AMERICAN LANDSCAPE PAINTING. Landscape has always been a characteristic and distinctive element in American painting. Just as there is something especial in American writ ing on nature in the work of Thoreau, Bur roughs, Muir, so there is something especial in the American painting of nature. In the early days the natural scenery of America was of great interest to visitors from abroad and to many Americans who looked beyond practical matters. American scenery was magnificent and vast,— sublime. The unending forests, the inland seas, the great rivers with their many waterfalls, and somewhat later the extending prairies and the enormous mountains, these were by all held to be characteristic of America. In the early days there was little painting of any sort. By the end of the 18th century at tempts were made to render the remarkable things in American nature; there are not a few engravings of American scenery, mostly by Europeans, but some by Americans, of whom Jacob Hoffman is the only one remembered. With the new century there came a number of other renderings, topographical drawings, en gravings of gentlemen's country-seats (William and Thomas Birch), illustrations in the few magazines ( Port folio ) , landscape backgrounds in books on natural history (Wilson, but par ticularly Audubon), collections of landscape engravings or aquatints. Such things show a widely developed taste, which, however, found no adequate expression until Thomas Cole came to New York in 1825. Earlier were W. G. Wall and W. Bennett, Thomas Doughty and Alvan Fisher. The first two painted American scenes which were often engraved and became popular. The last two had each a definite char acter, Doughty for his refined, painter's view of nature, Fisher as one who could paint a romantic story. Thomas Cole was the first to become generally recognized, the first to pre sent the view of romantic America that had long had its place in the general mind. He felt deeply the grandeur of the American scene, particularly in its wilder and fiercer aspects. He was not satisfied, however, with presenting these things as truthfully as he could, but sought to express the ideal conceptions that arose in his mind ( 'The Course of Empire,' 'The Voyage of Life') in landscape form. A. B. Durand held more strictly to the land scape ideal and also to a closer method. His work aimed first at a truthful representation of nature. He preferred quieter scenes and the more restful phases of nature. Cole and Du rand are often thought of as the leaders of the landscape painters of their time, who are loosely grouped as the Hudson River School. Of these some— Kensett, Casilear and Whit redge were more like Durand in their apprecia tion of a more intimate conception of nature even on a large scale. Others, like Cole, sought to render vast and grandiose aspects. Cole had confined himself chiefly to the Hudson and Lake George, the Catskills and the White Mountains, and so did many who followed him as Sandford R. Gifford. Bierstadt Hill and Moran, however, came later and with the ex pansion of the country sought the greater scenery of the West, while F. E. Church not
only painted the national wonder of Niagara, but ranged south to the Andes and north to the Arctic Circle, as well as abroad. These men and many others gave a view of romantic America which had long filled the public mind. George Inness, our greatest landscape painter, took a different view. With a much greater power of painting than his predecessors he sought to render the deep impressions made upon him by nature and to present the beauty of light and color which he everywhere per ceived. In this view he has been followed by most of our later painters — the most note worthy being Wyant, Tryon, Homer Martin, and, chiefly in marines, Winslow Homer. They have sought to render, not so much the striking forms of crag and torrent, as the myriad phases of sunlight and shadow, color and relations of form. In the last half century too the influence of foreign methods of painting is far more important than in earlier days. The earlier landscape painters picked up their painting largely by themselves or learned of each other; they often went abroad but generally when they had definitely formed their style and confided in their own way of doing things. In after years the growing cosmopolitan char acter of all art has led to all sorts of influences. George Inness arrived by himself at many of the ideas embodied in the work of the great French landscape school of the middle of the century. Many others however learned much directly of the Barbizon school, of Dusseldorf or Munich, or more recently of the revolu tionary technique represented in the public mind by the work of Monet. The older land scape was apt to present the striking phases of nature much as they might be seen by anyone who cared for them, and in much the same way (though more skilfully) as they might be ren dered by anyone who had a gift for painting. The later landscape gives much more distinctly the painter's especial way of seeing nature and it is expressed more definitely in the painter's way. One cannot enumerate all those worthy of mention: Alexander Harrison is best known for his marines, R. A. Blakelock for a personal romanticism, Walter Palmer largely for his feeling for snow effects. J. F. Murphy and Bruce Crane impress one mostly for their *tonal* quality. Theodore Robinson, Childe Hassam, John H. Twachtman are the best rep resentatives of the influence of Monet. Edward W. Redfield, Elmer W. Schofield and Gardiner Symons have in common that they see nature with a largeness of view and a truth of render ing that is uncommon. There will be found among the painters of the present century even those who care for the wider aspects of nature that seemed so romantic to the America of earlier years.
Isham, S., (The History of American Painting) (1905) ; Caffin, Charles H., Masters of Painting) (1902). For a view of American landscape as it appears to the general historian of art, consult Muther, R., of Art.) For a view of the earlier landscape a little nearer its own point of view, consult Sheldon, G. W., Painters) (1879) ; Benjamin, G. W., in (1880).