There is a widely held fallacy that Ireland's contribution to the art of the world has been almost exclusively in the realm of the written word. For example, it is difficult to say which of the two Yeats brothers the greater artist, Jack the painter, was or William the poet. The question is answerable in more than just personal terms.
The fine early drawings repeatedly strike echoes in the lyrics of the artist. And a great poem like ‘Sailing to Byzantium' can almost be taken as a direct comment on the shadowy world of a great painting like ‘About to Write a Letter'. In the painting the vision of the artist has become universal and immensely powerful. And in the poem the same thing has happened. The two can strike chords in each other, and it is even possible to imagine the pensive, hesitant figure in oil paint speaking the lines of the poem
Yeats the poet was a figure to be reckoned with at the turn of the century. He was a legend in his own lifetime, and while his brother was still only understood and loved by a small group of admirers, the poet was regarded as one of the great writers of the twentieth century.
 There has been some change in this state of affairs during the last ten or fifteen years, yet still Jack B. Yeats remains an under—rated and unexplored artist, and, what is more important, he is to a great extent regarded as a unique and uncharacteristic phenomenon in a country which has little or no tradition of visual art, and no artists in the past of comparable stature.
The visual arts in Ireland during the early Christian period are well— known and justly celebrated. What is not accepted to anything like the same extent is the fact that various artistic traditions were established during the intervening centuries since the golden ages in which the Book of Kells, the Ardagh Chalice and the Cross of Cong were produced, and that these traditions grew, expanded and enriched themselves, and ultimately produced artists of considerable stature. Various forces, however, have operated against the emergence of any clear idea of Irish art, with a character and style of its own. History has given to most of the artists of the seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the unfortunate labels of Anglo Irish', ‘Ascendancy' or ‘Plantation'.
Many of the better Irish artists have been forced by circumstance, or persuaded by ambition, to seek a better fortune in London, and their reclamation here may seem impertinent. Still others are known by a mere handful of paintings, the majority of their work having been re—attributed, and their pictures now masquerading in public collections under more illustrious names.
In spite of the temptations to be greedy about individual artists in pinning Irish nationality upon them, my first concern has been with the idea of an Irish art, developing, changing and enriching itself in spite of history rather than because of it. Artists tend to be the least patriotic of men, and the question of nationalism is not one with which they are greatly concerned. Yet in many areas — landscape, topography, portraiture, historical painting, silver, glass, even architecture — a distinctive national style and character, a difference of light, a sense of history evolving and of people being involved in it, are all contributory factors to the overall idea of categorising Irish Art.
While the art of early Christian Ireland has been extensively studied by Mile Françoise Henry and other scholars, there is no general history covering either the period since then or any considerable section of it. Invaluable works has been done on individual artists, notably by W. G. Strickland in his Dictionary of Irish Artists and by Thomas Bodkin, but their works is hard to come by, and, in the case of the former, tend to be rather academic in appeal.
Irish contemporary art is much harder to categorise, unlike it's british counterparts, with huge limited edition print sales from artists such as Doug Hyde and Todd white.
The fine early drawings repeatedly strike echoes in the lyrics of the artist. And a great poem like ‘Sailing to Byzantium' can almost be taken as a direct comment on the shadowy world of a great painting like ‘About to Write a Letter'. In the painting the vision of the artist has become universal and immensely powerful. And in the poem the same thing has happened. The two can strike chords in each other, and it is even possible to imagine the pensive, hesitant figure in oil paint speaking the lines of the poem
Yeats the poet was a figure to be reckoned with at the turn of the century. He was a legend in his own lifetime, and while his brother was still only understood and loved by a small group of admirers, the poet was regarded as one of the great writers of the twentieth century.
 There has been some change in this state of affairs during the last ten or fifteen years, yet still Jack B. Yeats remains an under—rated and unexplored artist, and, what is more important, he is to a great extent regarded as a unique and uncharacteristic phenomenon in a country which has little or no tradition of visual art, and no artists in the past of comparable stature.
The visual arts in Ireland during the early Christian period are well— known and justly celebrated. What is not accepted to anything like the same extent is the fact that various artistic traditions were established during the intervening centuries since the golden ages in which the Book of Kells, the Ardagh Chalice and the Cross of Cong were produced, and that these traditions grew, expanded and enriched themselves, and ultimately produced artists of considerable stature. Various forces, however, have operated against the emergence of any clear idea of Irish art, with a character and style of its own. History has given to most of the artists of the seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the unfortunate labels of Anglo Irish', ‘Ascendancy' or ‘Plantation'.
Many of the better Irish artists have been forced by circumstance, or persuaded by ambition, to seek a better fortune in London, and their reclamation here may seem impertinent. Still others are known by a mere handful of paintings, the majority of their work having been re—attributed, and their pictures now masquerading in public collections under more illustrious names.
In spite of the temptations to be greedy about individual artists in pinning Irish nationality upon them, my first concern has been with the idea of an Irish art, developing, changing and enriching itself in spite of history rather than because of it. Artists tend to be the least patriotic of men, and the question of nationalism is not one with which they are greatly concerned. Yet in many areas — landscape, topography, portraiture, historical painting, silver, glass, even architecture — a distinctive national style and character, a difference of light, a sense of history evolving and of people being involved in it, are all contributory factors to the overall idea of categorising Irish Art.
While the art of early Christian Ireland has been extensively studied by Mile Françoise Henry and other scholars, there is no general history covering either the period since then or any considerable section of it. Invaluable works has been done on individual artists, notably by W. G. Strickland in his Dictionary of Irish Artists and by Thomas Bodkin, but their works is hard to come by, and, in the case of the former, tend to be rather academic in appeal.
Irish contemporary art is much harder to categorise, unlike it's british counterparts, with huge limited edition print sales from artists such as Doug Hyde and Todd white.
Source...