What do you think?
Rate this book
World of Art
Pre Raphaelites
157 illustrations, 21 in colour. The works of the Pre-Raphaelites are among the best known and best loved of all English paintings, and yet there has long been a tendency to dismiss them as mere Victorian, and to deny them their proper status as works of art. This pioneering critical history places the movement in its historical setting, relating the individual painters and their art to the larger concerns of nineteenth-century society.
Paperback
First published January 1, 1971
2 people are currently reading
144 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
May 23, 2017
The Pre-Raphaelites are one of those artistic groups that defies definition because it was more just about a bunch of homies slangin' paint onto canvases and getting drunk together reciting poetry more than a cohesive "school" of art. In fact, this lack of a smug, self-conscious and pretentious ideal, as most "schools of art", makes them all the more endearing and Hilton does a nice job of making sure we understand that there wasn't a particular "message" behind the group, but more of a fraternity of young folks who didn't like the direction of art in England at the time and wanted to leap-frog back over everything post-Renaissance because they thought it sucked (hence the name).
Most people who stare at paintings might recognize some of these, especially all of Rossetti and stuff like Millais' "Ophelia". Hilton walks you through pretty much every PRB production and clues you into either their awfulness (Hilton is quite droll) or just what the heck is going on in the painting (often something naughty or secret). The PRB anticipated a lot of shit, especially the Symbolists and the Impressionists, so the book fills in a nice gap, too.
Most people who stare at paintings might recognize some of these, especially all of Rossetti and stuff like Millais' "Ophelia". Hilton walks you through pretty much every PRB production and clues you into either their awfulness (Hilton is quite droll) or just what the heck is going on in the painting (often something naughty or secret). The PRB anticipated a lot of shit, especially the Symbolists and the Impressionists, so the book fills in a nice gap, too.
January 3, 2019
This text is a great introduction to the PRB. Below are my notes and comments on sections that I want to highlight for future use:
The PBR was started by a triad of young men that were like minded and willing to share time and talent in 1848-51. These three were Rossetti, Hunt and Millais. Of them, Rossetti has had the most lasting impact on the history of the PRB yet Hunt was the most consistent and constant over time. At the start of the PRB Millais was hailed by Ruskin as the heir to Turner. Ruskin tied to guide and facilitated Millais’ development. The young artist was not influenced much by Ruskin but he did take a fancy to Effie, Ruskin’s very young wife. Four years after meeting Effie, Millais and she ran off together and married. Before that betrayal, Ruskin work in The Times two very important letters publicly supporting the PRB in 1851. (Hilton text p68)
Hunt’s The Awakening Conscience was clearly conceived as a moralist image. Ruskin described it as an image where not a single thing in the room that when read correctly holds tragic meaning. Hunt described it in the following ways, “in scribbles I arranged the two figures to present the woman recalling the memory of her childish home, and breaking away from her gilded cage with a startled holy resolve, while her shallow companion still sings on, ignorantly intensifying her repentant purpose…The corn and vine are left unguarded by the slumbering cupid watchers, and the fruit is left to be preyed on by the thievish birds” (Hilton text 92). The painting hanging over the mantle is Woman Taken in Adultery. Hunt’s image works to disrupt the traditional pleasure principle by empowering the central woman.
Rossetti’s work is different than Hunt and Millais. Though Rossetti did not receive accolades in his time, his work has had a more lasting impact on the history of the movement. (Hilton text p94) Rossetti’s personal life had a direct influence on the aesthetics of his work.
For The Scapegoat, Hunt traveled to the Dead Sea, bought a goat and set up camp at Oosdoom. He worked on the image out in the open air, making observations from the animal. In the middle of the project the goat died. Hunt bought another poor beast and proceeded to complete the painting with the second goat.
John Ruskin extolled the advancement in color theory and practice made by Hunt in his painting Our English Coasts and Brown’s The Pretty Baa-Lambs both from 1852. They show color in the shadows (a precursor to Impressionism). These pieces are faithful observations of light and do not superimpose a system of tonal harmonies. Ruskin taught his students to paint color by looking through a white card with a whole cut out to allow for judging spot color against the card. Both he and Brown taught students to look and record. Brown would tell his drawing students to not “scuffle about” with random lines. (Hilton text p136-138)
Helen Rossetti describes her brother’s 1854 painting Found as “A young drover from the country, while driving a calf to market, recognizes in a fallen woman on the pavement, his former sweetheart. He tries to raise her from where she crouches on the ground, but with closed eyes she turns her face from him to the wall” (Hilton text p140). This is an illustration of the moralist tendency in early PBR painting. Millias’ The Awakening Conscience (1852) is another. The author Hilton comments that Found has a clear connection to the poem “Rosebell” by William Bell Scott, a fellow PRB painter and poet.
John Brett (illust. on p145) and Henry Wallis (illust. on p123) have interesting Stonebreaker paintings from ‘57 and ‘58 respectively. This is the same year as Millet’s The Gleaners and only 8 or 9 years after Courbet’s biting Stonebreakers.
Brown’s The Last of England is both a tribute to Woolner leaving to live in Australia in 1852, but also shows emigration of the English to Australia which reached a high point in that same year. Brown made an effort to capture the light of a dull day at sea by painting in the open air on overcast days. (Hilton text 151-153)
William Morris started out in the PRB as a younger artists working with Rossetti in ‘57. Rossetti employed him to work on a famous project called the Oxford Murals. During that work Morris met Jane Burden and they married in ‘59. They would later have difficulties and separate but Jane would become the archetypal PRB “stunner” after the death of Lizzy Siddal (1862). Jane was the inspiration for the long thick-necked, big-eyed, full curvy lips and wavy hair (Hilton text 164-170).
Rossetti’s Beata Beatrix, from ’63, is a memorial painting of Lizzy Siddal. She died in ’62 of an overdose of laudanum. The image show the haloed bird dropping a poppy into Lizzy’s hand at the moment of death. Her face is a mixture of ecstasy and release, much like we can see in Bernini’s St. Teresa. This image by Rossetti melds the real and the unreal, the sensuous and the ethereal. Lizzy and Rossetti had been lovers since the early ‘50’s, and creative partners throughout that decade, but began to have difficulties in the early ‘60’s. The usually suave ladies man that Rossetti was, became reclusive and more self-destructive. In the absence of Lizzy, Rossetti found his muse in Jane Morris. She became the model for much of his work throughout the ‘60’s (Hilton text 179-185).
The PBR was started by a triad of young men that were like minded and willing to share time and talent in 1848-51. These three were Rossetti, Hunt and Millais. Of them, Rossetti has had the most lasting impact on the history of the PRB yet Hunt was the most consistent and constant over time. At the start of the PRB Millais was hailed by Ruskin as the heir to Turner. Ruskin tied to guide and facilitated Millais’ development. The young artist was not influenced much by Ruskin but he did take a fancy to Effie, Ruskin’s very young wife. Four years after meeting Effie, Millais and she ran off together and married. Before that betrayal, Ruskin work in The Times two very important letters publicly supporting the PRB in 1851. (Hilton text p68)
Hunt’s The Awakening Conscience was clearly conceived as a moralist image. Ruskin described it as an image where not a single thing in the room that when read correctly holds tragic meaning. Hunt described it in the following ways, “in scribbles I arranged the two figures to present the woman recalling the memory of her childish home, and breaking away from her gilded cage with a startled holy resolve, while her shallow companion still sings on, ignorantly intensifying her repentant purpose…The corn and vine are left unguarded by the slumbering cupid watchers, and the fruit is left to be preyed on by the thievish birds” (Hilton text 92). The painting hanging over the mantle is Woman Taken in Adultery. Hunt’s image works to disrupt the traditional pleasure principle by empowering the central woman.
Rossetti’s work is different than Hunt and Millais. Though Rossetti did not receive accolades in his time, his work has had a more lasting impact on the history of the movement. (Hilton text p94) Rossetti’s personal life had a direct influence on the aesthetics of his work.
For The Scapegoat, Hunt traveled to the Dead Sea, bought a goat and set up camp at Oosdoom. He worked on the image out in the open air, making observations from the animal. In the middle of the project the goat died. Hunt bought another poor beast and proceeded to complete the painting with the second goat.
John Ruskin extolled the advancement in color theory and practice made by Hunt in his painting Our English Coasts and Brown’s The Pretty Baa-Lambs both from 1852. They show color in the shadows (a precursor to Impressionism). These pieces are faithful observations of light and do not superimpose a system of tonal harmonies. Ruskin taught his students to paint color by looking through a white card with a whole cut out to allow for judging spot color against the card. Both he and Brown taught students to look and record. Brown would tell his drawing students to not “scuffle about” with random lines. (Hilton text p136-138)
Helen Rossetti describes her brother’s 1854 painting Found as “A young drover from the country, while driving a calf to market, recognizes in a fallen woman on the pavement, his former sweetheart. He tries to raise her from where she crouches on the ground, but with closed eyes she turns her face from him to the wall” (Hilton text p140). This is an illustration of the moralist tendency in early PBR painting. Millias’ The Awakening Conscience (1852) is another. The author Hilton comments that Found has a clear connection to the poem “Rosebell” by William Bell Scott, a fellow PRB painter and poet.
John Brett (illust. on p145) and Henry Wallis (illust. on p123) have interesting Stonebreaker paintings from ‘57 and ‘58 respectively. This is the same year as Millet’s The Gleaners and only 8 or 9 years after Courbet’s biting Stonebreakers.
Brown’s The Last of England is both a tribute to Woolner leaving to live in Australia in 1852, but also shows emigration of the English to Australia which reached a high point in that same year. Brown made an effort to capture the light of a dull day at sea by painting in the open air on overcast days. (Hilton text 151-153)
William Morris started out in the PRB as a younger artists working with Rossetti in ‘57. Rossetti employed him to work on a famous project called the Oxford Murals. During that work Morris met Jane Burden and they married in ‘59. They would later have difficulties and separate but Jane would become the archetypal PRB “stunner” after the death of Lizzy Siddal (1862). Jane was the inspiration for the long thick-necked, big-eyed, full curvy lips and wavy hair (Hilton text 164-170).
Rossetti’s Beata Beatrix, from ’63, is a memorial painting of Lizzy Siddal. She died in ’62 of an overdose of laudanum. The image show the haloed bird dropping a poppy into Lizzy’s hand at the moment of death. Her face is a mixture of ecstasy and release, much like we can see in Bernini’s St. Teresa. This image by Rossetti melds the real and the unreal, the sensuous and the ethereal. Lizzy and Rossetti had been lovers since the early ‘50’s, and creative partners throughout that decade, but began to have difficulties in the early ‘60’s. The usually suave ladies man that Rossetti was, became reclusive and more self-destructive. In the absence of Lizzy, Rossetti found his muse in Jane Morris. She became the model for much of his work throughout the ‘60’s (Hilton text 179-185).
February 26, 2010
Bought this used a couple weeks ago, not really sure if it's still in print.
As a collection of reproductions and historical survey of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, I found it pretty solid. Hilton covers all the primary painters associated with The Brotherhood, their proteges, and those influenced by the principles and styles. I would have liked him to cover the women associated with the movement in somewhat greater detail and perhaps touch on what the lesser known members had to offer. He also keeps his focus on English painting, ignoring similar developments going on in Germany and France at the time, which is fine in terms of focus. It just doesn't place The Brotherhood into full context the way a longer study might. Similarly, there are other English painters influenced by the movement Hilton does not cover, like Waterhouse (which seems really weird).
Hilton's criticism of various painters or specific works was sometimes helping in drawing focus to defining elements, but other times too intrusive and lacking in qualification. For example, while I agree that William Morris's painting suffers an inertness I didn't see the point in extending that into a rant about wallpaper.
Appparently, Hilton's essay was written in the 60's, when interest in the Pre-Raphaelites was re-ignited via psychedelic art and there was a dearth of more recent scholarly works on the movement. A search on Amazon a while back confirmed this is no longer the case. This particular volume is a nice addition to my collection and will likely be something I can refer to in the future, but I'm not sure it's something I'd recommend. There is probably a more detailed contemporary study at the public library.
As a collection of reproductions and historical survey of the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, I found it pretty solid. Hilton covers all the primary painters associated with The Brotherhood, their proteges, and those influenced by the principles and styles. I would have liked him to cover the women associated with the movement in somewhat greater detail and perhaps touch on what the lesser known members had to offer. He also keeps his focus on English painting, ignoring similar developments going on in Germany and France at the time, which is fine in terms of focus. It just doesn't place The Brotherhood into full context the way a longer study might. Similarly, there are other English painters influenced by the movement Hilton does not cover, like Waterhouse (which seems really weird).
Hilton's criticism of various painters or specific works was sometimes helping in drawing focus to defining elements, but other times too intrusive and lacking in qualification. For example, while I agree that William Morris's painting suffers an inertness I didn't see the point in extending that into a rant about wallpaper.
Appparently, Hilton's essay was written in the 60's, when interest in the Pre-Raphaelites was re-ignited via psychedelic art and there was a dearth of more recent scholarly works on the movement. A search on Amazon a while back confirmed this is no longer the case. This particular volume is a nice addition to my collection and will likely be something I can refer to in the future, but I'm not sure it's something I'd recommend. There is probably a more detailed contemporary study at the public library.
May 25, 2022
Art is so subjective that any critical examination is thus hard to judge objectively in return. Hilton really gives Holman Hunt a bad time and I don’t think that’s fair…I personally don’t see “a touch of the madman” when looking at a painting of a literal goat, but maybe that’s just me. This book gave a shit ton of juicy historical gossip about the members of the PRB though, and even when I disagreed with Hilton’s perspective, it was fun seeing him excoriate artists for being shitty (to his tastes). Of course there’s lots of beautiful paintings reprinted here if you just want to admire pretty pretty pictures and let head be empty for a while. I’m eager to read more books in this series.
September 5, 2020
Initially, I wanted to give four stars since this book gives a decent summary of the precursors of the movement and the foundation of the PRB. The problems started with Hilton highlighting Rossetti as the only worthy artist while also morally degrading him for having a hard time after his wife, Elizabeth Siddal's death making references to surrounding himself with alcoholics as Swinburne and Bell Scott, and engaging with "whore-ish" models as Annie Miller and Fanny Cornforth. Then, the author must speak of the second wave and he does so with such a deep disgust and utter boredom sometimes when he describes Morris's revolutionary work or Burne-Jones's early works that I couldn't help but gasp at some of his points. But the truly upsetting part for me was the following paragraph:
„ Perseus slaying the sea serpent has a fine slimy monster, and the added advantage of an extremely fetching naked girl. Here is an aspect of Burne-Jones's art which deserves manly commendation, for even if he did it with something of a sly, voyeurish quality, Burne-Jones did put an end to the latitancy of the mid-Victorian nude. (Nude painting had unfortunately disappeared during the Pre-Raphaelite years; Queen Victoria bought an Etty nude, but nakedness was almost always covered up during the years of her widowhood.) It is always nice to see a breast in a painting, or as delicately glorious a bottom as Andromeda's, like a pale peach at sunrise. There are many such pleasantnesses in Burne-Jones's painting.”
After reading this I'm not even sure this book deserves the three stars I gave. There are better surveys into the history of medievalism and the PRB, which are more accurate and up to date. It's much better to read the work of an author who enjoys the topic they write about.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hungarian review:
Te szentséges jó ég, erre a könyvre 4 csillagot szerettem volna eredetileg adni, mert ugyan meghaladott és régimódi, de az elején szépen ismerteti a preraffaelitizmus előzményeit és a PRB alakulását. Aztán jöttek a gondok, amikor Rossetti vált az istenné Hiltonnak, a második hullámot Morrisszal és Burne-Jonesszal pedig csak muszályból tárgyalja és le is szólja. Itt lett a négyből 3,5 csillag. A könyv során eltűrtem, hogy minden nőt szinte vagy butának vagy egyenesen „r*bancosnak” állít be a szerző, de a következő hímsoviniszta szöveg borított ki végképp:
„ Perseus slaying the sea serpent has a fine slimy monster, and the added advantage of an extremely fetching naked girl. Here is an aspect of Burne-Jones's art which deserves manly commendation, for even if he did it with something of a sly, voyeurish quality, Burne-Jones did put an end to the latitancy of the mid-Victorian nude. (Nude painting had unfortunately disappeared during the Pre-Raphaelite years; Queen Victoria bought an Etty nude, but nakedness was almost always covered up during the years of her widowhood.) It is always nice to see a breast in a painting, or as delicately glorious a bottom as Andromeda's, like a pale peach at sunrise. There are many such pleasantnesses in Burne-Jones's painting.”
Ezek után nem érdemli meg a két csillagot sem. És nem értem, 1970-ben egy ilyen mondat hogy mehetett át egy szerkesztőn.
„ Perseus slaying the sea serpent has a fine slimy monster, and the added advantage of an extremely fetching naked girl. Here is an aspect of Burne-Jones's art which deserves manly commendation, for even if he did it with something of a sly, voyeurish quality, Burne-Jones did put an end to the latitancy of the mid-Victorian nude. (Nude painting had unfortunately disappeared during the Pre-Raphaelite years; Queen Victoria bought an Etty nude, but nakedness was almost always covered up during the years of her widowhood.) It is always nice to see a breast in a painting, or as delicately glorious a bottom as Andromeda's, like a pale peach at sunrise. There are many such pleasantnesses in Burne-Jones's painting.”
After reading this I'm not even sure this book deserves the three stars I gave. There are better surveys into the history of medievalism and the PRB, which are more accurate and up to date. It's much better to read the work of an author who enjoys the topic they write about.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hungarian review:
Te szentséges jó ég, erre a könyvre 4 csillagot szerettem volna eredetileg adni, mert ugyan meghaladott és régimódi, de az elején szépen ismerteti a preraffaelitizmus előzményeit és a PRB alakulását. Aztán jöttek a gondok, amikor Rossetti vált az istenné Hiltonnak, a második hullámot Morrisszal és Burne-Jonesszal pedig csak muszályból tárgyalja és le is szólja. Itt lett a négyből 3,5 csillag. A könyv során eltűrtem, hogy minden nőt szinte vagy butának vagy egyenesen „r*bancosnak” állít be a szerző, de a következő hímsoviniszta szöveg borított ki végképp:
„ Perseus slaying the sea serpent has a fine slimy monster, and the added advantage of an extremely fetching naked girl. Here is an aspect of Burne-Jones's art which deserves manly commendation, for even if he did it with something of a sly, voyeurish quality, Burne-Jones did put an end to the latitancy of the mid-Victorian nude. (Nude painting had unfortunately disappeared during the Pre-Raphaelite years; Queen Victoria bought an Etty nude, but nakedness was almost always covered up during the years of her widowhood.) It is always nice to see a breast in a painting, or as delicately glorious a bottom as Andromeda's, like a pale peach at sunrise. There are many such pleasantnesses in Burne-Jones's painting.”
Ezek után nem érdemli meg a két csillagot sem. És nem értem, 1970-ben egy ilyen mondat hogy mehetett át egy szerkesztőn.
August 12, 2024
Hard going in places and quite dated (I have heard that this was written in the 60's). It acted as a good introduction to the movement which is what I wanted but the critical side was unexcepted and overly harsh in my opinion. Hilton is completely down on William Morris for example and doesn't hold back in his writing. He is also highly critical of Burne-Jones. There were some good passages which has made me consider the key works differently and seek out lesser known pieces but I think there must be better books out there on what was such an interesting time in British art history.
November 19, 2023
Millais is crazy taking Effie like that 6/10.
March 18, 2019
This was an even better read than I was hoping. While I wouldn't recommend it as someone's first art history book, it's definitely accessible if you have a basic grasp on art critique. It really illuminates the rivalries, friendships, and influences that gave rise to the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood and their works. Hilton's analysis covers a lot of ground and his insights (and occasional snarky remark) are interesting. The only downside is that most of the prints are black and white and Pre-Raphaelite works shine best in their full color glory - this is likely due to the book originally being published in 1970.
November 9, 2013
In 1894 George Moore had gone to a particular London bookstore
to inquire why they were not stocking "Esther Waters" and he
was told "because of a certain Pre-Raphaelite nastiness". The
book doesn't really explain why they came to be so vilified
when almost 50 years before they banded together to thumb their
nose at the Art world.
Hilton starts with who he feels is the father of the Pre-
Raphaelite movement - John Ruskin, a man who blended the
sensibilities of poet and painter with a scientific love of
nature, the elements and rock minerals. Along with a love of
Turner, he championed the modern painters and in his book "Modern
Painters" he gave vent to his idea that painting in the post
Renaissance tradition contained all that was loathsome.
His ideas were taken up by a group of painters who had come to the
conclusion that the Royal Academy was stifling young and creative
artists in their adherence to the conservative views and rules
of the founder, Sir Joshua Reynolds (called "Sir Sloshua" by the
Brotherhood).
Naturally enough the stuffy R.A. were disgusted with their irreverent
style - Charles Dickens wrote a blistering piece in "Household
Words" where he attacked John Everett Millais "Christ in the House
of His Parents" (1849) calling the depiction of the Mother "a monster out of the vilest gin shop in England". But the public loved the
colour and naturalism of the paintings and that is what the PRB's
did - where leaves and forests were brown in the old Masters
pictures, here they were green and lush and highly coloured (the
brightness was a PRB secret - they painted on a wet, white back
ground, giving a luminous effect).
Millais was the first to leave the Brotherhood at age 29 and went
on to become one of London's most fashionable painters - everything
despised by his early group. Hilton feels Holman Hunt almost relished
the lurid, obviously moralistic pictures that became his style,
then his trip to the Holy Land brought about a change of style
(Hilton thinks for the worse). Rossetti and his sensuous, seductive
portraits of women kept the Pre-Raphaelite flag burning the longest
with his links to William Morris and Edward Burne-Jones.
Again Ruskin was to the fore, establishing classes and lectures
in painting techniques in working men's institutes and night
classes paving the way for the Arts and Crafts boom almost 30
years later and the collapse of the old Academy. The Brotherhood
would become William Morris's "The Firm".
Hilton doesn't pull any punches - a great admirer of Millais and
Rossetti, he finds Holman Hunt distasteful, William Morris
boring and Burne-Jones flat. Hilton's text is meticulous and thorough and the numbers of the paintings are shown in the margins so the reader can refer to the paintings as they are discussed. I would have loved far more colour prints but with the numerous black and white pictures, the beautiful vibrancy of the colour really hits you.
I bought my copy around 1971,72 and found it just as exciting a
read now as I did back then.
to inquire why they were not stocking "Esther Waters" and he
was told "because of a certain Pre-Raphaelite nastiness". The
book doesn't really explain why they came to be so vilified
when almost 50 years before they banded together to thumb their
nose at the Art world.
Hilton starts with who he feels is the father of the Pre-
Raphaelite movement - John Ruskin, a man who blended the
sensibilities of poet and painter with a scientific love of
nature, the elements and rock minerals. Along with a love of
Turner, he championed the modern painters and in his book "Modern
Painters" he gave vent to his idea that painting in the post
Renaissance tradition contained all that was loathsome.
His ideas were taken up by a group of painters who had come to the
conclusion that the Royal Academy was stifling young and creative
artists in their adherence to the conservative views and rules
of the founder, Sir Joshua Reynolds (called "Sir Sloshua" by the
Brotherhood).
Naturally enough the stuffy R.A. were disgusted with their irreverent
style - Charles Dickens wrote a blistering piece in "Household
Words" where he attacked John Everett Millais "Christ in the House
of His Parents" (1849) calling the depiction of the Mother "a monster out of the vilest gin shop in England". But the public loved the
colour and naturalism of the paintings and that is what the PRB's
did - where leaves and forests were brown in the old Masters
pictures, here they were green and lush and highly coloured (the
brightness was a PRB secret - they painted on a wet, white back
ground, giving a luminous effect).
Millais was the first to leave the Brotherhood at age 29 and went
on to become one of London's most fashionable painters - everything
despised by his early group. Hilton feels Holman Hunt almost relished
the lurid, obviously moralistic pictures that became his style,
then his trip to the Holy Land brought about a change of style
(Hilton thinks for the worse). Rossetti and his sensuous, seductive
portraits of women kept the Pre-Raphaelite flag burning the longest
with his links to William Morris and Edward Burne-Jones.
Again Ruskin was to the fore, establishing classes and lectures
in painting techniques in working men's institutes and night
classes paving the way for the Arts and Crafts boom almost 30
years later and the collapse of the old Academy. The Brotherhood
would become William Morris's "The Firm".
Hilton doesn't pull any punches - a great admirer of Millais and
Rossetti, he finds Holman Hunt distasteful, William Morris
boring and Burne-Jones flat. Hilton's text is meticulous and thorough and the numbers of the paintings are shown in the margins so the reader can refer to the paintings as they are discussed. I would have loved far more colour prints but with the numerous black and white pictures, the beautiful vibrancy of the colour really hits you.
I bought my copy around 1971,72 and found it just as exciting a
read now as I did back then.
July 26, 2024
3.5/5
Un breve libro que aborda el tema de forma académica sin demasiadas pretensiones. La narrativa se complementa con imágenes que se agradece aparezcan en los momentos más oportunos.
Quizá peque de ser demasiado introductorio y enfocarse únicamente en los fundadores del movimiento sin prologarse en el tiempo para conocer a otros pintores fundamentales, pero es una obra clave para partir a conocer otros estudios.
Un breve libro que aborda el tema de forma académica sin demasiadas pretensiones. La narrativa se complementa con imágenes que se agradece aparezcan en los momentos más oportunos.
Quizá peque de ser demasiado introductorio y enfocarse únicamente en los fundadores del movimiento sin prologarse en el tiempo para conocer a otros pintores fundamentales, pero es una obra clave para partir a conocer otros estudios.
July 11, 2014
A bit difficult to get into, but after about page 40 it just flew by. Claims to be the first book since 1899 to focus on the painting of the Pre-Raphaelites and does a really good job --- and Hilton, the author, was only 29.
January 3, 2013
This book reads really well for being assigned reading for an upper division art history class. I highly recommend it for anyone interested in learning about the Pre-Raphaelites and art of the Victorian era.
October 3, 2010
My favorite art movement. Excellent reproductions. A good resource book for anyone interested in this period.
April 8, 2016
Thames & Hudson arts series. Very good and interesting although he has strong dislikes. Good analysis of the various artists and Ruskin.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews