Many contemporary art critics were perplexed by Whistler's innovative use of pastels. For example, the reviewer for the London Times thought that Whistler's drawings were "far more artistic and interesting" than most pastels, but pedantically insisted that they should not be described as pastels, since "in a true pastel the ground of the picture is entirely covered with the coloured chalk employed, this being generally obtained by making it rough like the surface of fine sand, the use of this being to enable the artist to blend the crude, powdery colour of his crayons, and thus give the soft gradations in light and shade and colour without any distinct outline."