ART OLASSES.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 522, 1 June 1909, Page 4

ART OLASSES.

.Sir,™ Referring to. a column in Saturday's. Dominion, on the above topic» ill winch the Director of lechmcal Education, Mr. W, S t a ?I obo A disagrees with the remarks made bvMr.; Robert Lee ■ (chairman: of the Wellington Education Board). It is but natural that such a reply should come from Mr. La Irobe. Yet, no doubt, more weight, will bo ElVeu to Mr. Lee's remarks- than the explanation by Mr. Li Trobe. It is amusing to read in Mr. La Trobe's protest that when ho to6k chargo of the school, in 1904; he found tho art classes needed complete reconstruction, that the training was marred by wrong methods, •described as a logacy from the old South Kensington regime. One has only to think of tho 1 vast numbers of men and vroincn who are now at" tho top of their artistic, fame who have emanated" from the South Kensington Schools. •; • _ Mr. La Trobe's remarks would have been in better*, taste had he refrained fronl disparaging methods adopted by his .predecessor not at present here to reply, even if he so wished. It would be.interestinn to read the views of teachers who were under the old regime and tho new, to say nothing of, those who have taken an active interest in the Art Department of the Technical School since it's inception! These opinions would bo free from bias.—l am, etc., ' .1 '. EBSKINE NICOL. May 29. :

r Sir,—ln Saturday's issue of The Dominion there appeared a long report, headed "Art Glasses: Some Recent Criticism," bearing on Mr. Lees recent critioism of the art Side of our technical schools. He is re-•-w ,r ay i ns - " Art is at a wry low ebb in Wellington at the present time." Instruction at the Technical Sohools is ourelv mechanical." He has boen replied to at groat length by tho Director of the lechmcal. School. and the report was "discussed in congratulatory terms" bj- the board, and proved to everybody's satisfaction, oxeent the observant outsider, who helps to foot the bill, that the art education of Wellington is .a splendid success. • i

i, The Director draws a comparison of the school with the year 1902, tho' closing year if ray memory serves mo well, of Mr. Nairn's life, when his strength was tailing fast, and Mr. ltiley..was hampered in his directorship by an unappreciativo committee. When a technical school has had a good foundation laid bv such, men as Mr, lliloy and. Mr. Nairn, who wero_ true lovers of art, and koenlv interested in applying their knowledge to tho improvement of colpnial taste- and industry, i it takes some years to overturn it, but, judging by present art results, it seems to have been successfully accomplished. It is not the number of students put through a school, but what they have done with their training that is tho test. Judso bv tho local art exhibitions, wandor round tho walls, aslt which is tho work of tho present-day students,, and draw your own conclusions by comparison with tho work of tho old students, whose work used to be displaved on"'the walls of tho Technical School, and .must still be about tho building sdmowhero. : "These soul-destroying courses in light and shado," spokbn of with such contompt in tho report, produoed such Btudettts as Miss I'loronce Broome, now in a very well Paid designee's position in America. Mr. G. E, .Butler, recently commissioned by Bristol to commomorato'the visit of their King.' Another, student of those! days is at the head of the art, department of the best produced weekly newspaper in Now Zealand. Quito recentlyi tpeftkinß to tha writer) - he traced aia position to tho training received tmdor,

Mr. Nairn, and Mr. Riley. Miss Mabel Hi s position' in the colonial art world is well-known. Miss Leo holds a good art position in Enttland. It is unnecessary to sdgale of Miss Richmond, Miss Richardson, and fillss liiDEard t their works do teßtify lor them. They are all'old students!under Air. Kiley s-directorship. The two teachers at present instructing at the Technical, whoso work really adorns tho walls of the Art Society, received their grounding under the sarno recimo. Whero are the products of the present succcssful system; surely, in scvon years, fchefe could have been some result? Or does it taW fourteen to bring tho students on to tlw walls of our exhibitions, except as mere dabblers r What tho outsider wants to know is: What has it cost per student head to kill art in this city ? In comparison wiim . a , Gof school in Christchurch, visited recently by the writer, art is not only dead, but cremated. True, there is a live art centre in this city, where a life class, energetic and hard-working, is held by a coterie of art students, whose work upon the walls of the local exhibitions is, ofttimes, adjudged the product of Government assistance, _ whereas _ they instruct themselves, and pay their own models, bccauso the Technical - School had not the ability to keep, them within ; its walls, as would have been tho case under the. dispised regime previous to the year 1902. Is it not time men with some knowledge • of their subject, like Mr.Lee, spoko in this matter? More power to him., May he help to bring hack life into the dry-bones of our local art schools, which spend tho publio monoy with such little real result.—l am, etc., k NAIRN STUDENT. Mav 29.