his guard, is likely to enter too much into the detail. He too
frequently makes his historical heads look like portraits; and this was
once the custom amongst those old painters who revived the art before
general ideas were practised or understood. A history painter paints man
in general; a portrait painter, a particular man, and consequently a
defective model.

Thus an habitual practice in the lower exercises of the art will prevent
many from attaining the greater. But such of us who move in these
humbler walks of the profession are not ignorant that, as the natural
dignity of the subject is less, the more all the little ornamental helps
are necessary to its embellishment. It would be ridiculous for a painter
of domestic scenes, of portraits, landscapes, animals, or of still life,
to say that he despised those qualities which have made the subordinate
schools so famous. The art of colouring, and the skilful management of
light and shadow, are essential requisites in his confined labours. If
we descend still lower, what is the painter of fruit and flowers without
the utmost art in colouring, and what the painters call handling; that
is, a lightness of pencil that implies great practice, and gives the
appearance of being done with ease? Some here, I believe, must remember
a flower-painter whose boast it was that he scorned to paint for the
million; no, he professed to paint in the true Italian taste; and
despising the crowd, called strenuously upon the few to admire him. His
idea of the Italian taste was to paint as black and dirty as he could,
and to leave all clearness and brilliancy of colouring to those who were
fonder of money than of immortality. The consequence was such as might
be expected. For these pretty excellences are here essential beauties;
and without this merit the artist's work will be more short-lived than
the objects of his imitation.