kfast-table, he submitted it to his friend, W.H. Harrison. The
title, it seemed, was not explicit enough, and after debate they
substituted "Modern Painters: their Superiority in the Art of Landscape
Painting to all the Ancient Masters proved by Examples of the True, the
Beautiful, and the Intellectual, from the Works of Modern Artists,
especially from those of J.M.W. Turner, Esq., R.A." And as the severe
tone of many remarks was felt to be hardly supported by the age and
standing of so young an author, he was content to sign himself "A
Graduate of Oxford." The book was spoken of, but no part of the copy
shown, to John Murray, who said he would prefer something about German
art. It found immediate acceptance with Messrs. Smith and Elder. Young
Ruskin had been doing business for seven years past with that firm; he
was well known to them as one of the most "rising" youths of the time,
and their own literary editor, Mr. Harrison, was his private Mentor, who
revised his proofs and inserted the punctuation, which he usually
indicated only by dashes. His dealings with the publishers were
generally conducted through his father, who made very fair terms for
him, as things went then.

In May, 1843, "Modern Painters," vol. i., was published, and it was soon
the talk of the art-world. It was meant to be audacious, and naturally
created a storm. The free criticisms of public favourites made an
impression, not because they were put into strong language, for the tone
of the press was stronger then than it is now, as a whole, but because
they were backed up by illustration and argument. It was evident that
the author knew something of his subject, even if he were all wrong in
his conclusions. He could not be neglected, though he might be protested
against, decried, controverted. Artists especially, who do not usually
see their works as others see them, and are not accustomed to think of
themselves and their school as mere dots and spangles in a perspective
of history, could not be entirely content to be classed as Turner's
satellites. And while the book contained something that promised to suit
every kind of reader everyone found something to shock him. Critics were
scandalized at the depreciation of Claude; the religious were outraged
at the comparison of Turner, in a passage omitted from later editions,
to the Angel of the Sun in the Apocalypse.

But the descriptive passages were such as had never appeared before in
prose; and the