Composition.— In every perfect work of art, whether of music, poetry, drama, painting, sculpture or architecture, there should be a fundamental theme, a dominant idea or concep tion which controls the whole, giving coherence and significance to all its parts. The esthetic conception is to be distinguished from the subject of the work, since a noble subject may be made commonplace by inadequate esthetic treatment, and a commonplace subject exalted by the way it has been handled by a superior artist. In giving form to the underlying con ception the artist must secure predominant unity of character or spirit, harmony in the assem blage and relation of all the parts, and such variety in details as to avoid the danger of wearisome monotony and secure that pleasur able esthetic emotion which comes from changes not too rapid or violent. This variety may, and generally should, introduce the element of contrast, but discreetly, so as not to destroy the harmony and general unity of the whole. Proportion should be just, giving to each part and to the whole suitable relative amounts and dimensions; and the whole work should possess both rhythm and balance. Balance is equilib rium between features or groups of features, an equilibrium of size, of intensity of color or tone, of importance or of accent; rhythm is the ordered succession of variations of accent or emphasis. There are those who believe that in all the great works of fine art, °pure') or these qualities have been secured by the application of secret mathematical for mula, but this contention, despite the ingenuity and learning of its supporters, is not as yet generally accepted by critics and artists.
Expression depends, as has already been said, upon many elements — the sentiment or conception to be expressed, the medium of ex pression, the technical resources of the art, and the personality of the artist being the chief. Music is peculiarly expressive of moods, of emotions apart from definite mental concepts; poetry of lofty moral and spiritual ideas; paint ing of the beauty of nature as interpreted through the artist's personality; architecture of sublimity, splendor, grace and elegance revealed in the triumph of mind over matter; sculpture of feeling revealed in the form and attitude of living beings. Each art has its own range and capacity for expressing feelings, emotions and definite ideas which it carries over from the mind of the interpreting artist to that of the spectator or listener, so that expression is al ways measured by impression. In general, if the inquiry be limited to the strictly ;esthetic field, what is expressed is not a categorical idea capable of statement as a proposition, but rather an abstract emotion, sentiment, or quality, as of grandeur, elegance, power, sublimity, grace, pathos or the like. In works of repre sentative art, such as painting, and sculpture, fidelity to nature enters largely into this power of expression. This is a different thing from the photographic mimicry of nature which is sometimes admired by undisciplined minds, and which often characterizes the periods of de cline in the history of art. This close mimicry is an affair of skilful technic, not of high art. To paint a key hanging on a nail so that the spectator shall mistake it for a real key is clever painting, but not high art. A great painting is one which seizes most completely and con veys through the eyes to the soul most effec tively the essential truth, the deep underlying aspects of a scene, subordinating to this end whatever details would interfere with the force and completeness of this impression. These aspects and this impression must first exist in and possess the artist's mind; he can put into his work only what he himself possesses; he must be himself inspired if his work is to be inspiring, for a truly great work cannot be pro duced by accident, nor by an inferior artist.
Great works of art may be marked by flaw less technical execution, but this perfection of technic is not essential to their greatness. It is indeed, oftener found in decadent art than in the periods of greatest inspiration; for it is when inspiration flags that technical finish be gins to be exalted into the place of first im portance.
However various the moods, emo tions and conceptions of artists of different races and ages, and however manifold the forms in which they are expressed, the men of any one land or period are in general so conditioned by like circumstances and environment, by simi larity of customs, traditions and education, ideals and aspirations, and even by popular taste and fashion, that they are unconsciously con strained into certain similarities of subject and manner by which the art of their time and place is clearly distinguishable from that of any other. The resulting predominant manner, form of expression, quality and habit of design we call the style of that age and place. The most daringly original artist cannot wholly escape the influence of his environment and education, and those who succeed most completely in dis regarding these influences are so few in number that they rarely affect the general set of the art-currents of their day, though they may sometimes prove to be the heralds of new ideas and methods — that is, of a new style — which comes into recognizable existence at a later date. Styles are therefore not mere fashions, nor can they be created or abolished. They are growths, the natural characteristic interpreta tion of the spirit of the age. The fine arts are therefore rightly studied as the tree exponents of the civilizations which produced them. Greek art differs from Roman art as Greek civiliza tion differed from that of Rome. Gothic art differs from that of the Renaissance; French from American art; the art of the end of the 19th century from that of its beginning. The phenomena of style are true of all the arts— of literature and poetry as unmistakably as of music and sculpture, of painting and architec ture. It is, however, in the last-named art that styles are most clearly distinguished, not only because of the definiteness and permanence of its forms, but also and chiefly because archited ture touches the daily life and habits of a people at more points than any other art, and deals with materials and technical processes which of necessity vary widely in different lands and ages. See AacHrrecru• History.—A history of the fine arts is really a history of the rise, growth, decay and succession of styles in the various arts, with special mention of those masterpieces which embody in the highest degree the qualities and characteristics of those styles, or which mark the various stages of their development. It is manifestly impossible within the limits of this article even to sketch in outline the historic developments of the several fine arts; for this, the reader is referred to the histories of art mentioned in the bibliography at the dose of this article, and to the briefer notices in this encyclopedia under the several titles: ARCHI TECTURE; DANCING; DRAMA; I NTERIOR DECORA TION ; MURAL DECORATION ; MUSIC ; PAINTING; POETRY; SCULPTURE.
The bibliography of the Fine Arts is enormous. The inquirer is re ferred to the lists of books under the above titles, and under lEstnrincs. and CRITICISM.