1829

This a fantastic warning to art critics from 1829. "For a long time to come they will be allowed to range in every direction over that field which they regard as their own, delighting in the theories which they themselves have imagined, and presenting to themselves objections for which they have the most eloquent replies…”

1829 Eugene Delacroix:

“Since time immemorial, criticisms of the fine arts have been appearing in print, and have always presented difficulties. That is nearly inevitable: in the first place, they get no more than a yawn from the generality of people, for whom writing of this kind is always obscure, complicated by terms of little known meaning and, in a word, tiresome, because it leaves nothing but vagueness in the mind. In the second place, the artists have a hatred for such performances because, far from contributing to the advancement of art, these discussions embroil the simplest questions, and twist all ideas out of shape…

…What need is there, indeed, to go to such lengths, when one quite naturally admires what is good and condemns what is bad? In order to be a good judge, isn’t it enough if one has a natural sense, given to every ordinarily constituted man, the sense which gives an inner warning of the presence of what is admirable and what is detestable?
A beautiful horse, an ugly woman, an ugly man, there you have things which anyone recognizes without difficulty; to the eyes of the simplest people, all that is crystal clear: it admits of no contradiction. A beautiful picture and a wretched one, just like music, good or bad, achieve appreciation in the same way; at all events that is how the matter seems to the great number of people who tell you they are happily gifted by nature with simple instincts, and who proclaim themselves unspoiled by the prejudices of the profession or of the schools. And so they get sensations of pure pleasure or distress from a work of art, as they would from any other external object…

…disputes arise about matters which seemed to be settled at first glance, and debated begin among the critic themselves. It is the artist who nevertheless pays the costs of this war of wits, since his judges are always agreed on one point, that of showing him, very charitable, how bad are his mistakes…

…Such is the sad fate of those who let themselves be overtaken and outrun, however solid the principles on which they have built their theories. Perhaps this would be the place to say something, in conclusion, about those priceless inventions, the rules for beauty, that immutable beauty which changes every twenty or thirty years. But that question, because of the place it holds in the field of art, is quite worthy to be treated separately, and at greater length. The story of real beauty, and above all the story of its variations, appears never to have been told…

…However, let the critics be reassured; despite the frightening picture of the disappointments to which they are subject, they are still in the strongest position. For a long time to come they will be allowed to range in every direction over that field which they regard as their own, delighting in the theories which they themselves have imagined, and presenting to themselves objections for which they have the most eloquent replies…”

Delacroix, E. "On art criticism." A rticle in the Revue de Paris. May 1829.