What Is it?, by Henry Stacy Marks R.A., R.W.S., H.R.C.A. (1829-1898). 1872. Oil on canvas. 26 1/2 x 41 1/8 inches (67.5 x 104.5 cm). Collection of Sudley House, Liverpool. Accession no. WAG268. Image kindly made available via Art UK on the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial licence (CC BY-NC). [Click on this image, and the one below, to enlarge them.]
What is it? was exhibited Royal Academy 1873, no. 195, and then later at the Exposition Universelle in Paris in 1878, no. 163. It shows four men and two women, dressed in medieval garb, standing with their backs turned on a bridge and looking down at the river below at some object that has drawn their attention. The banks of the river are lined with Gothic buildings typical of the 14th century. What exactly has interested the group is unclear because it is out of sight in the river, but it caused a great deal of speculation. On February 26, 1874 Marks wrote to George Holt, the second owner of the painting, about its subject: "I cannot pretend to solve the query which forms the title of the work in question – but you may be a sure it is nothing exciting or sensational, or we would have more action in the spectators" (Morris 296).
It appears the public attending the Royal Academy exhibition were not the only ones confused about the subject of Marks's painting; the critics were as well. The Examiner noted: "The curiosity of these folks is quite contagious, and we should really like to know what is going on in the stream below. Whether this is sufficient motive for a picture on which great skill and a great deal of labour has been expended may be doubted (526). The Biograph and Review was aggravated not to know more about the subject:
Artists, as a rule, paint what they profess to represent in minute detail, leaving little or nothing to the imagination. In Mr. Marks's picture of What is it? everything is left to the imagination of the beholder. The picture simply represents a group of people, with their backs to the public, looking over a bridge. Is it a quaint conceit, excellently carried out; and one feels in looking at it irresistibly compelled to try and find out what those eager backs of heads see below the bridge; and greatly aggravated at being unable to gratify one's curiosity. It's like reading an interesting novel, and then finding the third volume is lost. [389]
The critic of The Art Journal considered the subject to be peculiar but whimsical: "H. S. Marks, A., exhibits one of his peculiar ideas, which he calls, What is it? (195), wherein we see an assemblage of persons looking over a bridge with their backs turned to the spectator. The figures are well drawn, and are dressed as of the period of Edward III. It is a whimsical subject; the intention, however, cannot be mistaken" (169). F. G. Stephens in The Athenaeum gave the picture its most extensive, but also a mixed review, as he deplored the lack of action and passion in the figures while praising its technical aspects:
"What is it? (195) will attract much popular attention, and secure no little technical praise. The answer to the questioning title is to be found in the scene and composition, a bridge and a group of figures of people, who, with their backs toward us, look into the river, where something occurs or is to be seen which we cannot see, and, unless Mr. Marks takes us into the secret, we shall never be able to discover. There is no want of variety in the design here; but the figures, – we can hardly speak of the faces, – lack something, at least some of them do, of action and spirit; vivid rendering of something like vital emotion would, of course, move us more powerfully than any composition, however carefully considered or carefully painted can do, if there is no action. The tale Mr. Marks intended to tell is perfectly well told; nothing could be clearer and plainer than the fact that he has not aimed at producing a greater effect than is apparent here. It is a question, however, whether it would not have been better for us if he had expended the care and skill this work has received on a subject involving action, if not passion. The attitudes, without the expressions of the faces, would suffice for this, quite as finely as they do for the sober theme of this picture as it is. [571]
The reviewer for The Builder felt this work was an effort by Marks to question the purpose of his art: "Mr. H. S. Marks seems to have devoted all his energy to close imitativeness. What is it? (195), that his spectators behold from the bridge that crosses clear river's run, suggests that he with them halts to ask the purpose of his art; he paints so nicely that it must be wished his capability being shown, – that his next year's picture shall bring proof of 'what it really is'" (378). The critic of The Saturday Review felt this work showed a lack of imagination on Marks's part:
Mr. Marks, A.R.A., is another painter who has deservedly won his way by keen insight into character; yet The Ornithologist (380) labours under the disadvantage of telling a twice-told tale; neither is there novelty of idea in What is it? (195). In a previous picture, The King is Coming, we were permitted to see the faces of the spectators, but in the sequel now before us we are allowed to gaze merely on their backs. Really our artists must lead less intellectual lives than is usually imagined thus to be driven to expend invaluable hours on valueless thoughts. It might not be a bad plan for the Academy to keep a poet, after the manner of certain trading houses, whose duty it should be to supply the members with ideas. [716]
Cartoon for What is it? in The Magazine of Art, 1883: 84. It is captioned, "The Picture, much altered from the Cartoon, was exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1863."
A watercolour version of What is it? was exhibited at the Liverpool Society of Water Colour Painters in 1874, no. 7. This watercolour, 16 5/8 x 26 1/2 inches (92.2 x 67.3 cm), later sold at Christie's, London, on November 5, 1993. A cartoon for the painting was shown at the Winter Exhibition of the Grosvenor Gallery in 1880, no. 286. This is likely the same cartoon that was reproduced in The Magazine of Art in 1881 on page 84. The cartoon shows that Marks has modified the design significantly in the finished painting. The position and poses of some of the spectators has changed and he has added another woman to the composition on the far right.
Bibliography
"Another Visit to the Royal Academy Exhibition." The Builder XXXI (17 May 1873): 377-78.
"Exhibition of the Royal Academy." The Art Journal New Series XII (June 1873): 165-70.
Fine Victorian Pictures Drawings and Watercolours. London: Christie's (November 5, 1993): lot 104, 60.
"Henry Stacy Marks, R.A." The Biograph and Review IV (November 1880): 387-391.
Morris, Edward. Victorian & Edwardian Paintings in the Walker Art Gallery and at Sudley House. London: HMSO Publications, 1996: 296-98.
Oldcastle, John. "Sketches and Studies by Old and Modern Masters." The Magazine of Art IV (1881): 84-87.
Stephens, Frederic George. "Fine Arts. The Royal Academy." The Athenaeum No. 2375 (3 May 1873): 568-71.
"The Royal Academy." The Saturday Review XXXV (May 31, 1873): 716-17.
"The Royal Academy Exhibition." The Examiner (May 17, 1873): 526.
What Is It?. Art UK. Web. 25 October 2023.
Created 25 October 2023