AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY PUBLISHED MONTHLY BY T H E OPHTHALMIC PUBLISHING COMPANY

EDITORIAL STAFF LAWRENCE T. POST, Editor

640 S. Kingshighway, Saint Louis WILLIAM H. CRISP, Consulting Editor

530 Metropolitan Building, Denver EDWARD JACKSON, Consulting Editor

Republic Building, Denver HANS BARKAN

Stanford University Hospital, San Fran­cisco

HARRY S. GRADLE 58 East Washington Street, Chicago

H. ROMMEL HILDRETH 824 Metropolitan Building, Saint Louis

PARK LEWIS 454 Franklin Street, Buffalo

C. S. O'BRIEN The State University of Iowa, College of Medicine, Iowa City

M. URIBE TRONCOSO 350 West 85th Street, New York

JOHN M. W H E E L E R 635 West One Hundred Sixty-fifth Street, New York

EMMA S. BUSS, Manuscript Editor 4907 Maryland Avenue, Saint Louis

Address original papers, other scientific communications including correspondence, also books for review, and reports of society proceedings to Dr. Lawrence T. Post, 640 S. Kingshighway, Saint Louis.

Exchange copies of medical journals should be sent to Dr. William H. Crisp, 530 Metropolitan Building, Denver.

Subscriptions, applications for single copies, notices of change of address, and com­munications with reference to advertising should be addressed to the Manager of Sub­scriptions and Advertising, 640 S. Kingshighway, Saint Louis. Copy of advertisements must be sent to the manager by the fifteenth of the month preceding its appearance.

Authors' proofs should be corrected and returned within forty-eight hours to the manuscript editor. Twenty-five reprints of each article will be supplied to the author without charge. Additional reprints may be obtained from the printer, the George Banta Publishing Company, 450-458 Ahnaip Street, Menasha, Wisconsin, if ordered at the time proofs are returned. But reprints to contain colored plates must be ordered when the article is accepted.

THE EYE IN SCULPTURE As applied to representation of the

human form, sculpture finds its greatest limitations in regard to the eye. Espe­cially is this shortcoming noticeable in portrait sculpture.

A somewhat close analogy may be drawn between art and fashion, in that both often show on the one hand a dis­agreeable striving toward the merely novel and sensational, and on the other hand a curious affectation of reversion to the archaic and primitive.

During the Renaissance, and in some later periods, an excess of enthusiasm for the golden age of early Greek sculp­ture induced some sculptors to represent the eye in the form of a smooth oval prominence without detail, so that the practical effect was to give an impres­sion of blindness. Thus, Feilchenfeld (Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augen-heilkunde, 1936, volume 96, page 382) points out that of eight busts standing in Rome on the road from the Pincio to the

Villa Borghese, which have been made since the World War, three show "dead eyes." He feels that it is only an autosuggestive habit of acceptance that enables us to avoid being disagreeably impressed by the unnaturalness of this mode of representation, with its lack of expression, absence of "gaze," and lack of direction of gaze.

At the other extreme stand the florid attempts of some cultural periods, espe­cially the degenerative period of late Ro­man art, to depict the eye in all its de­tails by inserting precious stones and other materials or even by actual paint­ing. The doctrine of artistic unity, of complete representation of the subject in a single chosen material, severely condemns such hybrid efforts.

It has been argued that the sculptor ought to attempt plastic rendering only of details which may be realized by the palpating finger. Muscle and bone may be felt beneath the skin, but not the play of color which makes of the eyeball a

520

EDITORIALS 521

living thing. Yet to leave the eye expres­sionless is to rob portraiture of its high­est spirituality.

Since very early times there have been sculptors who recognized the necessity of finding means by which to represent the force of the living eye. Suggestive coloring was followed by careful paint­ing of ocular details. The transition from stone to bronze led to finer chisel­ing of outlines to indicate the pupil, and it even became customary to insert arti­ficial eyes in holes left in the bronze shell. By variations in curvature the at­tempt was made to delineate cornea, iris, and pupil. About four hundred years be­fore Christ the Greek sculptors learned that expression might be enhanced by emphasis on shading beneath the upper lids, upon frontal furrows, and upon eyebrow detail.

Some exponents of austere simplicity have argued that the chiseled pupillary impressions found in Roman copies of Greek statuary are merely spurious em­bellishments of the originals. But Feil-chenfeld adduces abundant evidence to support the contention that even colored representation of the eyeball was the rule rather than the exception among the archaic and classical Greeks.

In spite of the assumption, general during the Renaissance, that the Greek classic principle was opposed to ocular detail, chiseled representation of iris and pupil may be found in numerous works of Donatello, Settignano, Verrocchio and Michelangelo. Several hundred years later, Winckelmann and other archeologists called attention to the polychromia of Greek sculpture; and chiseling out to suggest the eye is now again recognized as good practice, al­though not universally adopted. It ap­pears characteristically as a deep de­pression taking the place of cornea, iris, and pupil, with other incidental but va­riable details such as an incomplete cir­cular groove to simulate the corneal light reflex.

Extreme opinions notwithstanding, the majority of cultured persons fail to find pleasure in forms of plastic art which lack contact with reality. To most of us it will seem that the eye, the "win­dow of the soul," should play an expres­

sive rather than a mute part in sculp­tured human features.

W. H. Crisp.

T H E A.M.A. IN KANSAS CITY Missouri put on her best behavior for

the seven thousand physicians who in­vaded her from all parts of the United States during the week of May 10th. The weather was clear and cool. This is mentioned first because it is a vital fac­tor in the success or failure of a meet­ing. The A.M.A. has wisely selected the most beautiful months of the year for meetings; winter past and spring not yet turned into the heat of summer.

Having been a trifle slow in making a reservation, our room assignment for the first night was not all that might be desired. At least we learned what room with a "half bath" meant. Let the unwary be advised that this does not denote a shower or a shared bathroom, but a bathroom without a bath. Let me pass quickly over the comments on in­sufficient rooming, facilities, for it was the only drawback to one of our best meetings. The truth of the matter is that there are only a few cities in our country that have adequate facilities for housing from five to ten thousand visitors in good hotel rooms. Kansas City made up for its lack by the cour­tesy with which the local physicians ex­tended the hospitality of their homes to the out-of-town doctors.

Early Monday morning saw some thirty members and assistants of the American Board of Ophthalmology gathered at breakfast for instructions concerning the examination, which was held immediately afterwards at the Kansas City General Hospital. Thirty-six candidates presented themselves. From year to year there seems to be a gradual improvement in the caliber of these, but there is still much to be done. The value of certification is now proved beyond question. Twelve spe­cial boards have followed the lead of the ophthalmologists and are either al­ready formed or in the process of for­mation.

One new feature this year was the submission of tentative questions for