THE PHILADELPHIA ART-UNION.
While other Art-Unions throughout the country are falling into disrepute, that of Philadelphia seems to be rising in favor.
This cannot be owing to the absence of discouragements. Like all similar institutions, it suffered severely from the pressure of the money-market during the last six months of the year 1851. It found, in common with others, that money was not forthcoming for the promotion of art, when it commanded from one to two per cent. a month on ’change—that men could not, or would not buy pictures, when they were obliged to strain every nerve to save themselves from bankruptcy.
Besides the serious loss of revenue arising from this source, the Philadelphia Art-Union lost by fire its two most valuable steel plates, just at the moment when it was about to reap from them a golden harvest. These splendid plates, “Mercy’s Dream,” and “Christiana and her Family,” which had cost the society several thousand dollars, and which were unquestionably among the most attractive prints ever issued in this country, were entirely destroyed in the conflagration of Hart’s buildings in this city.
It is not, therefore, mere good luck, nor the absence of discouraging circumstances, that has given the Philadelphia Art-Union its present condition of success. This success is based on the principles of its organization, which differ materially from those of other kindred associations.
In the first place, though located nominally in Philadelphia, and having its Board of Managers here, it is really an Art-Union for every place where it finds subscribers. Its prize-holders may select their prizes from any gallery in the United States, or may order a picture from any artist of their own selection. This puts it entirely out of the power of the Board of Managers, even if they had the inclination, to exercise favoritism toward any particular clique of artists, or to practice any kind of fraud or trickery either in the purchase or the valuation of pictures.
Secondly, and for the very reason just assigned, the Philadelphia Art-Union enjoys in a high degree the confidence of the artists themselves. They know by experience that its free gallery is the means of selling a large number of pictures, besides those which are ordered in consequence of the annual distributions. They know also that in order to sell their pictures, or to obtain orders for painting, they have not to cater to the fancies or caprices of a small clique of managers, but to appeal to the public at large, depending solely upon the general principles of their art. In other Art-Unions, the managers themselves select and buy the pictures that are to be distributed as prizes. Hence they are almost invariably regarded with jealousy by every artist who does not receive from them an order—that is, by at least nine-tenths of the whole body. The artist sees, however, that the Philadelphia Art-Union does not admit of any favoritism of this kind. Its very plan renders the thing impossible. If any particular artist finds that among the prize-holders, no order or purchase has come to his studio, he may see in it evidence perhaps that he has not pleased the public taste, but no evidence of partiality in the Board of Managers. So far as their operations are concerned, they give to all competitors “a fair field and no favor”—and this is all that the artist asks.
That this view of the subject is the true one, and that the artists themselves so view it, has been conclusively shown by their action on the occasion of the losses of the institution by the late fire. The artists of Philadelphia, on hearing of this disaster, called a meeting, of their own accord, and passed a series of resolutions, approving in the most unqualified manner both the plan and the management of the institution, and agreeing severally to paint a picture of the value of at least fifty dollars, and to present the same to the Art-Union. Several other gentlemen, amateurs and patrons of art, stimulated by this generosity, joined them in the enterprise, and already about fifty valuable prizes have been thus guarantied.
It is obvious that they have entered upon this matter in a generous spirit, with that animation and hearty good-will which spring naturally from the circumstances. Every one at all conversant with art or artists, knows how much the excellence of a picture, its very life and soul—all, in fact, that distinguishes it as a work of art, or raises it above a mere piece of mechanism—depends upon the feeling of the artist while creating it. The noble enthusiasm with which the artists have entered upon the present arrangement, is the best guaranty that the Art-Union will have from each painter one of the happiest efforts of his genius—something done under the direct influence of inspiration. Indeed, we happen to know that several of our most eminent artists intend to lay themselves out on this occasion—resolved to show what artists are, and what they can do, for an institution which commands their confidence.
Mr. Rothermel has signified his intention to paint a picture worth $500; Mr. Paul Weber a landscape worth $500; Mr. A. Woodside a picture worth $500; Mr. Scheussele a Scriptural subject worth $250; Mr. Sully a picture worth $100; Mr. Joshua Shaw a landscape worth $75; and several others have promised pictures at prices varying from $50 (the minimum) to $75, $100, $150, etc. The names of the other artists and amateurs who have offered original pictures of this description, are Rembrandt Peale, James Hamilton, Isaac L. Williams, Wm. A. K. Martin, Wm. F. Jones, Wm. E. Winner, Leo. Elliot, F. de Bourg Richards, George C. White, John Wiser, J. K. Trego, George W. Holmes, Geo. W. Conarroe, John Sartain, Alex. Lawrie, Jr., Samuel Sartain, G. R. Bonfield, S. B. Waugh, W. T. Richards, Aaron Stein, R. A Clarke, W. Sanford Mason, J. R. Lambdin, G. C. Lambdin, J. Wilson, May Stevenson, I. W. Moore, T. H. Glessing, W. H. Wilcox, Thomas A. Andrews, George F. Meeser, James S. Earle, Edward F. Dennison, George W. Dewey, James L. Claghorn. Others will, no doubt, be added to the list.