THE IDEAL
A rough circle, as drawn by a child, is the embodiment of an idea rather than a copy of something. A circle which is perfect may be considered ideal, because it is more refined and more controlled than one which is rough and approximate. Shapes like these circles, whether rough or ideal, may be used to represent all sorts of objects. Such drawings can make up ‘schemata’ or formulae. These may be adjusted the better to correspond with what appears in a viewfinder (‘nature’). The artist can adjust schemata so that they become either closer to a perfect ideal, or closer to nature.
Just as a child would tend to draw a circle as neatly as possible a more advanced artist would tend to make schemata more ideal – constructing an alternative world made up of schemata. This world is simpler and more organised than the real world.
Some philosophers have believed, like Plato, that this alternative world really exists – that it is something that lies deep in the structure of Nature. According to them it is as if there really were an ideal face, say, inherent in Nature, but that such a face is never properly formed in reality. The faces we see in people around us are only approximate embodiments of this ideal. Sir Joshua Reynolds referred to this conception as the ‘comprehensive view of Nature’. Whether this deep ideal really exists is a question best left to philosophers; but it is clear that schemata do make up drawings, and that some schemata are closer to an ideal than others. If we image a scale extending from the schematic to the impressionist, it could be said that the ideal is at the very furthest extreme of schematic representation.
Reynolds and others have argued that the highest aspiration an artist can have is to produce work at this most idealistic end of the scale. However it remains a matter of opinion what exact form such an ideal would take. There is no perfect example. The work of Michelangelo and Titian is usually considered to be close to this kind of ideal, and so is that of the ancient Greek sculptors. Arguably this style underlies all others, including those of all cultures in which representation has been developed to a significant degree.
Christ’s Entry into Jerusalem (between 1814 and 1820)
The 19th C artist, B. R. Haydon made strenuous attempts to paint in the grand style. He was not totally successful, and today is usually regarded as having failed. However his attempts have much merit, and they led him to reflect deeply on the requirements of the style. There is much to be learned from his lectures on the subject. He concluded them with an attempt to define the perfect style, a description which closely resembles what I am referring to as the core Style.
To conclude — remember the elements of perfection in painting are grouping without confusion, action without violence, decision without hardness, expression without distortion, grace without affectation, and beauty without insipidity.
B. R. Haydon. Lectures
In effect, reality without vulgarity, air without feebleness, tone without blackness, splendour without grandness, depth without dullness, and light and shadow without obscurity.
https://openlibrary.org/books/OL13640937M/Lectures_on_painting_and_design.
Haydon alluded to the great paintings of the ancient Greeks even though almost no painting of that period survives. We have to make do with accounts written by ancient authors, such as Pliny, who enumerated the qualities to be demanded of a painter. The painter who came closest to achieving perfection was Apelles. Such accounts of legendary achievement have led some artists to try emulate the ancient Greeks by copying the proportions of their sculptures. That is to miss the essence of classical art – which is a fullness of response from the viewer, rather than a recipe for proportions and measurements, as we shall see in the next chapter.