ceases to be new, it ceases to have value.

A manner, therefore, being a defect, and every painter, however

excellent, having a manner, it seems to follow that all kinds of

faults, as well as beauties, may be learned under the sanction of

the greatest authorities.

Even the great name of Michael Angelo may be used to keep in

countenance a deficiency, or rather neglect of colouring, and every

other ornamental part of the art.

If the young student is dry and hard, Poussin is the same. If his

work has a careless and unfinished air, he has most of the Venetian

School to support him. If he makes no selection of objects, but

takes individual nature just as he finds it, he is like Rembrandt.

If he is incorrect in the proportions of his figures, Correggio was

likewise incorrect. If his colours are not blended and united,

Rubens was equally crude.

In short, there is no defect but may be excused, if it is a

sufficient excuse that it can be imputed to considerable artists;

but it must be remembered that it was not by these defects they

acquired their reputation: they have a right to our pardon, but

not to our admiration.

However, to imitate peculiarities or mistake defects for beauties

that man will be most liable who confines his imitation to one

favourite master; and, even though he chooses the best, and is

capable of distinguishing the real excellences of his model, it is

not by such narrow practice that a genius or mastery in the art is

acquired. A man is as little likely to form a true idea of the

perfection of the art by studying a single artist as he would be of

producing a perfectly beautiful figure by an exact imitation of any

individual living model.