I wonder why some things are?  For instance, Art is allowed as much indecent license today as in earlier times —­but the privileges of Literature in this respect have been sharply curtailed within the past eighty or ninety years.  Fielding and Smollett could portray the beastliness of their day in the beastliest language; we have plenty of foul subjects to deal with in our day, but we are not allowed to approach them very near, even with nice and guarded forms of speech.  But not so with Art.  The brush may still deal freely with any subject, however revolting or indelicate.  It makes a body ooze sarcasm at every pore, to go about Rome and Florence and see what this last generation has been doing with the statues.  These works, which had stood in innocent nakedness for ages, are all fig-leaved now.  Yes, every one of them.  Nobody noticed their nakedness before, perhaps; nobody can help noticing it now, the fig-leaf makes it so conspicuous.  But the comical thing about it all, is, that the fig-leaf is confined to cold and pallid marble, which would be still cold and unsuggestive without this sham and ostentatious symbol of modesty, whereas warm-blood paintings which do really need it have in no case been furnished with it.

At the door of the Uffizzi, in Florence, one is confronted by statues of a man and a woman, noseless, battered, black with accumulated grime—­they hardly suggest human beings —­yet these ridiculous creatures have been thoughtfully and conscientiously fig-leaved by this fastidious generation.  You enter, and proceed to that most-visited little gallery that exists in the world—­the Tribune—­and there, against the wall, without obstructing rag or leaf, you may look your fill upon the foulest, the vilest, the obscenest picture the world possesses—­Titian’s Venus.  It isn’t that she is naked and stretched out on a bed—­no, it is the attitude of one of her arms and hand.  If I ventured to describe that attitude, there would be a fine howl—­but there the Venus lies, for anybody to gloat over that wants to—­and there she has a right to lie, for she is a work of art, and Art has its privileges.  I saw young girls stealing furtive glances at her; I saw young men gaze long and absorbedly at her; I saw aged, infirm men hang upon her charms with a pathetic interest.  How I should like to describe her—­just to see what a holy indignation I could stir up in the world—­just to hear the unreflecting average man deliver himself about my grossness and coarseness, and all that.  The world says that no worded description of a moving spectacle is a hundredth part as moving as the same spectacle seen with one’s own eyes—­yet the world is willing to let its son and its daughter and itself look at Titian’s beast, but won’t stand a description of it in words.  Which shows that the world is not as consistent as it might be.

There are pictures of nude women which suggest no impure thought—­I am well aware of that.  I am not railing at such.  What I am trying to emphasize is the fact that Titian’s Venus is very far from being one of that sort.  Without any question it was painted for a bagnio and it was probably refused because it was a trifle too strong.  In truth, it is too strong for any place but a public Art Gallery.  Titian has two Venuses in the Tribune; persons who have seen them will easily remember which one I am referring to.