ‘acci’a
'dents of light and ' fhadow [heighten or
idimihifh the peculiar character of each
fcenetaccording to their own charaéter;
fuppofe that while he was viewin g the rude
feene, a fudden gleam of fu‘nfhine glanced

on the rugged trunks, pierced into the re-

cefl'es of the torrent, while catching lights
were {hifting upon the fem, the projecting

‘roots and broken ground ; and that behind
, the molly {tagheaded trees, dark clouds

arofe, with breaks'between them into the
blue Qty: the whole would then be’ in-
finitely more firiking: But, in the other
fcene; though fuch a fl<y, With 'fuch

dights, would alfo"have a flrz'lcz'ngefl'eé’t,

yet, from the irritation which always at-
tends fudden contrai’cs, it would take 'off
from its repofe, its calm delight; in a
word, from its beauty“; but’let it be

4" Efl'ay oath: Piéturefque, Chap. 6th, firfi part.

viewed

 

/

 

C ~ 14-5 ‘]

Viefied under the influence of a warm fet-
. ting fun, or the mild glow of twilight,
rands‘then each fcene will have the accom- ~
ipaniment that moft fuits and heightens its
.rcharaéter. .

Having thus feparated the two charac-
ters, try what would be the- efireét' of unit-
ging them. Smooth part of the banks in
the rough fcene-e‘mix luxuriant trees,
flowering plants and frelh foliage .With the
gnarled and half decaying oaks g—add {till-
,‘Water and refleflions to the noify torrent-

' and you will feel how beauty will advance '
as pié’curefquenefs retires. Again, break
the banks in the other fcene, and make

thofe breaks more vifiblyl abrupt—place .

fome of the rough oaks among the fmoother
and frefher trees—take away the {limbs—
and let the water dafh among rude {tones

——and you can ”have no doubt; that you

would lofe in beauty what you would gain

in piéturefquenefs. _ 7

But {hould Mr. Brown come, and level
the banks in both fcenes to one fmooth

L edge,

'[ 146 1
"edge, clump the tree's, dam up all the
Water, and make every thing difiiné’t, hard,
and uncOnneé’ted—H—the beautiful and the
pi€turefque wOuld equally difappear, and
the infipid and the formal alone tea
main.

I {hall here with to mention more at
large fome few points, in which, I belieVe,
the defign and purport of my .efi'ay has
by many people been totally mifconceived ,3-
at the fame time I know how difficult it
is to guard againfli, or to. correé’c fuch
'falfe ideas; particularly when they are.
cherilhed by thofe who, perhaps,» have
been too ready to adopt them. In mat:
ters of greater confequence, wherever party
tuna high; he who exprefles warmly” his;
love of freedom,- and hatred of defpotifm,w‘
however carefully he may diftinguifh free-4
dom from lieentioufnefs, and defpotifiri
from limited monarchy, mull neVer hope
for candour: he will be treated by zealots
as a friend to anarchy and confufion, an
énemy to all order and regularity, and who

- W0uld

 

 

\

i 147 1
Wbuld Willa to fee mankind in What i§
‘called a Rate of nature. In the fame mama
her, from {peaking warmly of certain wild
tinpolifhed fcenes, Ihave been reprefented-
aS'a perfon, who, had I the poWer, would

defh‘oy all the (rpmforts of a placeéall.

gfaVel Walks and fhrubb‘eries—‘(iri which
éafe itwould at leaf’c be proper to begin.
with my own), allow no mowing, but
“Wet every body in high grafs,—tcar their
Clothes With brambles and briars,-‘~and fend
them 11p to their knees thro ugh dirty lanes
"between tWo cart- ruts; Though I ex-
pefled a good deal of this kind of min:
Conception; yet it {66med to me quite
unnecefl'ary to fec‘ommend thofe com;
, forts which every bodyiwa's fond of; and

With, gi'eat reafon; efpecially-as I was not
treating of the garden, but of the grounds: "5
my point was to fheW; that there were.

many fifiking circumflane‘es in nature;

which Were either negleéted or defiro‘yed,‘
{10111 a narrow eXclu’five attachment to‘.

high pplifh, ‘ and alfo from extending that
L 2 poliflz’

 

E I48 ]

polifh too far, and with too little attention
to beauty 1n its more general and enlarged ,
fenfe. . ,
As,notwithfl;andingthefemifconceptions,
my book has been more favourably Ire-g-
ceived than I had any reafon to expect, I '
will enter into fome little detail (not very
amufingI fear) 011 the fubjeét of thole .
comforts", and it cannot be more properly
difculIed than m a letter addreerd to you.
In this climate, particularly, gravel walks
are indifpenfible, and neatnefs and fym—
metry require that in the mofl: drefTed
parts they fhould be of uniform breadths,
andrtconfequently between two regular
borders: on that account, however ufeful *
and «even. ornamental, they cannot have the
playful variety of a path, which, in my idea,
is owing not merely to the variety of its.
curves, but to the lines of thofe curves
being foftened into the untrodden grafs,
and the tranfitions infenfibly made ;. from \
thence proceed what Hogarth calls, the
Waving-lines thatxrlead the eye a kind of
' wanton

 

[.149]

Wanton chace, and which difiinétnefs puts
.an immediate end to. Were a gardener,
for inflance, to copy, as nearly as poflible,
all the waving lines of a path, and to
make them as dill-met as thofe 'of a gravel
’4 walk, nothing could be more abfurd and
unnatural. The whole of this principle
, is admirably ekemplified in the remark of
Annibal Caracci, on the different ftyles of
painting (not drawing) of Raphael and
Correggio. ‘ He was {0 {truck With thefe
infenfible tranfitions in the latter, that, in a
letter to his coufin Ludovico, he faid,
“ That St. Paul of Raphael, which I form
' merly looked upon as a miracle, now
feems to me a piece of wood, [0 hard it is,
and {0 cutting.” It muf’t be remembered
alfo, that this was the judgment not of a
[mere colourii’t, but of one Whofe flyle of
drawing was remarkablefor its firmnefs
and precifion. If, therefore, fuch a painter
may be fuppofed to have qut ideas of the
fubjeé’t, a pathway (for no objeét is trifling
which clearly fhews the principle) has

~ ’ L 3 more

 

 

I :50. l?

more of the requifites of beauty than any
Walk With diftinét edges, Still, however,
the gravel walk, from its fymmetry, its
neatnefis, and its drefled appearance, ac...
cords much more with what is {oft and
beautiful, than with what is rude and pic-'-
turefque; for example, weie the fimply
beautiful feene I have juft defcribed cleft;
to a gentleman’s houfe, he would very
naturally make a regular gravel walk
through it, and he would do Very right;
for convenience, neatnefs, and a drefl'ed ap~
gpearance, are in fuch cafes among the firfi
confiderations. But thenA according top
the doctrine I have endeavoured to diet—
hliih, fuch a walk would not improve the
éeauzjy of the foche, though it would give
it, what, on another principle, is highly
pleafing; on the contrary, however well '
it might be managed however artfully
carried among the trees and lhruhs, aad
partially concealed and broken by them;
iiill there is {omething 1n the lines of it
that flifily cut aerofg every thing, and never.

like

 

 

mu...“ l ”Wm...” m

[151]

like the pathway, play as it were into
the other objeéts, and infenfibly, {teal
among them. It was on that accountl
obferved, that near the houfe pié’curefque
beauty (for in that early part of my eflay
I" had made no objection to the term) mull
“often be ficrficed to neatnefs, but that it
was a flzcry’z‘ce, and fhould not wantonly be
made 9“. Now, I believe, there are a,
number of perfons who, were they rich
enough, would have regular gravel walks
in every part of their whole place; (and
fhould they make them in fuch a fcyene as
_I have been mentioning, at a difia‘nce
from the houfe, I {hould think it a wanton
facrifice ; for a dry path Without borders
Would aanCr every purpofe of conve-g
nien'ce, without taking- 05 from the re-
tired charaé‘rer of the place. In a rude
{cene the fa'crifice would be mUch greater,
{Qt fymmetry and regularity, are partie

ii Efl'ay on the Bié’turefque.
' L g. cularly ;

 

[152]

cularly adverfe to the pié’turefquc.*,
With regard to a natural path, either
through a meadow, or acrofs more intri—
Cate ground, it is, I believe, very gs-
- nerally popula1 , a bye-road, from an idea
of ruts and mire, very naturally much lefs
{0; though the principal dif’ciné’tion be:
tween them both, and whatever has a
regular border, is the fame, There are,
however, bye- roads in dry foils, upon'a
level ful face, and where there are few heavy .
carriages, that to me have a remarkably
Cheerful look, and they are {0 far from
giving an idea of any thing flovenly, that
the manner in which the foil (Whether
{and 'or gravel) and the grafs are preffed
and blended together, has rather- the apes. '
"pearance of an operation of great nicety
andattention. I fhould think, therefore,
that in all fcenery at fome dif’tance from
the houfe, and (particularly of the wilder

9’ Elfay on the Pié’curefque, page 50,
kind)

 

I I53. 3

kind) ‘fuch roads and paths would anfwer
every purpofe of comfort and convenience,
Without formality; they might be dag
out, and fioned juf’t like any other gravel
Walk or read, only have no dif’tiné’t borders ;
and what I think would be a great addia
tional motive, they would give an idea
that the general foil was dry; whereas the
borders always feem to indicate that the
gravel extends no farther,'and was brought

' there on Vpurpofe. I , I
‘ ,All the fame principles hold good with
refpeé’t to mowing: It is a very common
obfervation, that {beep are the bef’t gar-
deners, and their bite (like the confiant
tread of animals in roads‘} makes no dif-
tinél: mark like thof‘e of .the fcythe and
the fpade; they, alfo leave Ifli‘ght inequali-
ties, Jeven where the turf is‘fineft, which
the Icythe cannot do, and on the fides of
banks many tufts of flowers untouched ;.
all which gives play and variety to the fur;
face. A pleafure-ground can hardly be
too nicely mowed, but fome of the cir-
cumftances'

 

 

w." .«vwwv «,1...

E 154 ‘1

cumftances of a {beep—walk might well be
imitated in. particular parts of it, and efpe-
cially on banks, or what are called garden-q
fiope55 which, when bare and clofe (haven,
have a remarkably cold, naked, and hard
zitppearance‘i6 ; dug clumps-on‘rtheir fides
give them a blif’cered look, and defch
that play of outline and eafy tranfition
which never flaould be neglected. But
were holes dug out of different fizes, from'
that-of a clump. to a fingle plant, and
where the foil itfelf was not excellent,
filled with rich mould, and no longer dug,
when the plants had taken root—not only
the lower fhru-bs, but tufts of flowers
might be f0 difperfed (yet fiill connected
and with room to mow between them)
that the Whole bank would have the play
and variety of wild, and the poliih of
drefl'ed nature.

The Whole that has been {aid on the {ub’fié‘t
of difi'rnét lines, applies in a mulch fironger;
‘glannet' to the boundaries of water, One

f? Eifayon the Pié’curefque, page“ 89.
great:

 

I

_ I 155-5 1 "
great tea-{0Y1 for having borders to a' gravd
Walk is, that» the operationsof hoein‘g-and
weeding, (Io necefl'ary to high keeping)
may be regularly and‘.” exactly carried on;

’but water useds no operation of that kind-.-

The very purpofe of a walk makes it- in‘

‘ eunven‘ient to have many boughs extended

beyond its edge ; but in water there is not
the fame objeé’tion; and there, befides.
their breaking the too long continuance of
a» line, they furnifh objects, of reflexion; a
Very material difference between that anda
walk. In walks and roads the fweeps
hunt in a great degree be regular, though
the curves of paths and bye- -roads might,
give hints for correéting their too great
famenefs and regularity, and a number of
inlets would be inconvenientand ridiculous
where you are to walk ; But coves and inlets 1
in water may be partially concealed; and, if
not too frequent, may'by that means give
variety without the breaks being too ape
parent.
' To return from this minute detail to
general difiinétions and principles, all the
3 . reflexiona

 

 

[ 1‘56 1

reflexio'ns I have made,'fince I publifhed

my: eflay, have confirmed» me in my opi~ ‘
nion, that whatever be the name applied to'
objeé’cs, the beautiful and the piétu'refque

mufl: remain as feparate as their refpeé’cive

qualities; as feparate as rough and fmooth,

as abrupt and - gradual; but though it is

neceifary that the improver {hould know

their dif’tinét natures, jui’c as the painter

muf’t know his diftinét colours before he

mixes them, yet it is not on their cohflmzt,
feparation, as you have'propofed, but on

blending them as circumi’cances may point

out, that your art muf’t‘ greatly depend ; {till

more however on the thoroUgh knowledge

and the application of thofe higher princi-V
ples of union, connection, 660. by means of“
which, all the characters of vifible nature
are, as it were, incorporated into one general
title of excellence.

The joint compliment you have paid
to my friend and me, I can for my own
part return with great fincerity; and,_
'on this occafion, I dare fay I may an-
7fwer for Mr. Knight. I fear, however.

that

 

I I 1,57 .1
'that..as.,-you complain ‘of the: occafionaél
afperity of my {uppofed .remarks'pnyour
opinions, you will not think me grown.
milder in this open; and continued contro‘
,verfy: in the courle of pointing out and
explaining the tendency of many indirect
attacksand infinuations; which at firttvfight
might not be obvious, fome degree of
{harpnefs in‘my ,anfwer would naturally
' arife; but he who writes a formal chal—
lenge, mul’t not expect a billet doux 1n re—
turn.- I may alfo obferve, that every man
(Whatever the game may be) has his par—
ticular manner of playing, and the fame in
writing: I have been told by fome of my
friends that my play is fhairp; I believe it
may be f0; but were I to endeavour to alter"
'it, I could not play at all. I truf’r, however,
that my friends will vouch for me, that
whatever {harpnefs there may be in my
fiyle, there is no rancour in my heart.
On reading over what I have written,
I could not but lament that there {hould
be: any controvcrfy between us: at heft
8 1t

 

; mm‘m'ww ‘at. mi; ~

 

4‘. «$8 1

{itis but a rough game, and in fume points ‘-
not unlike the ancient tOurnaments; where
friends and acquaintance, merely for a trial
of fidl‘l, and love of viétory', With all civility
and courtefy tilted at each others breafls—a—
tried to unhorfe each other—grew more
eager and animated—drew their fvvords—-ll '
{truck where the armour was weakef’c, and
where the fleel would bite to the quiclé‘
s—and all without animofity. As thefe
doughty combatants of days of yore, after
many a hard blow given and received, met
together in perfeét cordiality at the famous
round tables, [0 I hope we often (hall meet
at the tables of our common friends 5 andas
they, forgetting the fmarts of their mutual
Wounds, gaily difcourfed of the charms of
beauty, of feats of arms, and of various itraa
fagems of war ,-—*-of the difpofition of troops,
the choice of ground, and ambufcades 1n
Woods and ravines, {0 we may talk of the
many correfpondent difpofitions and firata—
gems in your milder art- of its broken
Piéturefque ravines, the intricacies and
concealments

 

3m "'5"? r. “7:!"

   

I59 I}
:itohcealme’nts of woodS'and thickets, and
of all its fofter, and more generally attraea
five beauties. ‘

.. Though I have already, perhaps, dwelt
too long on that great principle of con-«
neétion, yet I'cannot conclude this letter-
Without mentioning an example of its
'efl’eé’ts ina more important fpher'e. Not
that its efiefis are“ doubtful, but that it is an!
example by no means unapplicable to- the
{ubjeé‘t on which Ihave been writing, and
one that in the prefent crifis cannot be too
much‘impreffed on our minds.

The mutual: conneétion and depen-i
dance of all the difl'erent ranks and orders
of men in this country ,---the innumerable,-
‘but voluntary ties by which they are bOund
and united to each other, (f0 different from
what are experienced by the fubjeéts of
any other monarchy,) are perhaps the
firmed fecurities of its glory, its firength‘,
and its happinefs. Freedom, like the
general atmofphere, is difi'ufed through
Svery part, and its fieady and fettled m.-
I fluence,

, vix 1.. 'r'

 

[i160 ]

fluence, like that-of the atmofphere ‘on a

~fine evening, gives at once a glowing-

warmth, and an union to all within its
fphere; and although the feparatiovn. of the
different ranks and their gradations, like
thofe of vifible objects, is known and at}
pertained, yet from the beneficial mixture
and, frequent intercommunication of high
and low, that feparation is happily dif-

/guifed, and does not fenfibly operate on

the general mind. But {hould any of thefe
mofi: important links be broken3ih ihould
any fudden gap, any difiinét undifguifed
line of feparation be made, fuch as be-
tween the noble and the roturier, the
Whole firength of that firm chain (and
firm may it Rand) would at once be
broken. *

May the firength of that exalted prin-

ciple, whofe effects I have f0 much en-w

larged upon, enable us to cultivate this
and every other art of" peace in full fe-
curity, whatever f’torms threaten us from

without; and as it {0 happily pervades
the

the true fpirit of our government and
COnl’citUtion, may it no lefs prevail” in all”
our plans for embellifhing the outward:
face of this noble kingdom: ' i

. . . . . Till Albion {mile
One ample theatre of fylvan grace ale.

I will novv conclude this longcomment
on your ,letter, and as ijtjs the firft, fo I
hope it will be the laf’c time of my ad-

‘ "“ This line has, I’believev: been often quoted, and
always as defcriptive of the happy eEeéts of modern
gardening on the general face of the conntry: to me
it appears to have exaé’cly the oppofite tendency, and
for that reafon I have made ufe of it ; though I hope it
will not be thought. that, like Panurge, Iam always
crying au reéours. I by no means, however, conceive
that ,Mr. Mafon intended, by 6111mm grace, to inculcate
{uch a doctrine, as that all parts of an imprOVed place
ihould be wild, in thickets, and free from every ap-
pearance of art; but that the general features and our-
line of the place {hould be [0 far fylvan as not to be
disjoined from the furrounding objects. This finglc
Word of filvan, added to many other infiances through-
out his poem, are to me a plain indication that Mr.
Mafon had, in his idea, a much more free, connected,
and painter like Pryle of improvement, than he had feen
pra‘étifed by any of thofe whofe works he had jult re-
commended to his reader’ 8 attention.

M drelling

 

‘ filtffiifb} w‘ "'1', 1.; Us. 1-, '1 ~ .

 

‘. M [16.2]

drcfling YOU. in this public manners-{i1}
every private ‘intercoufe and communieas ‘
$1.0m 1 than always fed great fatisfaétiqn:

,1 3.111581?!
¥our mofl obedient

Humble fervanta

EVEDALE PRICE:

POST-

 

'l ""v‘m~ '
i

[ I63 _ l
,P O S T S C R I P T.
'I acknowledge, with pleafure, the very

pivil manner in which you gave me per-
million to reprint your letter; I made the

_ requef’t, as thinking it equally fair to both

parties. I likewife take this opportunity
10f mentioning, that {hould there be a fe-
pond edition of I my eflay, I 111111 mofl:
readily explain (if you think a further
explanation neceflary) that the places al—
luded to in pages zoo and 215 are not
works of your’s, but (to borrow an ex—
preflion I' have ufed on a different occa-
fion) of another, and, I neednot add, of
an inferior hand. It requires but little
candour to explain what I {hould be as
ferry as yourfelf to have mifunderf’tood.

 

 

vagi-GST;II:M§ ,'
‘. W yvlvfahy‘tfim _
.. 45.... 1,} fight? 3. gm. 4 ,
‘ -‘ ' "vi «gizylme I3,firflto§c,3wd thin; 41".
, . - \ «m139,£ine2,ofierbccol1’e, murmur.

 

       

 

 

 

 

i” .

 

 

 

,

u.

‘ 149
.
'2

.

I
. .
O

.

.92”

.3 3'
3““, '

 

   

 

 

 

Qv

 

 

    
 
  

 

 

\\\\"°i\”\\fi““f\7‘vfi“\i""\s\ ‘ , 

coauaaauap __

     

   

 

 

 

 

 

       

 

   

 

 

 

 

. 7H
r ‘ A <.
,\
¢ a ‘1 L, ‘ ‘ ‘ h
, \ ‘ _ ‘ ' ‘
¥ 7 I’ ’ R .
‘ ‘ V ‘ , ,‘ A
L, ,' _ . , ‘
.\‘\ /- A, V k
‘ > 7 T ,4 x ; \
_ A , \
_ v k
c F .. ‘ c ‘
I
‘ i .
/ ,
t' >
‘ V a M
r» A ‘ ; . * _
r . , ,
. ” v . ‘ ~ \
N A ', A
. f, 4.
\ ’ 7‘ \ \
r ,
' \
V ' a _
. ,» /
xi 4 ¥
‘ \4v ( > \
. . ‘H >
‘ W I
‘ 1 . N »
i -
‘ k

 

 

._ .mvflsuiw flame
Nam fir. u . .«
. J ,