He never attempted those lesser elegancies and graces in the art. Vasari says, he never painted
but one picture in oil, and resolved never to paint another.
Damnd Fool!
If any man had a right to look down. . . it was certainly Michael Angelo; . . .
O. Yes!
[P 127] . . . together with these [graces and embellishments], which we wish he had more
attended to, he has rejected all the false. . . ornaments, . . .
Here is another Contradiction If. Mich Ang. Neglected any thing. that
or>Veronese did: He Rejected it. for Good Reasons. Sr Joshua in other Places owns
that the Venetian Cannot Mix with the Roman or Florentine What then does he Mean
when he says that Mich. Ang. & Rafael were not worthy of Imitation in the Lower
parts of Art
[P 128] . . . Raffaelle had more Taste and Fancy, Michael Angelo more Genius and imagination.
[P 129] [Michael Angelo] never needed. . . help. [Raffaelle had] propriety, beauty, and majesty.
. . judicious contrivance. . . correctness of Drawing, purity of Taste, . . .
If all this is True Why does not Reynolds recommend The Study of Rafael & Mich:
Angelos Execution at page 97 he allows that the Venetian Style will III correspond
with the Great Style
[P 131] Such is the great style, . . . [in it] search after novelty. . . has no place.
But there is another style. . . inferior. . . . the original or characteristical style, . . .
these words be applied to such a Wretch as Salvator Rosa>
[P 132] . . . Salvator Rosa. . . . a peculiar cast of nature. . . though void of all grace, . . .
Salvator Rosa was precisely what he Pretended Not to be. His Pictures. are high
Labourd pretensions to Expeditious Workmanship. He was the Quack Doctor of
Painting His Roughnesses & Smoothnesses. are the Production of Labour & Trick. As
to Imagination he was totally without Any.
 |
28 |
 |