Now it is obvious, that the picture of Claude, already mentioned, which is between four and five feet long, if it had been extended to 20 or 30 feet, would not have been so pleasing a composition; because, instead of a picture, it would have resembled a panorama. This I may further instance, in the view from the breakfast-room, consisting of a distant range of mountains, by far too long for any picture. Yet a small part of this view might furnish a subject for the painter, by supposing a tree to form the foreground of the landscape. Are we then to plant such a tree, or a succession of such trees, to divide the whole field of vision into separate landscapes? and would not such an attempt at improvement be like placing five or six pictures of Claude in one long frame? The absurdity of the idea proves the futility of making pictures our models for natural improvements: however I may respect the works of the great masters in painting, and delight to look at nature with a painter's eye, yet I shall never be induced to believe that the best landscape painter would be the best landscape gardener*.
*[Since I began these remarks on Attingham, Mr. Price has published a second volume of "Essays on the Picturesque," the whole of which is founded on his enthusiasm for pictures; and he very justly observes (page 269), "Enthusiasm always leads to the verge of ridicule, and seldom keeps totally within it." Thus, not content with making the works of great painters the standard for laying out grounds, they are also to furnish plans and elevations for all our buildings, from the palace to the cottage: and since we cannot be quite reconciled to their being in a state of ruin, which would certainly be most picturesque, we must build them in such irregular forms, that trees may be introduced in various hollows and recesses, to be left for this purpose: these will, indeed, very soon contribute to produce those weather stains, and harmonious tints, which are more grateful to the painter's eye than polished marble; as the green rust on copper coins is more interesting to the antiquarian than the bright surface of gold or silver. Mr. Price confesses, that two small difficulties occur, in putting these projects fully in practice, viz. that "he sees no examples of chimneys, and very few of slanting roofs," but where fine pictures can be transferred from the canvas to the real residence of man. How void of taste must that man be, who could desire a chimney, or roof to his country-house, when we are told that Poussin, and Paul Veronese, built whole cities without a single chimney, and with only one or two slanting roofs ! This idea of deriving all our instruction from the works of great painters, is so ingenious and useful, that it ought not to be confined to gardening and building. In our markets, for instance, instead of that formal trim custom of displaying poultry, fish, and fruit, for sale on different stalls, why should we not rather copy the picturesque jumble of Schnyders and Rubens? Our kitchens may be furnished after the designs of Teniers and Ostade, our stables after Woovermans, and we may learn to dance from Watteau or Zuccarelli; in short, there is no individual, from the emperor to the cobbler, who may not find a model for his imitation in the works of painters, if he will but consult the whole series from Guido to Teniers.]
