| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: The Mentor: Rembrandt, Vol. 4, Num. 20, Serial No. 120, December 1, 1916
Author: Dyke, John C. Van
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Mentor: Rembrandt, Vol. 4, Num. 20, Serial No. 120, December 1, 1916" ***
THE MENTOR 1916.12.01, No. 120,
Rembrandt
LEARN ONE THING
EVERY DAY
DECEMBER 1 1916 SERIAL NO. 120
THE
MENTOR
REMBRANDT
By JOHN C. VAN DYKE
Professor of the History of Art
Rutgers College
DEPARTMENT OF VOLUME 4
FINE ARTS NUMBER 20
FIFTEEN CENTS A COPY
Christmas Giving
The old question--What shall we give? Too often answered by giving the
easiest thing. “There, that’s off my mind for another year!” Yes, off
your mind--but how does your heart feel when your friend sends _you_
something that shows that he has cherished a little special thought of
you?
* * * * *
Christmas giving may be a blessing or a blight--according to the spirit
of the giver. It is a blessing when it carries with it a thought that
honors the one that gives and benefits the one that receives.
* * * * *
“Benefit is the end of Nature,” says Emerson, “and he is great who
confers the most benefits. Beware of good staying in your hand. Pay it
away quickly to someone.”
* * * * *
Thousands of you tell me in the daily mail how The Mentor benefits you.
Can you give a better gift to your friend than this same benefit? If
we benefit you, we can also benefit him. With whole heart we pledge
full service to him as to you. Give, then, this Christmas, The Mentor
and all its service to your friend. Your message of friendship will be
repeated to him twice a month throughout the year.
THE EDITOR.
[Illustration: IN THE HERMITAGE, PETROGRAD
SOBIESKI--PORTRAIT BY REMBRANDT]
_REMBRANDT_
_Early Years_
ONE
Sometimes it is difficult to learn the truth about a great man. This
is particularly so in the case of one who lived three centuries ago;
for in those days people were not as careful to keep records as they
are today. For years the great painter Rembrandt was regarded as having
been ignorant, boorish, and avaricious. Fables making him out to be
such a character sprang up without any foundation. It is only within
the last fifty years that we have come to know the true Rembrandt, and
to realize that he had profound sympathy, a powerful imagination, and
originality of mind, and that he was a poet as well as a painter, an
idealist and also a realist. He has justly been called “the Shakespeare
of Holland.”
Rembrandt Harmens van Rijn--for that is his full name--was born at
Leyden, a town near Amsterdam, in Holland, on July 15, 1605. Leyden is
famous in history as the birthplace of many great artists and other men
of renown. Rembrandt’s home overlooked the river Rhine. He was the son
of a well-to-do miller, and his parents were ambitious that Rembrandt
enter the law, for his older brothers had been sent into trade.
At that time Holland was entering upon her great career of national
enterprise. Science and literature flourished, poetry and the stage
were cultivated by her people, and art was made welcome in every town,
large and small. So Rembrandt, after he had been sent to the high
school at Leyden, decided to become a painter. For already within him
he felt the first urgings of genius.
Accordingly, when Rembrandt was only twelve or thirteen years old,
his father allowed him to become a pupil of Jacob van Swanenburch, a
painter of no great ability, who, however, enjoyed some reputation
because he had studied in Italy. Three years later the boy was placed
under Pieter Lastman, of Amsterdam, who was a much better artist and
teacher. Authorities differ as to how long Rembrandt remained with
Lastman. One says that he was his pupil until he was nineteen years
old; another believes that he studied with him for only six months. At
any rate, sometime after 1623 Rembrandt returned to the home of his
parents at Leyden.
During these first years of his artistic life, Rembrandt worked hard.
He painted pictures of almost everyone he saw--beggars, cripples, and
in short every picturesque face and form of which he could get hold.
Life, character, and special lighting effects were his principal
concern. Frequently he used his mother for a model, and from these
portraits we can trace his strong resemblance to her. The young
artist also liked to paint his father and sisters; and by the number
of portraits he painted of himself, we can see that from the very
beginning he worked hard to master every form of expression, learning
to draw the human face as it appeared not only to the casual observer,
but also to one who read the character within. It is said that during
his lifetime Rembrandt painted nearly sixty portraits of himself.
Time went by, and the young artist of Leyden was attracting the
attention of art lovers in the great metropolis of Amsterdam. Some of
them urged him to move there; and feeling that he was now strong enough
to stand alone, Rembrandt rented a large house in Amsterdam and removed
there in 1631. He divided the upper part of his house into small
studios, and there he worked and taught. His pupils were many and from
wealthy families. From this teaching Rembrandt derived a large income.
Fortune smiled upon him. At one bound he leaped into the position of
the leading portrait painter of Amsterdam. Numerous commissions for
portraits flowed in upon him, and during the first few years of his
residence there he painted at least forty. When he was only twenty-six
years old, in 1632, he painted the “Anatomy Lesson,” a picture that
made an enormous sensation, and holds its place today as one of
Rembrandt’s masterpieces.
The year 1634 was one of the happiest in Rembrandt’s life. He was then
at the beginning of a successful artistic career, and it was at that
time that he married Saskia van Ulenburg, a beautiful Frisian maiden.
Saskia brought him love and wealth. Eight years of prosperity and
sunshine followed their union.
Rembrandt and his wife were a joyous pair. They had four children, a
boy and two girls who died in infancy--and a son, Titus, who grew to
man’s estate.
PREPARED BY THE EDITORIAL STAFF OF THE MENTOR ASSOCIATION
ILLUSTRATION FOR THE MENTOR, VOL. 4, No. 20, SERIAL No. 120
COPYRIGHT, 1916, BY THE MENTOR ASSOCIATION, INC.
[Illustration: DETAIL OF THE ANATOMY LESSON
BY REMBRANDT
IN THE HAGUE MUSEUM]
_REMBRANDT_
_The Master Painter_
TWO
The year 1640 marks the beginning of what may be termed the second
period of Rembrandt’s life and work. It was during these years that
success and happiness were his. From then until 1654 Rembrandt worked
in what has been called his “second manner.” His art grew in power,
and the coldness of his “first manner” had disappeared. He had passed
through a period of exaggerated expression and had come to a truer,
calmer form of painting. It is interesting to compare his own portrait
painted in 1640 with the earlier portraits of himself. This painting
portrays a man strong and robust, with powerful head, determined chin,
and keen, penetrating eyes. This was the Rembrandt of that period, the
man confidently independent and careless as to his popularity as an
artist.
Rembrandt had now many pupils. He had bought a house in Amsterdam, and
had placed in it a great collection of paintings and engravings. At
that time the artist was living a life of simple domesticity, happy
with his wife and children. His friends were many, and his interests
were large.
Rembrandt’s mother died in 1640, and two years later the great
sorrow of his life came upon him. His wife Saskia died. This changed
everything for him. The events of his latter days are clouded in
obscurity.
The terms of Saskia’s will are interesting, in that they may throw
some light upon a later action of the artist’s, which will be related
further on. She left her money to their son Titus, with Rembrandt as
sole trustee, and with full use of the money until he should marry
again or until the marriage of Titus.
It was in 1642 also that Rembrandt painted his most famous picture--the
“Night Watch.” This is one of the landmarks of Rembrandt’s career.
However, it is not a night watch at all, but a call to arms by day, and
more properly should be named the “Day Watch.”
The artist’s life was changed after the death of his wife. No longer
does he appear to have been the buoyant, carefree painter and art
lover. There is a pathetic sadness in many of his works done at this
time. This is well illustrated in his pictures of the Holy Family, a
subject which was a favorite with him during this period of his life.
One reason for Rembrandt’s unhappiness was his waning popularity. The
“Night Watch,” which was painted to order as a collection of portraits
in one composition, did not prove satisfactory to his customers.
Some of them complained of being put in the background and obscured.
Naturally, the artist could not give places of prominence to every
person in the picture. Not understanding this, however, these people
took offence at his disposition of the characters, and transferred
their patronage elsewhere.
It was at this time that Rembrandt did a great deal of landscape
painting, and genius that he was, he made a success of it. It is to
this period that the famous painting, “The Mill,” is ascribed.
But though he was still the great artist, a cloud of adversity was
slowly coming over Rembrandt’s life. Evil days were at hand.
PREPARED BY THE EDITORIAL STAFF OF THE MENTOR ASSOCIATION
ILLUSTRATION FOR THE MENTOR, VOL. 4, No. 20, SERIAL No. 120
COPYRIGHT, 1916, BY THE MENTOR ASSOCIATION, INC.
[Illustration: IN THE WIDENER COLLECTION, PHILADELPHIA
THE MILL, BY REMBRANDT]
_REMBRANDT_
_Last Years_
THREE
During the last part of the seventeenth century money was scarce in
Holland. Long continued wars and civil troubles had worn out the
country. Financial depression overwhelmed Amsterdam; and in addition
to this the taste in art changed, and Rembrandt and his pictures were
neglected.
Most of Rembrandt’s money was tied up in his house and in his large
collection of valuable pictures; and when his paintings ceased to be
in demand, he was forced to borrow money. Very little is known of the
artist’s life at this time. He was living with his servant, Hendrickje
Stoffels, and in 1654 a child was born to them. To her Rembrandt gave
the name of Cornelia, after his much loved mother. It has been asserted
that he married Hendrickje, but it is probable that he did not, for in
such a case the money left by Saskia would have gone at once to her son
Titus, according to the will.
In 1656 Rembrandt’s financial affairs went crashing down to ruin. By
a process of law his house and land were transferred to Titus. But as
his son was still a minor, Rembrandt was allowed to remain in charge of
Saskia’s estate. And then ruin stared him in the face. In July, 1656,
Rembrandt was declared bankrupt, and an inventory of his property was
ordered. Two years later the larger part of his collection of etchings
and drawings was sold. The sum realized was only a small fraction of
their value.
Rembrandt, driven from his house, stripped of everything he possessed,
without friends or money, took a modest lodging in Amsterdam. The city
which once had acclaimed him as its greatest portrait painter now
passed him by and left him alone to wait for death.
During all these dark years, however, Rembrandt was painting some of
his greatest pictures. Even amid the ruins of his affairs he could go
calmly on working; and for this he deserves the highest respect. Among
the works of this time are the portrait of Jan Six, the “Adoration of
the Magi,” and “John the Baptist Preaching in the Wilderness.” At the
same time he continued to paint his own portrait; but in these pictures
of the artist in his old age we see a man broken by misfortune.
Titus, Rembrandt’s only son, had married. He died in 1668, leaving
one child. A year later, on October 8, 1669, Rembrandt himself passed
away. In the “Livre Mortuaire” of the Wester Kerk in Amsterdam appears
the following simple entry, relating to his death: “Tuesday, 8th Oct.,
1669, Rembrandt van Rijn, Painter on the Rovzegraft, opposite the
Doolhof. Leaves two children.”
Rembrandt outlived his popularity, although he was the greatest genius
of his time and country, and in fact one of the great geniuses of all
time and all countries. He was left to die alone and neglected by his
fellow-countrymen, who had they foreseen the fame that the future held
in store for him, might have sought his humble lodging to honor him on
bended knee.
PREPARED BY THE EDITORIAL STAFF OF THE MENTOR ASSOCIATION
ILLUSTRATION FOR THE MENTOR, VOL. 4, No. 20, SERIAL No. 120
COPYRIGHT, 1916, BY THE MENTOR ASSOCIATION, INC.
[Illustration: IN THE RYKS MUSEUM, AMSTERDAM
ELIZABETH BAS--PORTRAIT BY REMBRANDT]
_REMBRANDT_
_The Real Man_
FOUR
One day Rembrandt was employed in painting the portraits of a very
rich family in Amsterdam. This was to be a group picture, and as usual
with him, Rembrandt was working hard to make it a success. While he
was painting, someone opened the door of the room in which he was and
brought in the dead body of a monkey. The appearance of this funny
little creature appealed to the artist at once. He wanted to make a
picture of it right away. But the only thing on which he could make the
drawing was the canvas on which he was painting the portraits of the
rich family. So Rembrandt, without hesitation, painted the monkey in
among their portraits. They were very angry, of course, but in those
days Rembrandt was at the height of his career and he did not have to
concern himself about how his customers felt.
This little incident, whether it is strictly true or not, illustrates
one side of Rembrandt’s character. When he was most successful he
was carefree and independent. It may have been this independence
that brought him to his ruin--although in all probability it was the
indifference of his fellow citizens to his work.
The age in which Rembrandt lived cared little for personalities.
There were no newspapers to record his doings, and no one of his
contemporaries cared enough about it to write down much about his life
and work. For these reasons, the world has never known much about
Rembrandt, the man. We know that he was light-hearted, headstrong and
extravagant. We know that he was neglected and died poor and feeble.
But we know little more than this, although of late more reliable
information concerning the life of this great painter has been found.
A man’s faults are usually remembered when his virtues are
forgotten. For years it pleased biographers to represent Rembrandt
as a ne’er-do-well artist, who could not take advantage of his
opportunities. We know now, however, that his faults were very human
ones, and that his merits greatly overbalanced them.
As a boy the artist was not an industrious scholar. He looked upon
reading and writing as rather troublesome and hardly worth the labor
involved in learning them. Later he worked hard at his chosen career,
and the great number of pictures that he painted is sufficient evidence
that he was by no means lazy.
Probably Rembrandt’s greatest fault was his extravagance. Many a man
can endure adversity with courage; success is sometimes more difficult
to bear. Hard luck often brings out the best in a man; success may
destroy it. Rembrandt was no exception. He spent his money freely, and
like the grasshopper of the fable, sang happily through the summer,
with no thought of the cold to come.
He liked to attend sales of works of art, and he gladly paid huge sums
for any pictures that caught his fancy. It is said that the dealers
came very soon to know his rash and reckless methods and would push the
prices far up, confident that Rembrandt would meet them. At the same
time, the artist liked to buy expensive jewels for his wife. He loved
Saskia devotedly, and he wanted her to have everything of the finest.
This manner of open-handed living naturally played havoc with his
finances.
When Saskia died Rembrandt was heartbroken. His customers fell off
and many troubles overwhelmed him. His friends helped him as much as
possible, but money ran through his hands like water through a sieve,
and he could not seem to control his expenditures. Then later the death
of his faithful Hendrickje was the last blow to his happiness. For a
few years Rembrandt lingered, and then he too passed into the great
silence.
It is true that many of Rembrandt’s troubles were self-inflicted: but
he suffered enough to pay for his faults. At any rate it is better to
remember him as a great genius and a man worthy of respect and honor.
PREPARED BY THE EDITORIAL STAFF OF THE MENTOR ASSOCIATION
ILLUSTRATION FOR THE MENTOR, VOL. 4, No. 20, SERIAL No. 120
COPYRIGHT, 1916, BY THE MENTOR ASSOCIATION, INC.
[Illustration: IN THE DRESDEN GALLERY
SASKIA HOLDING A FLOWER--PORTRAIT BY REMBRANDT]
_REMBRANDT_
_Saskia van Ulenburg_
FIVE
Rembrandt’s life was one of curious contrasts. During his early manhood
he was Amsterdam’s leading portrait painter. These were years of
happiness and carefree enjoyment of all the good things of life. But
almost as suddenly as the painter stepped into the sunshine of success,
he fell back into the shadows of adversity. One of the principal causes
of his happiness was his wife, Saskia. Just as her entrance into his
life coincided with the period of his greatest prosperity, so her
death marked the beginning of his darker years. It would seem almost
as though Saskia were his guardian angel, and that with her departure
Rembrandt’s star began to descend.
Saskia van Ulenburg was the ninth child of a wealthy patrician family
of Friesland. She was born at Leeuwarden in 1612. Saskia became an
orphan at an early age, and then she made her home with one or the
other of her married sisters in turn, and finally with a cousin, who
lived in Amsterdam. It was at the house of this cousin that Rembrandt
met her. Charmed by her youthful grace, he obtained permission to paint
several portraits of her.
Saskia at this time was a slender girl, rather small of stature. Her
features were very regular, and her eyes were of a beautiful brown
shade, matching her soft reddish brown hair. Her brilliant complexion
was the envy of her less favored companions.
The young painter soon showed that he took a special interest in
Saskia. He bestowed great care on her portraits, and was in her company
as much as possible. He himself was young, attractive, and good
looking; and we may be sure that Saskia’s family did not frown upon his
suit. They probably realized that Rembrandt would make an excellent
husband for their ward.
Rembrandt’s father had died some time before this, and his mother
gladly gave her consent to the marriage. Saskia and Rembrandt were made
man and wife on June 22, 1634.
Their life together was very happy. Rembrandt’s tastes were domestic,
and he was never more pleased than when planning his wife’s happiness.
He centered his whole thought and energy upon her. Saskia, simple and
loving, was governed in all things by his wishes: she was entirely
devoted to him.
Rembrandt liked to use Saskia as his model. Some of the better known
pictures for which she posed are her own portrait in the Cassel
Gallery, the “Jewish Bride,” painted in 1634, which is now in the
Hermitage in Petrograd, “Sophonisba Receiving the Cup of Poison from
Massinissa,” in the Prado at Madrid, which is also dated 1634, and the
famous painting of Saskia and himself, now in the Dresden Gallery and
done about 1635, which represents Rembrandt in military costume, seated
at a table, with a long glass of sparkling wine in his hand and Saskia
perched on his knee.
At this period in his life everything seemed to smile on Rembrandt.
He was extravagant and did not know the meaning of the word “save.”
Saskia’s health had not as yet given cause for anxiety. But sad days
were to come. Three children were lost in rapid succession. In 1641 the
only child of theirs who survived was born. He was named Titus, after
Saskia’s sister Titia. But the young wife did not live long after her
son was born. Her health broke down, and an etching made by Rembrandt
about 1640 shows her with sharpened features, feverish eyes, and an
expression of pensive melancholy. The happy days were over. Their brief
union, begun in joy, was soon to end in tears. As if in prophecy,
Rembrandt’s anxieties were deepened by another sorrow--the death of his
mother in 1640.
Saskia’s illness made rapid progress. Day after day she faded, and no
longer did the artist have any delusions as to her recovery. Saskia
made her will on June 5, 1642. She herself, however, had not lost all
hope, for in this will she spoke of the children she might eventually
have. She made Rembrandt trustee of her property for their son Titus,
showing her perfect trust in her husband. At the end of the document
she signed her name for the last time in tremulous, almost illegible
characters, as if exhausted by the effort.
It was only a few days later that Saskia passed away, on June 19, 1642.
Rembrandt followed her coffin to the Oude Kerk and then returned to his
lonely house, where everything reminded him of his brief happiness and
where he was now alone with a child nine months old. He never seemed
to recover from the blow. He went on working, and during the years to
come painted some of his greatest pictures; but seemingly he had lost
his grip on life, and from that time on it was only a matter of a few
years until he was overwhelmed by financial troubles and was driven to
a humble lodging and his death.
PREPARED BY THE EDITORIAL STAFF OF THE MENTOR ASSOCIATION
ILLUSTRATION FOR THE MENTOR, VOL. 4, No. 20, SERIAL No. 120
COPYRIGHT, 1916, BY THE MENTOR ASSOCIATION, INC.
[Illustration: IN THE CASSEL GALLERY
COPPENOL--PORTRAIT BY REMBRANDT]
_REMBRANDT_
_His Etchings_
SIX
Many people in considering Rembrandt think of him only as a master
painter; they overlook the fact that he was also the leading etcher of
his time. This monograph will take up briefly this part of the great
artist’s work.
It is related of Hokusai, the Japanese artist, that he once said
that he hoped to live to be very old, and that he might have time to
learn to draw in such a way that every stroke of his pencil would be
the expression of some living thing. That is exactly what Rembrandt
managed to do in almost every one of his etchings. This is particularly
true of the wonderful little etching of his mother. One critic says
that on looking at this etching he was compelled to close his eyes
for a moment, because of the tears that rose unbidden at sight of
it. It would be hard to find anything more worthy of praise than
this engraving. Every line expresses motherly kindness, sweetness,
and thoughtfulness. Nothing could have been omitted; the etching is
complete.
So skilful was Rembrandt as an etcher that the nobleness of his ideas
and the depth of his nature are apt to be overlooked. His engravings
are pervaded by his big, artistic personality and by his own ennobling
influence. The artist’s soul spoke not only through the choice of
subject, but found expression in every single detail. He showed a
singular inventive power, originality of conception, and a great depth
of understanding.
Among Rembrandt’s etchings were many wonderfully life-like portraits,
biblical subjects, and landscapes. An interesting thing about all this
work is that most of it was done between the years 1639 and 1661. After
this Rembrandt seems to have renounced etching entirely. In these
twenty years he produced his greatest works, on every one of which
appears the impress of the genius of the man.
Rembrandt seems to have had a particular interest in making etchings
of beggars. He delighted to draw them. These types were easy to find
in Amsterdam at that time; but they may be called super-beggars, for
as a critic says, “One is almost inclined to say that they cannot be
beggars, because the master’s hand has endowed them with the warmth
and splendor with which his artistic temperament clothed everything he
looked at.”
Some of Rembrandt’s etchings have brought great prices. In most cases,
however, these prices varied because of the “state” of the plates. The
points of difference between these “states” arise from the additions
and changes made by Rembrandt on the plates. A single impression of
one of his etchings, “Rembrandt with a Sword,” was bought for about
$10,000 in 1893. Another, “Ephraim Bonus with Black Ring,” brought
about $9,750; while a third, the “Hundred Guilder Print,” fetched about
$8,750.
Some may find in Rembrandt’s etching much that at first appears rough
and uncouth. More apparent skill and ease in drawing may appear to have
been shown by other etchers. But Rembrandt’s work may justly be termed
big, for it was conceived on a grand scale by a genius and master.
PREPARED BY THE EDITORIAL STAFF OF THE MENTOR ASSOCIATION
ILLUSTRATION FOR THE MENTOR, VOL. 4, No. 20, SERIAL No. 120
COPYRIGHT, 1916, BY THE MENTOR ASSOCIATION, INC.
THE MENTOR · DEPARTMENT OF FINE ARTS · DECEMBER 1, 1916
REMBRANDT
By JOHN C. VAN DYKE
_Professor of the History of Art, Rutgers College_
_MENTOR GRAVURES_
SOBIESKI
DETAIL OF THE ANATOMY LESSON
THE MILL
_MENTOR GRAVURES_
ELIZABETH BAS
PORTRAIT OF SASKIA HOLDING A FLOWER
COPPENOL
[Illustration: Portrait of the Artist
By Himself
In the Collection of Mr. Henry C. Frick, New York City]
Entered as second-class matter March 10, 1913, at the
postoffice at New York, N. Y., under the act of March 3, 1879.
Copyright, 1916, by The Mentor Association, Inc.
The visitor to the Netherland art galleries should leave his notions of
Greek and Italian art with his umbrella, at the entrance. Holland is no
place to talk about canons of proportion or types of beauty or ideals
of any kind. The Dutch are now, as they have always been, a people
confronted by the realities of existence, and see life, literature, and
art as facts rather than as fancies. There has never been much romance
about them, but, on the contrary, a realization of the existent, a
grasp of the truth and vitality of things, a keen penetration into the
human problem. There never was any need for far-fetched fancies or
ideals. The life about them interested and impressed them, and, from
the very beginning, the Dutch painters were painting the portrait of
their own land and people. The result was an art that has a distinct
quality of its own--just as distinct a quality as the art of Persia or
Japan. You would not think of judging Japanese art by that of Italy.
Why then think of Dutch art in any other terms than its own?
_Rembrandt and Raphael_
[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF A MAN
Altman Collection of Metropolitan Museum, New York]
To carry out the thought in illustration, it may be said that
Rembrandt, the great Dutchman, was the very opposite of Raphael, the
great Italian. He painted no allegories on Vatican walls, was not
led away by Renaissance revivals of Greek form, dreamed no dreams
of uniting pagan types with Christian ideals. Even technically he
was widely different from Raphael. He painted the easel picture in
oils, had no love whatever for Italian line and composition, did all
his drawing and modeling by catches of shadow, and produced his most
startling effects by the dramatic use of light and color. In all this
Rembrandt was merely reflecting his time and his people in his own
ingenious way. He was emphatically true to the Dutch point of view, and
today his art is full of truth, force, vitality, character. In fact,
that word “character” is the keynote to all his work. It furthermore
explains that æsthetic paradox, sometimes applied to Rembrandt, “the
beauty of the ugly.” For many of his people are ugly, if we regard them
for the straightness of their foreheads and noses, the oval of their
chins, or the proportions of their figures; but they are beautiful
in their simplicity of presence, their unconscious sincerity, their
profound truth of character.
[Illustration: THE ARCHITECT
In the Gallery at Cassel, Germany]
_Rembrandt as a Leader_
No country in Europe produced a finer quality of art, or a more learned
school of craftsmen, than Holland. There was a master genius there as
elsewhere, and that genius was Rembrandt. He came when Holland had
reached her highest pitch of power--came on the crest of the wave of
which he and his fellow painters were the light and color. He has been
acclaimed as her great painter and he deserves that title, for of all
the Dutch masters he was practically the only one who was universal in
his scope. His art alone, in its appeal, travels beyond the confines
of the Netherlands. What he has to say is world-embracing, and finds
sympathetic response with all peoples. He is profound in his humanity,
in his penetration into life problems, in his sympathy with his fellow
man. The poor, mean-looking Amsterdam Jews that he portrayed in so many
of his pictures are pathetic in their humility, their suffering, their
patience. He was always taking for models the humble, the despised, the
lowly. His heart seemed to go out to them.
_His Biblical Pictures_
And with such types what a new interpretation he gave the Bible! How he
realized Bible truth and brought it home to his own people by using the
Jew of the quarter and the boor of the polder for models! Look at the
“Supper at Emmaus”--look for the intensity of the types rather than for
any regularity of form. What pathos in the pale, blue-lipped Christ,
with the phosphorescent glimmer of the tomb about the architecture at
the back! What amazement in the disciples at the table! What fear in
the boy bringing in the dish! This was perhaps the first time in art
that the “Supper at Emmaus” was made real and believable. The story
was not only realized, but humanized. All of Rembrandt’s Biblical
pictures were of this nature. Look again at the “Manoah’s Prayer,” or
the “Tobit and the Angel,” or the “Sacrifice of Abraham.” They are
Dutch types again, in Dutch costumes and surroundings. Rembrandt knew
very well that the Biblical characters were not Dutch in type, and
that the people in the time of Christ did not dress like the boors
and burghers of Holland. He purposely painted his own people in their
native costumes, that he might the better and the more forcefully bring
realization home to them. It was not, is not, affectation. Study the
Manoah and his wife, the Abraham, the family of Tobit on the doorstep,
and you cannot find in all art people of more unconscious sincerity.
Rembrandt believed in them. And that is why you and I believe in them
today.
_Rembrandt as a Portrait Painter_
[Illustration: JAN HERMANSZ KRUL
In the Gallery at Cassel, Germany]
[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF JOHN SIX
In the Six Gallery, Amsterdam]
[Illustration: WOMAN WITH PINK
In the Gallery at Cassel, Germany]
Rembrandt painted many Biblical pictures, which are at present widely
scattered throughout the European galleries. In all of them he gave a
new interpretation, a profound insight, a real meaning, to Scriptural
story. In addition he painted many figure compositions of a historical
or mythological cast. But his great success, after all said and done,
was with the portrait. His technical methods were well suited to the
portrait, and he was unsurpassed in giving the truth of presence in
his sitter. The quiet dignity of his Dutch burghers, their repose
and simplicity, the complete absence of anything like pretense about
them, made up Rembrandt’s point of view; but to this he added a
cunning hand and a technical skill that were wonderful. How superbly
with his catches of light and shade he could draw an eye, a forehead,
a nose, a chin! How instantly and inevitably he caught the salient
feature and turned it by sharp emphasis into positive expression! What
significance he could get out of an outstretched hand, a bent back, a
bowed head! These were features wherewith he proclaimed the character
of his sitter. The “Portrait of an Old Lady,” in the National Gallery,
London, has the flabby cheek, the trembling lip, the wrinkled brow of
the aged; but you can also see that hers has been a life of suffering,
and that the eyes have often been blinded with tears. On the contrary,
the “Portrait of a Man”--the so-called Sobieski, at Petrograd, has the
determination and force of the warrior. It has grip and firmness and
courage about it. These are not only in the features, but Rembrandt has
even put them in the brush work--the manner of handling. Again, by way
of contrast, the heads in the “Lesson in Anatomy” are put in calmly,
serenely, inevitably just right. What intelligence, seriousness, and
living presence they have! They are what might be called speaking
likenesses, in the sense that all they lack of life is speech. And what
can one say that will adequately describe the loveliness of mood, the
eternal womanly, in the “Portrait of Saskia,” at Cassel! It is a wonder
as a piece of color, but still more wonderful as a characterization
of the painter’s wife. Once more, for a further contrast, look at the
“Portrait of Coppenol.” He is supposed to be a writing master because
he is sharpening a quill pen, but whatever his profession or pursuit,
have you any difficulty in seeing here a dull-witted person of very
limited intelligence? The very fatness of the forehead, so remarkable
in its realistic rendering, the narrow eyes, with their vacant stare,
the pumpkin cheeks and head, the soft, lazy hands, seem to point to
some clerk or pedagogue, who had not enough brains to know that he
wanted more.
Rembrandt was easily one of the great group of portrait painters with
Titian, Velasquez, and Holbein. And by this I mean no faint praise.
It seems to be thought in some quarters that portraiture is somehow
an inferior branch of painting. It is said to require no invention or
imagination. But nothing could be more mistaken than such an idea. When
we speak of Rembrandt, Titian, Velasquez, and Holbein we are speaking
of the world’s great masters, and perhaps their most satisfactory
masterpieces are their portraits. A painter who can adequately portray
his fellow man, as Rembrandt did, has practically said the last word in
art. That Rembrandt had this gift and accomplishment is evidenced by
the high esteem in which his work is held by painters even to this day.
[Illustration: THE NIGHT WATCH
In the Ryks Museum, Amsterdam
A fine gravure reproduction of this painting appears in The Mentor,
Number 17, “Dutch Masterpieces.”]
_His Technical Method_
There was no trick about Rembrandt’s painting. He was no slave to a
peculiar color, canvas or brush. He painted at times with a palette
knife: at other times with his thumb. He kneaded the surface, ploughed
through it when it was wet, did almost anything to get effects by
catches of light and shade whereby he drew and modeled. But none of
these small peculiarities explains his technical success. His methods
were sound enough, and for the most part were known before his day;
but he applied them better and increased their carrying power. He
has been called the master of light and shade, and so, indeed, he
was within a limited range. It was the same light and shade known to
Leonardo, Giorgione, and Carravagio, and probably Rembrandt got it from
pictures of the Neapolitan School, though he never was in Italy. But
Rembrandt improved upon the Italian method of using shadow. He made it
transparent, enveloping, mysterious. And its antithesis, light, he made
penetrating and dramatic by putting it in sharp contrast. Out of the
two he got wonderful effects. In doing the portrait head, for instance,
he threw his highest light on the collar, the nose, the chin, the
forehead. This high light ran off quickly into half-light and then into
shadow, so that by the time the ear or side of the neck was reached,
dark, even black, notes were used. The decrease was rapid; in fact
often violent, but this only served to focus the attention more keenly
upon the dominant features of the face. The result was what has been
called “forced,” but it was very effective. It was the same effect that
one sees today at the opera, when the chief actor is in the spot-light
and the rest of the stage is in gloom.
[Illustration: SYNDICS OF THE CLOTH HALL
In the Ryks Museum, Amsterdam
A fine gravure reproduction of this painting appears in The Mentor,
Number 8, “Pictures We Love to Live With.”]
_The Night Watch_
But this violent focusing of light had its limitations even in
Rembrandt’s hands. The “Night Watch” exemplifies them. This was to be
a portrait group of the sixteen members of the Frans Banning Cock
Shooting Company. The members wanted their portraits painted in a
group, after the manner of the time, and Rembrandt conceived the
idea of painting the portraits and making a stirring picture of the
company coming out of its quarters, at one and the same time. It was
an ambitious scheme, and not wholly successful, because here came in
the limitations of his method. He painted sixteen portraits with his
spot-light illumination, each one being completed under its own light.
The picture lacked that one light which should have bound together the
whole company. As a result there were sixteen separate portraits on the
one canvas, held together in measure by shadow, color and atmosphere,
but spotty in the lighting. The French writers of the eighteenth
century could not understand the lighting, and were led to think the
picture represented a night scene. They called it the “Ronde de Nuit,”
and, later, Sir Joshua Reynolds translated this into “Night Watch.” But
nothing is more certain than that Rembrandt intended it for a day scene
in full sunlight. It was simply his arbitrary way of handling light
that made a night effect out of daylight.
[Illustration: THE ANATOMY LESSON
In the Hague Museum]
That is about the only criticism that can be lodged against the
“Night Watch.” Light and color have both been sacrificed to shadow;
but when that is conceded the picture still remains a marvel of
color, shadow, and atmosphere, and a wonder of life and action.
The movement--the bustle of it--is superb. The Captain and his
Lieutenant in the foreground are in full light, but back of them and
around them, emerging out of the gloom, are nebulous heads, flashing
casques, plumes, halberds, guns, drums, dogs, street urchins--all the
belongings of a militia company on parade. They are not only wonderful
in their action, but in their mystery of appearance, coming out of
shadow depths into light. Of course, the picture was not entirely
satisfactory to the sixteen. They had bargained for their portraits,
and little knew then how cheaply they were purchasing immortality.
Those in the background complained that they were not sufficiently
spot-lighted, not treated with sufficient importance; in fact,
subordinated to those in the front row. But the picture, as a picture,
is certainly successful, is a great favorite with all art-lovers, and
in the Ryks Museum in Amsterdam, where it now hangs, it is considered
one of the world’s great masterpieces. Truer lighting--that is truer to
the facts of general illumination--is seen in the earlier “Lesson in
Anatomy” and the later “Syndics of the Cloth Hall,” but neither picture
has the fascination nor the imagination of the “Night Watch.”
_Rembrandt’s Styles_
[Illustration: THE SACRIFICE OF ABRAHAM
In the Old Pinacothek, Munich]
[Illustration: THE ANGEL LEAVING TOBIT
In the Gallery of the Louvre, Paris]
[Illustration: BLESSING OF JACOB
In the Gallery at Cassel, Germany]
Rembrandt’s work is usually divided into three different periods.
At first his method of handling was calm, measured, even at times
smooth. His light and color were gray, as also his backgrounds. This
period has been called his “gray period.” The “Lesson in Anatomy,”
the “Sacrifice of Abraham,” the “Coppenol,” the “Elizabeth Bas,” the
“Old Lady” of the National Gallery, London, all illustrate this early
manner. It was gradually encroached upon and finally superseded by
a fuller, freer handling of the brush, with much warmer color and
light, tending toward reddish gold. This has been called his “golden
period,” and marks the midday of his career. The beautiful “Saskia,”
at Cassel, and the so-called “Sobieski,” at Petrograd, illustrate
the beginning of this period--the changing from gray to warmer notes
of red, yellow, and gold. The “Woman with the Pink,” at Cassel, the
“Manoah’s Prayer,” at Dresden, the “Night Watch,” were done further
along in this middle period. It was the time when Rembrandt was in
his full strength, saw comprehensively, handled a full palette of
color, and was almost infallibly accurate with his hand. In his
third and last period Rembrandt’s work became rather hot and foxy in
color, dark in illumination, kneaded and thumbed in the surface, and
sometimes uncertain in drawing. He was expanding into a larger view
and vision up to the last--seeing objects in their broader relations
and proportions rather than in their surfaces. Toward the close he
often slurred the surfaces, neglected textual qualities, and threw his
whole force into the rendering of mass in relation to light, air, and
color. The pictures of this period are hard for the beginner in art to
understand, because he is misled by the roughness of the surfaces, the
messy state of the pigments, the apparent fumbling, kneading, rubbing
out and amending, of the brush work. But, as we have said, Rembrandt
was purposely slurring surface truths for the greater truths of bulk,
weight, and general relationship. The best example of this late work
among our illustrations is the “Syndics of the Cloth Hall,” in the Ryks
Museum, Amsterdam. In it Rembrandt went back to his early method of
lighting, but continued with his late manner of handling and coloring.
It is superbly broad in vision, absolute in its truth to life, and
convincing in its incident. The cloth merchants are seated about a
table, perhaps figuring up their year’s balance, when someone opens the
door to enter and they all look up to see the incomer. Nothing could
be simpler, more direct, or truer. Rembrandt never painted anything
better. For here he completely fulfilled expectations. Many of his
later canvases he could not complete. The “Blessing of Jacob,” at
Cassel, for instance, he probably gave up in despair, or was working
upon at the time of his death. He had reached a pitch in his career
when he saw and strove for things that his hand or brush could not
realize or pin down to canvas. That is the great stone wall that even
genius encounters and cannot surmount.
_The Master’s Life_
[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF AN OLD LADY
In the National Gallery, London]
The story of Rembrandt’s career is recited elsewhere in this number
of The Mentor, but it may be said here that it was not different from
that of many other painters. He came up to Amsterdam from the outlying
country, and achieved celebrity at an early age. Praise and pay and
pupils poured in upon him. He married the beautiful Saskia and was
happy. But as he expanded in vision and methods he went beyond the
understanding and the appreciation of his public. His pupils, such
as Bol and Flinck, who had a more commonplace point of view, and a
smoother, prettier style of painting, outdid him in public favor. The
public began to desert him, the fair Saskia died, the great master fell
upon evil days, and finally passed out in penury and want--evidently
neglected and possibly forgotten by the age and people he had done so
much to glorify. The record of his death in the Burial Book of the
Wester Kirk, Amsterdam, is pathetic in its meagerness. “Tuesday, 8th
Oct., 1669. Rembrandt van Rijn, painter on the Roozegraft, opposite
the Doolhof. Leaves two children.” It almost looks as though he were
identified only by the squalid quarters in which he died. And this
was Rembrandt, the greatest master north of the Alps, and a genius of
almost Shakespearian quality!
_Many Pictures Attributed to Him_
[Illustration: SASKIA VAN ULENBURGH
In the Gallery at Cassel, Germany
A fine gravure reproduction of this painting appears in The Mentor,
Number 28.]
It seems that not only was Rembrandt and his art misunderstood in his
own time, but that he is still misunderstood at the present time. This
is in measure due to many pictures which are mistakenly attributed to
him. One need not be an expert to find it strange that of twenty pupils
of Rembrandt, who painted more or less in his style, there remain
hardly twenty pictures apiece, and of some of them not even one. What
paralyzed their hands or destroyed their works? What became of their
pictures? You begin to get a glimmer of light when you understand that
to Rembrandt there are assigned a thousand or fifteen hundred examples;
that these are painted in fifteen or twenty different styles, though
all superficially resembling Rembrandt’s style. Almost everything that
is Rembrandtesque, or even casually resembles Rembrandt, has been
signed up and sold as his since the master came back to popular favor.
The name is one that now brings thousands of dollars in the auction
room, and what wonder that it is often misused!
These Rembrandtesque pictures were done by other hands than his, are
pupils’ works, or school work or copies, or, in a few cases, forgeries.
Rembrandt’s work has never been critically studied as that of Leonardo
or Giorgione (jore-joe´-nee). Strange, again, is it not, that Leonardo
and Giorgione in the final analysis should have less than a dozen
pictures apiece left to them, while Rembrandt should still be given
his thousand? Northern art has not had a critical searchlight turned
upon it, as had Italian art thirty years ago. When it does, the present
catalogue of Rembrandts will crumble. In the meantime, the art student
would better accept Rembrandt only in his best authenticated works,
such, for instance, as are reproduced in this number of The Mentor.
Half of the so-called Rembrandts in the European galleries are now to
be taken with a grain of salt. They may be, and often are, exceedingly
good pictures, but they are not by Rembrandt.
_SUPPLEMENTARY READING_
GREAT MASTERS OF DUTCH AND FLEMISH PAINTING _Bode_
London, 1909.
OLD MASTERS OF BELGIUM AND HOLLAND _Fromentin_
Boston, 1882.
THE DUTCH SCHOOL OF PAINTING _Havard_
London, 1885.
REMBRANDT _Michel_
New York, 1894.
REMBRANDT _Verhaeren_
(Les Grands Artistes), Paris.
REMBRANDT _Vosmoer_
Paris, 1877.
REMBRANDT _Valentiner_
(Klassiker die Kunst), Stuttgart.
REMBRANDT, A STUDY OF HIS LIFE AND WORK _Brown_
New York, 1907.
⁂ Information concerning the above books and articles may be had on
application to the Editor of The Mentor.
_THE OPEN LETTER_
“Why are pictures repeated,” asks one of our readers. We rarely
repeat a picture, but we _do_ print more than one picture of the
same subject--and for a most excellent reason: The Mentor is not
through with a subject in one number. That would be a poor and meager
educational service. The plan of The Mentor Association is to present
subjects to its members in various ways, so that they may consider
these subjects from different points of view. This is done so as
to give the reader a broad, comprehensive grasp of things. Let me
illustrate. The Taj Mahal is one of the most beautiful buildings in
existence. When, therefore, we published The Mentor on “Beautiful
Buildings of the World,” we printed, of course, a picture of the Taj
Mahal. When we came to the subject of India in Mr. Elmendorf’s series
of travel numbers, we could not overlook the exquisite Taj Mahal--which
is one of the sights of India. We shall later on have a number of The
Mentor on Oriental Architecture. The Taj Mahal being one of the finest
examples of oriental architecture, cannot of course be ignored in that
number simply because we printed two pictures of the building in former
Mentors. In each case the reader is asked to consider the Taj Mahal
from a different point of view. And, moreover, we do not repeat the
same picture. We print three different views of the Taj Mahal.
* * * * *
Another instance. We printed in The Mentor devoted to “Masters of the
Violin” a very fine portrait of the Spanish violinist, Sarasate. This
picture not only happens to be a most interesting portrait of the great
violinist, but it has a special art value in having come from the brush
of Whistler. Next year we shall devote a number of The Mentor to the
work of James MacNeil Whistler. When we do so it will be impossible
for us to ignore this wonderful portrait of Sarasate, for it is a
distinguished example of Whistler’s art. The present number is another
case in point. We have considered Rembrandt’s art several times in
The Mentor. He occupied a prominent place, as you know, in the number
devoted to “Dutch Masterpieces.” He also appears in the number on “The
Wife in Art.” And now we devote a number exclusively to him.
The basic idea of The Mentor is a broad one. We do not consider that a
subject, once treated, must be boxed up and shelved. Oh, no! While we
make our excursions into the different fields of knowledge, we shall
often turn our faces back to some great subject of interest that we
have already observed and consider it anew from a different point of
view.
* * * * *
When you write to The Mentor always sign your name and address. The old
time-worn signatures of “Reader” or “Friend” make it hard for us to
give Mentor service. The following came into the office a few days ago:
“Have greatly enjoyed your Mentor this last year. One
suggestion I would make, though, is relative to the Madonna
Ansidei. That famous painting was purchased by Morgan a number
of years ago. In 1910 it was in the National Gallery, as a
loan, and at present is in the Metropolitan Museum, New York,
one of its greatest treasures. Ought our public to be informed
by The Mentor that it is in London?”
A READER.
Where our reader got the notion that the Ansidei Madonna is in the
Metropolitan Museum of Art, in New York, I am at a loss to understand.
If that famous work had ever been brought to America, surely the whole
world would have known of it. Works of art of such importance are not
moved about without the public being advised of it. The Ansidei Madonna
is in the National Museum, London, and the circumstances of its being
placed there are exactly as stated in The Mentor. It was purchased
for the National Museum from the Duke of Marlborough’s collection for
about $350,000. The Raphael Madonna, in the Metropolitan Museum of Art,
that our reader refers to, is known as the “Madonna of St. Anthony of
Padua.” I hope that this will catch the eye of our friendly reader, and
especially I hope that he will not continue to entertain the thought,
or impart it to others, that The Mentor is giving the public incorrect
information concerning the Ansidei Madonna.
[Illustration: W. D. Moffat
EDITOR]
THE MENTOR ASSOCIATION
ESTABLISHED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A POPULAR INTEREST IN ART,
LITERATURE, SCIENCE, HISTORY, NATURE, AND TRAVEL
CONTRIBUTORS--PROF. JOHN C. VAN DYKE, HAMILTON W. MABIE, PROF. ALBERT
BUSHNELL HART, REAR ADMIRAL ROBERT E. PEARY, WILLIAM T. HORNADAY,
DWIGHT L. ELMENDORF, HENRY T. FINCK, WILLIAM WINTER, ESTHER SINGLETON,
PROF. G. W. BOTSFORD, IDA M. TARBELL, GUSTAV KOBBÉ, DEAN C. WORCESTER,
JOHN K. MUMFORD, W. J. HOLLAND, LORADO TAFT, KENYON COX, E. H. FORBUSH,
H. E. KREHBIEL, SAMUEL ISHAM, BURGES JOHNSON, STEPHEN BONSAL, JAMES
HUNEKER, W. J. HENDERSON, AND OTHERS.
The purpose of The Mentor Association is to give its members, in an
interesting and attractive way, the information in various fields of
knowledge which everybody wants to have. The information is imparted
by interesting reading matter, prepared under the direction of leading
authorities, and by beautiful pictures, produced by the most highly
perfected modern processes.
THE MENTOR IS PUBLISHED TWICE A MONTH
BY THE MENTOR ASSOCIATION, INC., AT 52 EAST NINETEENTH STREET, NEW
YORK, N. Y. SUBSCRIPTION, THREE DOLLARS A YEAR. FOREIGN POSTAGE 75
CENTS EXTRA. CANADIAN POSTAGE 50 CENTS EXTRA. SINGLE COPIES FIFTEEN
CENTS. PRESIDENT, THOMAS H. BECK; VICE-PRESIDENT, WALTER P. TEN
EYCK; SECRETARY, W. D. MOFFAT; TREASURER, ROBERT M. DONALDSON; ASST.
TREASURER AND ASST. SECRETARY, J. S. CAMPBELL
* * * * *
COMPLETE YOUR MENTOR LIBRARY
Subscriptions always begin with the current issue. The following
numbers of The Mentor Course, already issued, will be sent postpaid at
the rate of fifteen cents each.
Serial
No.
1. Beautiful Children in Art
2. Makers of American Poetry
3. Washington, the Capital
4. Beautiful Women in Art
5. Romantic Ireland
6. Masters of Music
7. Natural Wonders of America
8. Pictures We Love to Live With
9. The Conquest of the Peaks
10. Scotland: The Land of Song and Scenery
11. Cherubs in Art
12. Statues With a Story
13. The Discoverers
14. London
15. The Story of Panama
16. American Birds of Beauty
17. Dutch Masterpieces
18. Paris, the Incomparable
19. Flowers of Decoration
20. Makers of American Humor
21. American Sea Painters
22. The Explorers
23. Sporting Vacations
24. Switzerland: The Land of Scenic Splendors
25. American Novelists
26. American Landscape Painters
27. Venice, the Island City
28. The Wife in Art
29. Great American Inventors
30. Furniture and Its Makers
31. Spain and Gibraltar
32. Historic Spots of America
33. Beautiful Buildings of the World
34. Game Birds of America
35. The Contest for North America
36. Famous American Sculptors
37. The Conquest of the Poles
38. Napoleon
39. The Mediterranean
40. Angels in Art
41. Famous Composers
42. Egypt, the Land of Mystery
43. The Revolution
44. Famous English Poets
45. Makers of American Art
46. The Ruins of Rome
47. Makers of Modern Opera
48. Dürer and Holbein
49. Vienna, the Queen City
50. Ancient Athens
51. The Barbizon Painters
52. Abraham Lincoln
53. George Washington
54. Mexico
55. Famous American Women Painters
56. The Conquest of the Air
57. Court Painters of France
58. Holland
59. Our Feathered Friends
60. Glacier National Park
61. Michelangelo
62. American Colonial Furniture
63. American Wild Flowers
64. Gothic Architecture
65. The Story of the Rhine
66. Shakespeare
67. American Mural Painters
68. Celebrated Animal Characters
69. Japan
70. The Story of the French Revolution
71. Rugs and Rug Making
72. Alaska
73. Charles Dickens
74. Grecian Masterpieces
75. Fathers of the Constitution
76. Masters of the Piano
77. American Historic Homes
78. Beauty Spots of India
79. Etchers and Etching
80. Oliver Cromwell
81. China
82. Favorite Trees
83. Yellowstone National Park
84. Famous Women Writers of England
85. Painters of Western Life
86. China and Pottery of Our Forefathers
87. The Story of The American Railroad
88. Butterflies
89. The Philippines
90. The Louvre
91. William M. Thackeray
92. Grand Canyon of Arizona
93. Architecture in American Country Homes
94. The Story of The Danube
95. Animals in Art
96. The Holy Land
97. John Milton
98. Joan of Arc
99. Furniture of the Revolutionary Period
100. The Ring of the Nibelung
101. The Golden Age of Greece
102. Chinese Rugs
103. The War of 1812
104. The National Gallery, London
105. Masters of the Violin
106. American Pioneer Prose Writers
107. Old Silver
108. Shakespeare’s Country
109. Historic Gardens of New England
110. The Weather
111. American Poets of the Soil
112. Argentina
113. Game Animals of America
114. Raphael
115. Walter Scott
116. The Yosemite Valley
117. John Paul Jones
118. Russian Music
119. Chile
NUMBERS TO FOLLOW
December 15, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: THE LAND OF SUNSHINE. _By Charles F.
Lummis, Author and Editor._
January 1, 1917. KEEPING TIME. _By C. F. Talman, of the United States
Weather Bureau._
THE MENTOR ASSOCIATION, INC.
52 EAST 19th STREET, NEW YORK, N. Y.
THE MENTOR
You will have to hurry if you wish to take advantage of the Special
Christmas Offer we are now making. There are only a few days left.
Most of our members have sent in their gift names already. A few have
delayed. If you are among these few, please be sure to send yours in
_at once_.
_Special Christmas Offer_:
1 Yearly subscription $3.00
2 One-year subscriptions 5.00
OR
1 Two-year subscription 5.00
Send your subscriptions in at once. Statement will be sent you January
1st.
THE MENTOR ASSOCIATION, INC. 52 EAST NINETEENTH STREET--NEW YORK, N. Y.
MAKE THE SPARE MOMENT COUNT
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "The Mentor: Rembrandt, Vol. 4, Num. 20, Serial No. 120, December 1, 1916" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.