Abstract
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Cf. Bernard Teyssèdre, Roger de Piles et les débats sur le coloris (Paris, 1957), passim.
2.
Roger De Piles, Dialogue sur le coloris (Paris, 1699), 14.
3.
For Poussin's use of 'pensee' in this sense, cf., for example, Correspondence, ed. Jouanny, 1911 (reprinted 1968), no. 40 (Lettres et propos sur l'art, ed. by A. F. Blunt, 46).
4.
No distinction was necessarily implied at that time by the variant spellings of 'dessin' and 'dessein'. De Piles's definitions are presumably, as Anthony Blunt has suggested (in a personal communication), a reflection of Zuccaro's distinction between 'disegno interno' and 'disegno esterno' (cf. A. F. Blunt, Artistic Theory in Italy (Oxford, 1940), ch. IX).
5.
Cf. Teyssèdre, Roger de Piles, passim.
6.
Junius, The Painting of the Ancients, 1638 (translation of De pictura veterum, 1637), 255; cf. also pp. 269-70.
7.
Chambray, Perfection de la Peinture, 1699, 12. Chambray is by implication dividing colour into two parts: (I) tints, and (2) chiaroscuro, used for modelling.
8.
Note to line 263 (p. 194).
9.
Note to line 256 (p. 192).
10.
In this he resembles Junius.
11.
Roger de Piles, Dialogue sur le coloris (Paris, 1673). References here are to the 1699 edition.
12.
Junius, Painting of the Ancients, 4-5.
13.
De Piles, Dialogue, 9.
14.
Félibien, Preface to Conférences de l'Académie Royale pendant 1667-1669, 310.
15.
Ent. I, 92.
16.
The concept of the 'je ne sais quoi' was one much discussed by writers on morality and literature also—notably by Le Père Bouhours in his Entretiens d'Ariste et d'Eugène (1671) and Manière de bien penser (1687). The notion of the 'je ne sais quoi' was closely linked with that of the 'honnête homme'; the Abbé Goussault writes : Ce n'est souvent ni la bonne mine, ni les belles actions, ni l'enjouement de l'humeur, ni la vivacité de l'esprit qui plaisent dans un homme, mais un certain je ne sais quoi d'honnête et d'engageant qui fait qu'il est bien par-tout ... (Reflexions sur les défauts ordinaires des hommes, 1692, 57). It may well be that Félibien, certainly aware of discussions on such themes, saw himself as the 'honnête' critic (as it were), embodying such desirable qualities as the 'je ne sais quoi' in his own work. See D. Mornet, Histoire de la littérature française classique (Paris, 1947, 3rd ed.), especially Part II, pp. 97ff., for an illuminating discussion of the question of the 'je ne sais quoi'.
17.
Félibien, Les reines de Perse in Recueil; cited by Teyssèdre, Roger de Piles, 62ff.
18.
This was pointed out by Teyssèdre, op. cit., 64ff.
19.
Ent. II, 157.
20.
Ent. II, 233.
21.
Ent. I, 94f.
22.
Ent. II, 272ff.
23.
Cf. Teyssèdre, Roger de Piles, passim.
24.
Ent. III, 102-3.
25.
E.g., Perfection, 65-66.
26.
Les Reines de Perse, 50-51.
27.
Félibien, Ent. IV, 252.
28.
For a full list of Félibien's works, cf. Teyssèdre, Roger de Piles, 598ff.
29.
Félibien, Ent. V, 6.
30.
Félibien, Ent. V, e.g. 19ff., 29.
31.
On Poussin and Claude, cf. Ent. V, 22.
32.
Ent. VI, 192.
33.
Pointed out by Teyssèdre, Roger de Piles, 346f.
34.
Correspondance de l'abbé Nicaise, in Archives de l'art français, i, 1851-52.