Leonardo

A History of British Wood EngravingAuthor(s): Albert GarrettSource: Leonardo, Vol. 13, No. 1 (Winter, 1980), p. 88Published by: The MIT PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1577973 .

Accessed: 10/06/2014 11:57

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

The MIT Press and Leonardo are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toLeonardo.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.107 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 11:57:07 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

own fault that I did not succeed, in my text, in showing that, contrary to (one) Marxist view of art as 'an effective instrument of pre-directed socio-political or ideological change', I see art's social role precisely as providing a 'vehicle for speculation' and 'intimating the natural order or pointing to the mystery of the universe'. Doing these things does not seem to me to transcend 'societal concerns' at all, but, on the contrary, to fulfil a most fundamental societal need.

I repeat that I blame myself for unclarity: the reviewer has obviously not wilfully misunderstood me.

Donald Brook Discipline of Visual Arts, School of Humanities

Flinders University of South Australia Bedford Park, South Australia 5042

'The Other Half: A Self-Portrait'

What John Adkins Richardson says in his review of my book in Leonardo 12, 34 (1979) is probably all correct except that my contribution to scholarship has been minuscule. As a matter of fact my catalogue of the Leonardo da Vinci drawings at Windsor was an important contribution to scholarship, as it established a chronology of the drawings in a manner that has not been contradicted. But, of course, it is true that after that I attempted synthetic surveys like The Nude, which nevertheless must have a good deal of scholarship behind them.

Lord Clark The Garden House

Castle Road, Saltwood Hythe, Kent, CT21 4QX

England

own fault that I did not succeed, in my text, in showing that, contrary to (one) Marxist view of art as 'an effective instrument of pre-directed socio-political or ideological change', I see art's social role precisely as providing a 'vehicle for speculation' and 'intimating the natural order or pointing to the mystery of the universe'. Doing these things does not seem to me to transcend 'societal concerns' at all, but, on the contrary, to fulfil a most fundamental societal need.

I repeat that I blame myself for unclarity: the reviewer has obviously not wilfully misunderstood me.

Donald Brook Discipline of Visual Arts, School of Humanities

Flinders University of South Australia Bedford Park, South Australia 5042

'The Other Half: A Self-Portrait'

What John Adkins Richardson says in his review of my book in Leonardo 12, 34 (1979) is probably all correct except that my contribution to scholarship has been minuscule. As a matter of fact my catalogue of the Leonardo da Vinci drawings at Windsor was an important contribution to scholarship, as it established a chronology of the drawings in a manner that has not been contradicted. But, of course, it is true that after that I attempted synthetic surveys like The Nude, which nevertheless must have a good deal of scholarship behind them.

Lord Clark The Garden House

Castle Road, Saltwood Hythe, Kent, CT21 4QX

England

own fault that I did not succeed, in my text, in showing that, contrary to (one) Marxist view of art as 'an effective instrument of pre-directed socio-political or ideological change', I see art's social role precisely as providing a 'vehicle for speculation' and 'intimating the natural order or pointing to the mystery of the universe'. Doing these things does not seem to me to transcend 'societal concerns' at all, but, on the contrary, to fulfil a most fundamental societal need.

I repeat that I blame myself for unclarity: the reviewer has obviously not wilfully misunderstood me.

Donald Brook Discipline of Visual Arts, School of Humanities

Flinders University of South Australia Bedford Park, South Australia 5042

'The Other Half: A Self-Portrait'

What John Adkins Richardson says in his review of my book in Leonardo 12, 34 (1979) is probably all correct except that my contribution to scholarship has been minuscule. As a matter of fact my catalogue of the Leonardo da Vinci drawings at Windsor was an important contribution to scholarship, as it established a chronology of the drawings in a manner that has not been contradicted. But, of course, it is true that after that I attempted synthetic surveys like The Nude, which nevertheless must have a good deal of scholarship behind them.

Lord Clark The Garden House

Castle Road, Saltwood Hythe, Kent, CT21 4QX

England

'A History of British Wood Engraving'

Stephen Calloway's review of my book in Leonardo 12, 342 (1979) is objective and sincere. He does, however, raise some critical production problems. Regarding the 400 illustrations he says'... which, though carefully chosen to complement the text, remain irritatingly out of step with it'. A continuous sequential development was chosen, the absolute minimum of reduction, surrounded with a maximum of white space, and a sensitive double-page design layout to enhance the engravings. One cannot have it both ways at this scale; it is not possible with 407 pages.

The text of the chapter on Palaeolithic art is much reduced from the original manuscript and is there to illustrate the very important concepts of Henry Moore, Leon Underwood, Ger- trude Hermes and Blair Hughes-Stanton, formulated when they were students at Leon Underwood's Brook Green School. These artists cannot be evaluated without this source material.

Calloway states 'and thus the artists' inscriptions and signa- tures do not appear'. They cannot appear if one wants to reproduce solid black and exceedingly fine white lines of wood engraving to meet the standards of this book. To do it would require half-tone printing settings throughout. That would result in a soot and smudge reproduction and there would be no black, only a dark grey. One can have the penciled inscriptions and signatures, when artists provide such material, in magazines and cheap books. A large part of the ?60 cost arose from the need for very high densitometry of the black. Calloway's comment is sympathetically understood, but, in achieving these standards of reproduction fidelity, it is not possible-not even with hand printing.

I was a little surprised that he found some errors in the section on the work of Ricketts and of Shannon and I hope he will point them out to me. I was particularly careful not to repeat errors I was aware of. The new material introduced is based on documen- tary evidence.

Albert Garrett Eastcote

10 Sunningdale Ave. Ruislip, Middlesex HA4 9SR

England

'A History of British Wood Engraving'

Stephen Calloway's review of my book in Leonardo 12, 342 (1979) is objective and sincere. He does, however, raise some critical production problems. Regarding the 400 illustrations he says'... which, though carefully chosen to complement the text, remain irritatingly out of step with it'. A continuous sequential development was chosen, the absolute minimum of reduction, surrounded with a maximum of white space, and a sensitive double-page design layout to enhance the engravings. One cannot have it both ways at this scale; it is not possible with 407 pages.

The text of the chapter on Palaeolithic art is much reduced from the original manuscript and is there to illustrate the very important concepts of Henry Moore, Leon Underwood, Ger- trude Hermes and Blair Hughes-Stanton, formulated when they were students at Leon Underwood's Brook Green School. These artists cannot be evaluated without this source material.

Calloway states 'and thus the artists' inscriptions and signa- tures do not appear'. They cannot appear if one wants to reproduce solid black and exceedingly fine white lines of wood engraving to meet the standards of this book. To do it would require half-tone printing settings throughout. That would result in a soot and smudge reproduction and there would be no black, only a dark grey. One can have the penciled inscriptions and signatures, when artists provide such material, in magazines and cheap books. A large part of the ?60 cost arose from the need for very high densitometry of the black. Calloway's comment is sympathetically understood, but, in achieving these standards of reproduction fidelity, it is not possible-not even with hand printing.

I was a little surprised that he found some errors in the section on the work of Ricketts and of Shannon and I hope he will point them out to me. I was particularly careful not to repeat errors I was aware of. The new material introduced is based on documen- tary evidence.

Albert Garrett Eastcote

10 Sunningdale Ave. Ruislip, Middlesex HA4 9SR

England

'A History of British Wood Engraving'

Stephen Calloway's review of my book in Leonardo 12, 342 (1979) is objective and sincere. He does, however, raise some critical production problems. Regarding the 400 illustrations he says'... which, though carefully chosen to complement the text, remain irritatingly out of step with it'. A continuous sequential development was chosen, the absolute minimum of reduction, surrounded with a maximum of white space, and a sensitive double-page design layout to enhance the engravings. One cannot have it both ways at this scale; it is not possible with 407 pages.

The text of the chapter on Palaeolithic art is much reduced from the original manuscript and is there to illustrate the very important concepts of Henry Moore, Leon Underwood, Ger- trude Hermes and Blair Hughes-Stanton, formulated when they were students at Leon Underwood's Brook Green School. These artists cannot be evaluated without this source material.

Calloway states 'and thus the artists' inscriptions and signa- tures do not appear'. They cannot appear if one wants to reproduce solid black and exceedingly fine white lines of wood engraving to meet the standards of this book. To do it would require half-tone printing settings throughout. That would result in a soot and smudge reproduction and there would be no black, only a dark grey. One can have the penciled inscriptions and signatures, when artists provide such material, in magazines and cheap books. A large part of the ?60 cost arose from the need for very high densitometry of the black. Calloway's comment is sympathetically understood, but, in achieving these standards of reproduction fidelity, it is not possible-not even with hand printing.

I was a little surprised that he found some errors in the section on the work of Ricketts and of Shannon and I hope he will point them out to me. I was particularly careful not to repeat errors I was aware of. The new material introduced is based on documen- tary evidence.

Albert Garrett Eastcote

10 Sunningdale Ave. Ruislip, Middlesex HA4 9SR

England

88 88 88 Letters Letters Letters

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.107 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 11:57:07 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions