David Jones was a visionary who wrote, in 1937:

That our culture has accelerated every line of advance into the territory of physical science is well appreciated – but not so well understood are the unforeseen, subsidiary effects of this achievement. We stroke cats, pluck flowers, tie ribands, assist at the manual acts of religion, make some kind of love, write poems, paint pictures, are generally at one with that creaturely world inherited from our remote beginnings. Our perception of many things is heightened and clarified. Yet must we do the gas-drill, be attuned to many newfangled technicalities, respond to increasingly exacting mechanical devices; some fascinating and compelling, others sinister in the extreme; all requiring a new and strange direction of the mind, a new sensitivity certainly, but at a considerable cost.

David Jones, In Parenthesis (1937; rpt. London: Faber, 1963), p. xiv.

In Parenthesis (1937) was David Jones’s first and perhaps greatest book, it made his name as a writer: a hard-to-classify modernist prose-poem distilling and mythologising his experiences during the First World War.


Before that book made his reputation, however, David Jones was already an artist. He specialised in watercolours; some had an almost faux-naif simplicity, while others, especially in his later years, were crammed to the point of destruction with tiny details drawn from a complex symbolic language of his private inner world.

What concerns him is the universal thing showing through the particular thing, and as a painter it is this showing through that he endeavours to capture. The eye sees particular things, but the man’s delight in the physical vision is checked by the mind’s apprehension informing it.

Eric Gill writing in the earliest essay on Jones in 1930

His creative life was largely determined by two experiences. During World War I he served on the Western Front, an event that he regarded as epic and imbued with religious, moral and mythic overtones, in which Divine Grace manifested a continual presence. The second experience was his conversion to Roman Catholicism in 1921. And therein lies both the fascination, and the daunting difficulty, of David Jones’s work. Everything he saw, and everything he read, was put to work; everything found its place in the great myth-system that was constantly evolving in his head. Even the smallest personal experiences could speak to him of world history, mythology and religion.

He took no real interest in the present: when he looked at the present, it was in order to see through it, into the distant past […] he was a sort of aesthetic autodidact, not so much a thinker as a maker of patterns with ideas

Noel Malcolm, writing in The Telegraph in 2003

What this means is that Jones’s art is both intensely symbolic and autobiographical – not in the sense that it tells the story of his life, but insofar as it relates to and reveals his own particular experiences and obsessions – Celtic mythology, Arthurian legend, conversion to Catholicism, the framing views from windows, Roman history, words…

My ‘method’ is merely to arse around with such words as are available to me until the passage in question takes on something of the shape I think it requires and evokes the image I want. I find, or think I find, the process almost identical to what one tries to do in painting’ and drawing’. Having tried, to the best of one’s powers, to make the lines, smudges, colours, opacities, translucencies, tightnesses, hardnesses, pencil marks, paint marks, chalk marks, spit-marks, thumb marks, etc. evoke the image one requires as poss. one only hopes that some other chap, someone looking at the picture may recognise the image intended.

David Jones talking to Desmond Chute in 1952, from p44 ‘David Jones’ by Paul Hills 1981




trustees of the David Jones estate; (c) A. J. Hyne; Supplied by The Public Catalogue Foundation

9100782_orig man...great door

I should like to speak of a quality which I rather associate with the folk-tales of Wales or Celtic derivation, a quality congenial and significant to me which in some oblique was has some connection with what I want in painting. I find it impossible to define, but it has to do with a certain affection for the intimate creatureliness of things – a care for, and appreciation of the particular genius of place, men, trees, animals, and yet withal a pervading sense of metamorphosis and mutability. That trees are men walking. That words ‘bind and loose material things’.

David Jones writing in 1935

Further Reading:

  1. Wikipedia
  2. Regarding In Parenthesis in ‘The Thought Fox’
  3. David Jones by Paul Hills Tate Gallery publications (1981)
  4. Poetry Foundation notes on David Jones
  5. David Jones Society website
  6. Videos commissioned by David Jones Society about the life of the artist
  7. Desmond Sloane essay on David Jones on The Jackdaw website

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s