"About Pictures, &c."

image 1image 2image 3image 4cropped image 1

About Pictures, &c.—

We went into the Institute rooms in Washington st.,¹ yesterday afternoon, (20th) to take 'a last fond look' at the pictures—(which we blame ourselves much for not having noticed more fully before.) If we may flatter ourself that our readers remember any length of time what sentiments we advance in these columns, they must be aware that we 'go' heartily for all the rational refinements, and rose–colorings of life—such as music, mirth, works of art, genial kindness, and so forth. We wish every mechanic and laboring man and woman in Brooklyn, would have some such adornment to his or her abode—however humble that abode may be—a print hung on the wall, a pot of flowers, or even the occasional noise of an accordeon,² (an instrument, by the by, which discourses very eloquent music, well–played, and is cheap to buy, and easy learned: We advise our excellent friend Mr. Hjousberry ³ to get an invoice of cheap ones, and put them in tune for humble purchases, the coming season.). . . . . . And if we are met with the ready rejoinder, that "it is hard enough for poor folk to earn the necessaries of life, let alone things which you can neither eat or wear," we still say that that higher appetite, the appetite for beauty and the intellectual, must be consulted too—and the bread and beef should not always be allowed to carry the day. 'He that hath two loaves,' says Jean Paul,⁴ 'let him go and exchange one for some flowers; for bread is food for the body, but flowers are food for the mind.'

Among several very fair paintings at the Institute, we yesterday noticed with satisfaction the 'Portrait of a Gentleman,' No. 19—'Portrait of a Child,' No. 31—the 'Kitchen Bail at White Sulphur Springs'—Mr. Fisher's 'Portrait of a Lady,' and Mr. Rogers's two 'Landscapes.⁵ Doubtless there were others worthy of particular commendation, but our limited time, (many had been taken away, too, as the Exhibition closes to–day) prevented our making a fuller examination. . . . . The old 'Snow Scene, Brooklyn thirty years ago,'⁶ —a regular 'feature' in these Exhibitions—stood out in as bold relief as ever; and we paid due respect to it. Perhaps few things will be able to bring before the eyes and realization of the next race, the fact how rapidly Brooklyn has 'went' in the progress of improvement, more fully than this well delineated picture.

We commend these Exhibitions—and hope the spirit which prompts them will increase and multiply in Brooklyn. We wish some plan could be formed which would result in a perpetual free exhibition of works of art here, which would be open to all classes.