,,essays ,,on ,,art                     
,,by                             ,a4    
,,clutton-,,brock                       
,,methuen  ,,co4 ,,ltd4                 
#cf ,,essex ,,street ,w4,c4             
,,london                                
,first ,published in #aiai              
,,preface   ,these essays1 reprinted    
from the ,times ,literary ,supplement   
with a few additions and corrections1   
are not all entirely or directly        
concerned with art2 but even the last   
one--,waste or ,creation8--does bear on 
the question1 ,how are we to improve the
 art of our own time8 ,after years of   
criticism ,i am more interested in this 
question than in any other that concerns
 the arts4 ,whistler said that we could 
not improve it2 the best we could do for
 it was not to think about it4 ,i have  
discussed that opinion1 as also the     
contrary opinion of ,tolstoy1 and the   
truth that seems to me to lie between   
them4 ,if these essays have any unity1  
it is given to them by my belief that   

art1 like other human activities1 is    
subject to the will of man4 ,we cannot  
cause men of artistic genius to be born2
 but we can provide a public1 namely1   
ourselves1 for the artist1 who will     
encourage him to be an artist1 to do his
 best1 not his worst4 ,i believe that   
the quality of art in any age depends1  
not upon the presence or absence of     
individuals of genius1 but upon the     
attitude of the public towards art4     
,because of the decline of all the arts1
 especially the arts of use1 which began
 at the end of the eighteenth century   
and has continued up to our own time1 we
 are more interested in art than any    
people of the past1 with the interest of
 a sick man in health4 ,to say that this
 interest must be futile or mischievous 
is to deny the will of man in one of the
 chief of human activities2 but it often
 is denied by those who do not          
understand how it can be applied to art4
 ,we cannot make artists directly2 no   
government office can determine their   

training2 still less can any critic tell
 them how they ought to practise their  
art4 ,but we can all aim at a state of  
society in which they will be encouraged
 to do their best1 and at a state of    
mind in which we ourselves shall learn  
to know good from bad and to prefer the 
good4 ,at present we have neither the   
state of society nor the state of mind2 
and we can attain to both not by        
connoisseurship1 not by an anxiety to   
like the right thing or at least to buy 
it1 but by learning the difference      
between good and bad workmanship and    
design in objects of use4 ,anyone can do
 that1 and can resolve to pay a fair    
price for good workmanship and design2  
and only so will the arts of use1 and   
all the arts1 revive again4 ,for where  
the public has no sense of design in the
 arts of use1 it will have none in the  
fine arts4 ,to aim at connoisseurship   
when you do not know a good table or    
chair from a bad one is to attempt      
flying before you can walk4 ,so1 ,i     

think1 professors of art at ,oxford or  
,cambridge should be chosen1 not so much
 for their knowledge of ,greek          
sculpture1 as for their success in      
furnishing their own houses4 ,what can  
they know about ,greek sculpture if     
their own drawing-rooms are hideous8 ,i 
believe that the notorious fallibility  
of many experts is caused by the fact   
that they concern themselves with the   
fine arts before they have had any      
training in the arts of use4 ,so1 if we 
are to have a school of art at ,oxford  
or ,cambridge1 it should put this       
question to every pupil3 ,if you had to 
build and furnish a house of your own1  
how would you set about it8 ,and it     
should train its pupils to give a       
rational answer to that question4 ,so we
 might get a public knowing the         
difference between good and bad in      
objects of use1 valuing the good1 and   
ready to pay a fair price for it4  ,at  
present we have no such public4 ,a      
liberal education should teach the      

difference between good and bad in      
things of use1 including buildings4     
,oxford and ,cambridge profess to give a
 liberal education2 but you have only to
 look at their modern buildings to see  
that their teachers themselves do not   
know a good building from a bad one4    
,they1 like all the rest of us1 think   
that taste in art is an irrational      
mystery2 they trust in the expert and   
usually in the wrong one1 as the        
ignorant and superstitious trust in the 
wrong priest4 ,for as religion is merely
 mischievous unless it is tested in     
matters of conduct1 so taste is mere    
pedantry or frivolity unless it is      
tested on things of use4 ,these have    
their sense or nonsense1 their          
righteousness or unrighteousness1 which 
anyone can learn to see for himself1    
and1 until he has learned1 he will be at
 the mercy of charlatans4  ,i have      
written all these essays as a member of 
the public1 as one who has to find a    
right attitude towards art so that the  

arts may flourish again4 ,the critic is 
sure to be a charlatan or a prig1 unless
 he is to himself not a pseudo-artist   
expounding the mysteries of art and     
telling artists how to practise them1   
but simply one of the public with a     
natural and human interest in art4 ,but 
one of these essays is a defence of     
criticism1 and ,i will not repeat it    
here4                                   
,a4 ,,clutton-,,brock    ,july #cj1     
#aiai   ,,farncombe1 ,,surrey           
,,contents                    ,,the     
,,adoration ,,of ,,the ,,magi           
#a                   ,,leonardo ,,da    
,,vinci                     #ac         
,,the ,,pompadour ,,in ,,art            
#bg                   ,,an ,,unpopular  
,,master                   #cg          
,a ,,defence ,,of ,,criticism           
#dh                   ,,the ,,artist    
,,and ,,his ,,audience           #eh    
,,wilfulness ,,and ,,wisdom             
#gd                   ,,the ,,magic     
,,flute                     #hf         

,,process ,,or ,,person8                
#ig                   ,,the ,,artist    
,,and ,,the ,,tradesman         #aaj    
,,professionalism ,,in ,,art            
#abj                   ,,waste ,,or     
,,creation8                   #acb      
,,essays ,,on ,,art                     
,the ,adoration of the ,magi   ,there is
 one beauty of nature and another of    
art1 and many attempts have been made to
 explain the difference between them4   
,signor ,croce's theory1 now much in    
favour1 is that nature provides only the
 raw material for art4 ,the beginning of
 the artistic process is the perception 
of beauty in nature2 but an artist does 
not see beauty as he sees a cow4 ,it is 
his own mind that imposes on the chaos  
of nature an order1 a relation1 which is
 beauty4 ,all men have the faculty1 in  
some degree1 of imposing this order2 the
 artist only does it more completely    
than other men1 and he owes his power of
 execution to that4 ,he can make the    
beauty which he has perceived because he

 has perceived it clearly2 and this     
perceiving is part of the making4  ,the 
defect of this theory is that it ends by
 denying that very difference between   
the beauty of nature and the beauty of  
art which it sets out to explain4 ,if   
the artist makes the beauty of nature in
 perceiving it1 if it is produced by the
 action of his own mind upon the chaos  
of reality1 then it is the very same    
beauty that appears in his art2 and if1 
to us1 the beauty of his art seems      
different from the beauty of nature1 as 
we perceive it1 it is only because we   
have not ourselves seen the beauty of   
nature as completely as he has1 we have 
not reduced chaos so thoroughly to      
order4 ,it is a difference not of kind1 
but of degree2 for the artist himself   
there is no difference even of degree4  
,what he makes he sees1 and what he sees
 he makes4 ,all beauty is artistic1 and 
to speak of natural beauty is to make a 
false distinction4  ,yet it is a        
distinction that we remain constantly   

aware of4 ,in spite of ,signor ,croce   
and all the subtlety and partial truth  
of his theory1 we do not believe that we
 make beauty when we see it1 or that the
 artist makes it when he sees it4 ,nor  
do we believe that that beauty which he 
makes is of the same nature as that     
which he has perceived in reality4      
,rather he1 like us1 values the beauty  
which he perceives in reality because he
 knows that he has not made it4 ,it is  
something1 independent of himself1 to   
which his own mind makes answer3 that   
answer is his art2 it is the passionate 
value expressed in it which gives beauty
 to his art4 ,if he knew that the beauty
 he perceives was a product of his own  
mind1 he could not value it so2 if he   
held ,signor ,croce's theory1 he would  
cease to be an artist4  ,and1 in fact1  
those who act on his theory do cease to 
be artists4 ,nothing kills art so       
certainly as the effort to produce a    
beauty of the same kind as that which is
 perceived in nature4 ,in the beauty of 

nature1 as we perceive it1 there is a   
perfection of workmanship which is      
perfection because there is no          
workmanship4 ,natural things are not    
made1 but born2 works of art are made4  
,there is the essential difference      
between them and between their beauties4
 ,if a work of art tries to have the    
finish of a thing born1 not made1 if a  
piece of enamel apes the gloss of a     
butterfly's wing1 it misses the peculiar
 beauty of art and is but an inadequate 
imitation of the beauty of nature4 ,that
 beauty of the butterfly's wing1 which  
the artist like all of us perceives1 is 
of a different kind from any beauty he  
can make2 and if he is an artist he     
knows it and does not try to make it4   
,but all the arts1 even those which are 
not themselves imitative1 are always    
being perverted by the attempt to       
imitate the finish of nature4 ,there is 
a vanity of craftsmanship in ,louis     
,quinze furniture1 in the later ,chinese
 porcelain1 in modern jewelry1 no less  

than in ,dutch painting1 which is the   
death of art4 ,all great works of art   
show an effort1 a roughness1 an         
inadequacy of craftsmanship1 which is   
the essence of their beauty and         
distinguishes it from the beauty of     
nature4 ,as soon as men cease to        
understand this and despise this effort 
and roughness and inadequacy1 they      
demand from art the beauty of nature and
 get something which is mostly dead     
nature1 not living art4  ,we can best   
understand the difference between the   
two kinds of beauty if we consider how  
beauty steals into language1 that art   
which we all practise more or less and  
in which it is difficult1 if not        
impossible1 to imitate the finish of    
natural beauty4 ,there is no beauty     
whatever in sentences like ,trespassers 
will be prosecuted or ,pass the mustard1
 because they say exactly and completely
 all that they have to say4 ,there is   
beauty in sentences like ,the bright day
 is done1 ,and we are for the dark1 or  

,after life's fitful fever he sleeps    
well1 because in them1 although they    
seem quite simple1 the poet is trying to
 say a thousand times more than he can  
say4 ,it is the effort to do something  
beyond the power of words that brings   
beauty into them4 ,that is the very     
nature of the beauty of art1 which      
distinguishes it from the beauty of     
nature2 it is always produced by the    
effort to accomplish the impossible1 and
 what the artist knows to be impossible4
 ,whenever that effort ceases1 whenever 
the artist sets himself a task that he  
can accomplish1 a task of mere skill1   
then he ceases to be an artist1 because 
he no longer experiences reality in the 
manner necessary to an artist4 ,the     
great poet is aware of some excellence  
in reality so intensely that it is to   
him beauty2 for all excellence when we  
are intensely aware of it is beauty to  
us4 ,there is that truth in ,croce's    
theory4 ,our perception of beauty does  
depend upon the intensity of our        

perception of excellence4 ,but that     
intensity of perception remains         
perception1 and does not make what it   
perceives4 ,that the poet and every     
artist knows2 and his art is not merely 
an extension of the process of          
perception1 but an attempt to express   
his own value for that excellence which 
he has perceived as beauty4 ,it is an   
answer to that beauty1 a worship of it1 
and is itself beautiful because it makes
 no effort to compete with it4  ,thus in
 the beauty of art there is always value
 and wonder1 always a reference to      
another beauty different in kind from   
itself2 and we too1 if we are to see the
 beauty of art1 must share the same     
value and wonder4 ,to enter that        
,kingdom of ,heaven we must become      
little children as the artist himself   
does4 ,art is the expression of a       
certain attitude towards reality1 an    
attitude of wonder and value1 a         
recognition of something greater than   
man2 and where that recognition is not1 

art dies4 ,in a society valuing only    
itself1 believing that it can make a    
heaven of itself out of its own skill   
and knowledge and wisdom1 the difference
 between the beauty of nature and the   
beauty of art is no longer seen1 and art
 loses all its own beauty4 ,the surest  
sign of corruption and death in a       
society is where men and women see the  
best life as a life without wonder or   
effort or failure1 where labour is      
hidden underground so that a few may    
seem to live in ,paradise2 where there  
is perfect finish of all things1 human  
beings no less than their clothes and   
furniture and buildings and pictures2   
where the ideal is the lady so perfectly
 turned out that any activity whatever  
would mar her perfection4 ,in such      
societies the artist becomes a slave4   
,he too must produce work that does not 
seem to be work4 ,he must express no    
wonder or value for patrons who would be
 ashamed to feel either4 ,what he makes 
must seem to be born and not made1 so   

that it may fit a world which pretends  
to be a born ,paradise populated by     
cynical angels who own allegiance to no 
god4 ,in such a world art means1 beauty 
means1 the concealment of effort1 the   
pretence that it does not exist2 and    
that pretence is the end of art and     
beauty in all things made by man4 ,there
 is a close connexion between the idea  
of life expressed in ,aristotle's ideal 
man and the later ,greek sculpture4 ,the
 aim of that sculpture1 as of his ideal 
man1 was proud and effortless           
perfection4 ,both dread the confession  
of failure above all things--and both   
are dull4 ,in ,aristotle's age art had  
started upon a long decline1 which ended
 only when the pretence of perfection   
was killed1 both in art and in life1 by 
,christianity4 ,then the real beauty of 
art1 the beauty of value and wonder1    
superseded the wearisome imitation of   
natural beauty2 and it is only lately   
that we have learnt again to prefer the 
real beauty to the false4  ,men must    

free themselves from the contempt of    
effort and the desire to conceal it1    
they must be content with the perpetual1
 passionate failure of art1 before they 
can see its beauty or demand that beauty
 from the artist4 ,when they themselves 
become like little children1 then they  
see that the greatest artists1 in all   
their seeming triumphs1 are like little 
children too4 ,for in ,michelangelo and 
,beethoven it is not the arrogant1 the  
accomplished1 the magnificent1 that     
moves us4 ,they are great men to us2 but
 they achieved beauty because in their  
effort to achieve it they were little   
children to themselves4 ,they impose awe
 on us1 but it is their own awe that    
they impose4 ,it is not their           
achievement that makes beauty1 but their
 effort1 always confessing its own      
failure2 and in that confession is the  
beauty of art4 ,that is why it moves and
 frees us2 for it frees us from our     
pretence that we are what we would be1  
it carries us out of our own egotism    

into the wonder and value of the artist 
himself4  ,consider the beauty of a     
tune4 ,music itself is the best means   
which man has found for confessing that 
he cannot say what he would say2 and it 
is more purely and rapturously beauty   
than any other form of art4 ,a tune is  
the very silencing of speech1 and in the
 greatest tunes there is always the hush
 of wonder3 they seem to tell us to be  
silent and listen1 not to what the      
musician has to say1 but to what he     
cannot say4 ,the very beauty of a tune  
is in its reference to something beyond 
all expression1 and in its perfection it
 speaks of a perfection not its own4    
,pater said that all art tries to attain
 to the condition of music4 ,that is    
true in a sense different from what he  
meant4 ,art is always most completely   
art when it makes music's confession of 
the ineffable2 then it comes nearest to 
the beauty of music4 ,but when it is no 
longer a forlorn hope1 when it is able  
to say what it wishes to say with calm  

assurance1 then it has ceased to be art 
and become a game of skill4  ,often the 
great artist is imperious1 impatient1   
full of certainties2 but his certainty  
is not of himself2 and he is impatient  
of the failure to recognize1 not        
himself1 but what he recognizes4        
,michelangelo1 ,beethoven1 ,tintoret1   
would snap a critic's head off if he did
 not see what they were trying to do4   
,they may seem sometimes to be arrogant 
in the mere display of power1 yet their 
beauty lies in the sudden change from   
arrogance to humility4 ,the arrogance   
itself bows down and worships2 the very 
muscle and material force obey a spirit 
not their own4 ,they are lion-tamers1   
and they themselves are the lions2 out  
of the strong comes forth sweetness1 and
 it is all the sweeter for the strength 
that is poured into it and subdued by   
it4 ,what is the difference1 as of      
different worlds1 between ,rubens at his
 best and ,tintoret at his best8 ,this3 
that ,rubens always seems to be uplifted

 by his own power1 whereas ,tintoret has
 most power when he forgets it in       
wonder4 ,when he bows down all his      
turbulence in worship1 then he is most  
strong4 ,rubens1 in the ,descent from   
the ,cross1 is still the supreme        
drawing-master2 and painters flocking to
 him for lessons pay homage to him4     
,but1 in his ,crucifixion1 it is        
,tintoret himself who pays homage1 and  
we forget the master in the theme4 ,we  
may say of ,rubens's art1 in a new      
sense1 ,c'est magnifique1 mais ce n'est 
pas la guerre4 ,the greatest art is not 
magnificent1 but it is war1 desperate   
and without trappings1 a war in which   
victory comes through the confession of 
defeat4  ,man1 if he tries to be a god  
in his art1 makes a fool of himself4 ,he
 becomes like ,god1 he makes beauty like
 ,god1 when he is too much aware of ,god
 to be aware of himself4 ,then only does
 he not set himself too easy a task1 for
 then he does not make his theme so that
 he may accomplish it2 it is forced upon

 him by his awareness of ,god1 by his   
wonder and value for an excellence not  
his own4 ,so in all the beauty of art   
there is a humility not only of         
conception1 but also of execution1 which
 is mere failure and ugliness to those  
who expect to find in art the beauty and
 finish of nature1 who expect it to be  
born1 not made4 ,they are always        
disappointed by the greatest works of   
art1 by their inadequacy and strain and 
labour4 ,they look for a proof of what  
man can do and find a confession of what
 he cannot do2 but that confession1 made
 sincerely and passionately1 is beauty4 
,there is also a serenity in the beauty 
of art1 but it is the serenity of       
self-surrender1 not of                  
self-satisfaction1 of the saint1 not of 
the lady of fashion4 ,and all the       
accomplishment of great art1 its        
infinite superiority in mere skill over 
the work of the merely skilful1 comes   
from the incessant effort of the artist 
to do more than he can4 ,by that he is  

trained2 by that his work is            
distinguished from the mere exclamation 
of wonder4 ,he is not content to        
applaud2 he must also worship1 and make 
his offerings in his worship2 and they  
are the best he can do4 ,it was not only
 the shepherds who came to the birth of 
,christ2 the wise men came also and     
brought their treasures with them4 ,and 
the art of mankind is the offering of   
its wise men1 it is the adoration of the
 ,magi1 who are one with the simplest in
 their worship--                   ,wise
 men1 all ways of knowledge past1       
,to the ,shepherd's wonder come at last4
  ,but they do not lose their wisdom in 
their wonder4 ,when it passes into      
wonder1 when all the knowledge and skill
 and passion of mankind are poured into 
the acknowledgment of something greater 
than themselves1 then that              
acknowledgment is art1 and it has a     
beauty which may be envied by the       
natural beauty of ,god ,himself4        
,leonardo da ,vinci   ,leonardo da      

,vinci is one of the most famous men in 
history--as a man more famous than      
,michelangelo or ,shakespeare or        
,mozart--because posterity has elected  
him the member for the ,renaissance4    
,most great artists live in what they   
did1 and by that we know them2 but what 
,leonardo did gets much of its life from
 what he was1 or rather from what he is 
to us4 ,of all great men he is the most 
representative2 we cannot think of him  
as a mere individual1 eating and        
drinking1 living and competing1 on equal
 terms with other men4 ,we see him      
magnified by his own legend from the    
first1 with people standing aside to    
watch and whisper as he passed through  
the streets of ,florence or ,milan4     
,there he goes to paint the ,last       
,supper1 they said to each other2 and we
 think of it as already the most famous 
picture in the world before it was      
begun4 ,every one knew that he had the  
most famous picture in his brain1 that  
he was born to paint it1 to initiate the

 ,high ,renaissance2 from ,giotto       
onwards all the painters had been       
preparing for that1 ,florence herself   
had been preparing for it4 ,it makes no 
difference that for centuries it has    
been a shadow on the wall2 it is still  
the most famous painting in the world   
because it is the masterpiece of        
,leonardo4 ,there was a fate against the
 survival of his masterpieces1 but he   
has survived them and they are          
remembered because of him4 ,we accept   
him for himself1 like the people of his 
own time1 who1 when he said he could    
perform impossibilities1 believed him4  
,to them he meant the new age which     
could do anything1 and still to us he   
means the infinite capacities of man4   
,he is the ,adam awakened whom          
,michelangelo only painted2 and1 if he  
accomplished but little1 we believe in  
him1 as in mankind1 for his promise4 ,if
 he did not fulfil it1 neither has      
mankind2 but he believed that all things
 could be done and lived a great life in

 that faith4  ,another ,florentine      
almost equals him in renown4 ,men       
watched and whispered when ,dante passed
 through the streets of ,florence2 but  
,dante lives in his achievement1        
,leonardo in himself4 ,dante means to us
 an individual soul quivering through a 
system1 a creed1 inherited from the     
past4 ,leonardo is a spirit             
unstraitened2 not consenting to any past
 nor rebelling against it1 but newborn  
with a newborn universe around it1      
seeing it without memories or           
superstitions1 without inherited fears  
or pieties1 yet without impiety or      
irreverence4 ,he is not an iconoclast1  
since for him there are no images to be 
broken2 whatever he sees is not an image
 but itself1 to be accepted or rejected 
by himself2 what he would do he does    
without the help or hindrance of        
tradition4 ,in art and in science he    
means the same thing1 not a rebirth of  
any past1 as the word ,renaissance seems
 to imply1 but freedom from all the     

past1 life utterly in the present4 ,he  
is concerned not with what has been     
thought1 or said1 or done1 but with his 
own immediate relation to all things1   
with what he sees and feels and         
discovers4 ,authority is nothing to him1
 whether of ,galen or of ,st4 ,thomas1  
of ,greek or mediaeval art4 ,in science 
he looks at the fact1 in art at the     
object2 nor will he allow either to be  
hidden from him by the achievements of  
the dead4 ,giotto had struck the first  
blow for freedom when he allowed the    
theme to dictate the picture2 ,leonardo 
allowed the object to dictate the       
drawing4 ,to him the fact itself is     
sacred1 and man fulfils himself in his  
own immediate relation to fact4  ,all   
those who react and rebel against the   
,renaissance have an easy case against  
its great representative4 ,what did he  
do in thought compared with ,st4        
,thomas1 or in art compared with the    
builders of ,chartres or ,bourges8 ,he  
filled notebooks with sketches and      

conjectures2 he modelled a statue that  
was never cast2 he painted a fresco on a
 wall1 and with a medium so unsuited to 
fresco that it was a ruin in a few      
years4 ,even in his own day there was a 
doubt about him2 it is expressed in the 
young ,michelangelo's sudden taunt that 
he could not cast the statue he had     
modelled4 ,michelangelo was one of those
 who see in life always the great task  
to be performed and who judge a man by  
his performance2 to him ,leonardo was a 
dilettante1 a talker2 he made monuments1
 but ,leonardo remains his own monument1
 a prophecy of what man shall be when he
 comes into his kingdom4 ,with him1 we  
must confess1 it is more promise than   
performance2 he could paint ,the ,last  
,supper because it means the future2 he 
could never1 in good faith1 have painted
 ,the ,last ,judgment1 for that means a 
judgment on the past1 and to him the    
past is nothing2 to him man1 in the     
future1 is the judge1 master1 enjoyer of
 his own fate4 ,compared with his1      

,michelangelo's mind was still          
mediaeval1 his reproach the reproach of 
one who cares for doing more than for   
being1 and certainly ,michelangelo did a
 thousand times more2 but from his own  
day to ours the world has not judged    
,leonardo by his achievement4 ,as       
,johnson had his ,boswell so he has had 
his legend2 he means to us not books or 
pictures1 but himself4 ,in his own day  
kings bid for him as if he were a work  
of art2 and he died magnificently in    
,france1 making nothing but foretelling 
a race of men not yet fulfilled4        
,before ,francis ,bacon1 before         
,velasquez or ,manet1 he prophesied not 
merely the new artist or the new man of 
science1 but the new man who is to free 
himself from his inheritance and to see1
 feel1 think1 and act in all things with
 the spontaneity of ,god4 ,that is why  
he is a legendary hero to us1 with a    
legend that is not in the past but in   
the future4 ,for his prophecy is still  
far from fulfilment2 and the very       

science that he initiated tells us how  
hard it is for man to free himself from 
his inheritance4 ,it seems strange to us
 that ,leonardo sang hymns to causation 
as if to ,god4 ,in its will was his     
peace and his freedom4       ,o         
marvellous necessity1 thou with supreme 
reason constrainest      all efforts to 
be the direct result of their causes1   
and by a      supreme and irrevocable   
law every natural action obeys thee by  
the shortest possible process4          
,who would believe that so small a space
 could contain the      images of all   
the universe8 ,o mighty process1 what   
talent can      avail to penetrate a    
nature such as thine8 ,what tongue will 
it      be that can unfold so great a   
wonder8 ,verily none4 ,this it is       
that guides the human discourse to the  
considering of divine      things4#a    
,footnote #a3 ,the sayings of ,leonardo 
quoted in this article are taken from   
,leonardo da ,vinci's ,notebooks1 by ,e4
 ,m',curdy4 7,duckworth1 #aijf47  ,to   

,leonardo causation meant the escape    
from caprice2 it meant a secure relation
 between man and all things1 in which   
man would gain power by knowledge1 in   
which every increase of knowledge would 
reveal to him more and more of the      
supreme reason4 ,there was no chain for 
him in cause and effect1 no unthinking  
of the will of man4 ,rather by knowledge
 man would discover his own will and    
know that it was the universal will4 ,so
 man must never be afraid of knowledge4 
,the eye is the window of the soul4     
,like ,whitman he tells us always to    
look with the eye1 and so to confound   
the wisdom of ages4 ,there is in every  
man's vision the power of relating      
himself now and directly to reality by  
knowledge2 and in knowing other things  
he knows himself4 ,by knowledge man     
changes what seemed to be a compulsion  
into a harmony2 he gives up his own     
caprice for the universal will4  ,that  
is the religion of ,leonardo1 in art as 
in science4 ,for him the artist also    

must relate himself directly to the     
visible world1 in which is the only     
inspiration2 to accept any formula is to
 see with dead men's eyes4 ,that has    
been said again and again by artists1   
but not with ,leonardo's mystical and   
philosophical conviction4 ,he knew that 
it is vain to study ,nature unless she  
is to you a goddess or a god2 you can   
learn nothing from reality unless you   
adore it1 and in adoring it he found his
 freedom4 ,how different is this        
doctrine from that with which1 after    
centuries of scientific advance1 we     
intimidate ourselves4 ,we are threatened
 by a creed far more enslaving than that
 of the ,middle ,ages4 ,if the ,middle  
,ages turned to the past to learn what  
they were to think or to do1 we turn to 
the past to learn what we are4 ,they may
 have feared the new2 but we say that   
there is no new1 nothing but some       
combination or variation of the old4    
,causation is to us a chain that binds  
us to the past1 but to ,leonardo it was 

freedom2 and so he prophesies a freedom 
that we may attain to not by denying    
facts or making myths1 but by           
discovering what he hinted--that        
causation itself is not compulsion but  
will1 and our will if1 by knowledge1 we 
make it ours4  ,no one before him had   
been so much in love with reality1      
whatever it may be4 ,he was called a    
sceptic1 but it was only that he        
preferred reality itself to any tales   
about it2 and his religion1 his worship1
 was the search for the very fact4      
,this1 because he was both artist and   
man of science1 he carried further than 
anyone else1 pursuing it with all his   
faculties4 ,in his drawings there is the
 beauty not of his character1 but of the
 character of what he draws2 he does not
 make a design1 but finds it4 ,that     
beauty proves him a ,florentine--,duerer
 himself falls short of it--but it is   
the beauty of the thing itself1         
discovered and insisted upon with the   
passion of a lover4 ,he draws animals1  

trees1 flowers1 as ,correggio draws     
,antiope or ,io2 and it is only in his  
drawings now that he speaks clearly to  
us4 ,the ,mona ,lisa is well enough1 but
 another hand might have executed the   
painting of it4 ,it owes its popular    
fame to the smile about which it is so  
easy to write finely2 but in the        
drawings we see the experiencing passion
 of ,leonardo himself1 we see him       
feeling1 as in the notebooks we see him 
thinking4 ,there is the eagerness of    
discovery at which so often he stopped  
short1 turning away from a task to      
further discovery1 living always in the 
moment1 taking no thought either for the
 morrow or for yesterday1 unable to     
attend to any business1 even the        
business of the artist1 seeing life not 
as a struggle or a duty1 but as an      
adventure of all the senses and all the 
faculties4 ,he is1 even with his pencil1
 the greatest talker in the world1 but  
without egotism1 talking always of what 
he sees1 satisfying himself not with the

 common appetites and passions of men1  
but with his one supreme passion for    
reality4 ,if ,michelangelo thought him a
 dilettante1 there must have been in his
 taunt some envy of ,leonardo's freedom4
  ,yet once at least ,leonardo did      
achieve1 and something we should never  
have expected from his drawings4 ,the   
,last ,supper is but a shadow on the    
wall1 yet still we can see its          
greatness1 which is the greatness of    
pure design1 of ,giotto1 ,masaccio1     
,piero della ,francesa4 ,goethe and     
others have found all kinds of          
psychological subtleties in it1 meanings
 in every gesture2 but what we see now  
is only space1 grandeur1 a supreme      
moment expressed in the relation of all 
the forms4 ,the pure music of the       
painting remains when the drama is      
almost obliterated2 and it proves that  
,leonardo1 when he chose1 could withdraw
 himself from the delight of            
hand-to-mouth experience into a vision  
of his own1 that he had the reserve and 

the creative power of the earlier       
masters and of that austere1 laborious  
youth who taunted him4 ,if it were not  
for ,the ,last ,supper we might doubt   
whether he could go further in art than 
the vivid sketch of ,the ,magi2 but ,the
 ,last ,supper tells us how great his   
passion for reality must have been1     
since it could distract him from the    
making of such masterpieces4  ,that     
passion for reality itself made him cold
 to other passions4 ,we know            
,michelangelo and ,beethoven as men in  
some respects very like other men4 ,they
 were anxious1 fretful1 full of         
affections and grievances1 and much     
concerned with their relations4         
,leonardo is like ,melchizedek1 not only
 by the accident of birth1 for he was a 
natural son1 but by choice4 ,he never   
married1 he never had a home2 there is  
no evidence that he was ever tied to any
 man or woman by his affections2 yet it 
would be stupid to call him cold1 for   
his one grand passion absorbed him4     

,monks suspected him1 but in his heart  
he was celibate like the great monkish  
saints1 celibate not by vows but by     
preoccupation4 ,it is clear that from   
youth to age life had no cumulative     
power over him2 as we should say in our 
prosaic language1 he never settled down1
 for he let things happen to him and    
valued the very happening4 ,he was      
always like a strange1 wonderful        
creature from another planet1 taking    
notes with unstaled delight but never   
losing his heart to any particular4 ,sex
 itself seems hardly to exist for him1  
or at least for his mind4 ,often the    
people in his drawings are of no sex4   
,rembrandt draws every one1 ,leonardo no
 one1 as if he were his own relation4   
,women and youths were as much a subject
 of his impassioned curiosity as        
flowers1 and no more4 ,he is always the 
spectator1 but a spectator who can      
exercise every faculty of the human mind
 and every passion in contemplation2 he 
is the nearest that any man has ever    

come to ,aristotle's ,supreme ,being4   
,but we must not suppose that he went   
solemnly through life living up to his  
own story1 that he was mysterious in    
manner or in any respect like a         
charlatan4 ,rather1 he lived always in  
the moment and overcame mankind by his  
spontaneity4 ,he had the charm of the   
real man of genius1 not the reserve of  
the false one4 ,the famous statement of 
what he could do1 which he made to      
,ludovico ,sforza1 is not a mere boast  
but an expression of his eagerness to do
 it4 ,these engines of war were splendid
 toys to him1 and all his life he       
enjoyed making toys and seeing men      
wonder at them4 ,his delight was to do  
things for the first time like a child1 
and then not to do them again4 ,again   
and again he cries out against authority
 and in favour of discovery4 ,whoever in
 discussion adduces authority1 he says1 
uses not intellect but rather memory2   
and1 anticipating ,milton1 he observes  
that all our knowledge originates in    

opinions4 ,perhaps some one had rebuked 
him for having too many opinions4 ,we   
can be sure that he chafed against dull1
 cautious1 safe men who wished for      
results4 ,he himself cared nothing for  
them2 it was enough for him to know what
 might be done1 without doing it4 ,he   
was so sure of his insight that he did  
not care to put it to the test of       
action2 that was for slower men1 whether
 artists or men of science4 ,his        
notebooks were enough for him4  ,in     
spite of the notebooks and the sketches1
 we know less about the man ,leonardo   
than about the man ,shakespeare4 ,here  
and there he makes a remark with some   
personal conviction or experience in it4
 ,intellectual passion1 he says1 drives 
out sensuality4 ,in him it had driven   
out or sublimated all the sensual part  
of character4 ,we cannot touch or see or
 hear him in anything he says or draws4 
,the passion is there1 but it is too    
much concerned with universals to be of 
like nature with our own passions4 ,he  

seems to be speaking to himself as if he
 had forgotten the whole audience of    
mankind1 but in what he says he ignores 
the personal part of himself2 he is most
 passionate when most impersonal4 ,to   
the ambitious1 whom neither the boon of 
life nor the beauty of the world        
suffices to content1 it comes as a      
penance that life with them is          
squandered and that they possess neither
 the benefits nor the beauty of the     
world4 ,that might be a platitude said  
by some one else2 but we know that in it
 ,leonardo expresses his faith4 ,the    
boon of life1 the beauty of the world1  
were enough for him without ambition1   
without even further affections4 ,he    
left father and mother and wealth1 and  
even achievement1 to follow them2 and he
 left all those not out of coldness1 or 
fear1 or idleness1 but because his own  
passion drew him away4 ,no cold man     
could have said1 ,where there is most   
power of feeling1 there of martyrs is   
the greatest martyr4 ,it is difficult   

for us northerners to understand the    
intellectual passion of the ,south1 to  
see even that it is passion2 most       
difficult of all for us to see that in  
men like ,leonardo the passion for      
beauty itself is intellectual4 ,we1 with
 our romanticism1 our sense of exile1   
can never find that identity which he   
found between beauty and reality4 ,this 
benign nature so provides that all over 
the world you find something to imitate4
 ,to us imitation means prose1 to him it
 meant poetry2 science itself meant     
poetry1 and illusion was the only       
ugliness4 ,nature never breaks her own  
law4 ,it is we who try to find freedom  
in lawlessness1 which is ignorance1     
ugliness1 illusion4 ,falsehood is so    
utterly vile that1 though it should     
praise the great works of ,god1 it      
offends against ,his divinity4 ,there is
 ,leonardo's religion2 and if still it  
is too cold for us1 it is because we    
have not his pure spiritual fire in     
ourselves4                              

,the ,pompadour in ,art   ,it is an     
important fact in the history of the    
arts for the last century or more that  
in ,england and ,america1 if not        
elsewhere1 the chief interest in all the
 arts1 including literature1 has been   
taken by women rather than by men4 ,in  
the great ages of art it was not so4    
,women1 so far as we can tell1 had      
little to do with the art of ,greece in 
the fifth century or with the art of the
 ,middle ,ages4 ,there were female      
patrons of art at the ,renaissance1 but 
they were exceptions subject to the     
prevailing masculine taste4 ,art was and
 remained a proper interest of men up to
 the eighteenth century4 ,women first   
began to control it and to affect its   
character at the mistress-ridden ,court 
of ,louis ,,xv4 ,but in the nineteenth  
century men began to think they were too
 busy to concern themselves with the    
arts4 ,men of power1 when they were not 
working1 needed to take exercise and    
left it to their wives to patronize the 

arts4 ,and so the notion grew that art  
was a feminine concern1 and even artists
 were pets for women4 ,the great man1   
especially in ,america1 liked his wife  
to have every luxury4 ,the exquisite    
life she led was itself a proof of his  
success2 and she was for him a living   
work of art1 able to live so because of 
the abundance of his strength4 ,in her1 
that strength passed into ornament and  
became beautiful2 she was a friendly1   
faithful ,delilah to his ,samson1 a     
,delilah who did not shear his locks4   
,and so he came to think of art itself  
as being in its nature feminine if not  
effeminate1 as a luxury and ornament of 
life1 as everything1 in fact1 except a  
means of expression for himself and     
other men4  ,this female control of art 
began1 as ,i have said1 at the          
mistress-ridden ,court of ,louis ,,xv1  
and it has unfortunately kept the stamp 
of its origin4 ,at that ,court art1 to  
suit the tastes of the ,pompadour and   
the ,du ,barri1 became consciously      

frivolous1 became almost a part of the  
toilet4 ,the artist was the slave of the
 mistress1 and seems to have enjoyed his
 chains4 ,in this slavery he did produce
 something charming2 he did invest that 
narrow and artificial ,heaven of the    
,court with some of the infinite beauty 
and music of a real ,heaven4 ,but out of
 this refined harem art there has sprung
 a harem art of the whole world which   
has infested the homes even of perfectly
 respectable ladies ever since4 ,all    
over ,europe the ideals of applied art  
have remained the ideals of the         
,pompadour2 and only by a stern and     
conscious effort have either women or   
men been able to escape from them4      
,everywhere there has spread a strange  
disease of romantic snobbery1 the       
sufferers from which1 in their efforts  
at aesthetic expression1 always pretend 
to be what they are not4 ,excellent     
mothers of families1 in their furniture 
and sometimes even in their clothes1    
pretend to be ,king's mistresses4 ,of   

course1 if this pretence were put into  
words and so presented to their         
consciousness1 they would be indignant4 
,it has for them no connexion with      
conduct2 it is purely aesthetic1 but art
 means to them make-believe1 the        
make-believe that they live an entirely 
frivolous life of pleasure provided for 
them by masculine power and devotion4   
,yet these ladies know that they have   
not the revenues of the ,pompadour2 they
 must have their art1 their             
make-believe1 as cheap as possible2 and 
it has been one of the triumphs of      
modern industry to provide them with    
cheap imitations of the luxury of the   
,pompadour4 ,hence the machine-made     
frivolities of the most respectable     
homes1 the hair-brushes with backs of   
stamped silver1 the scent-bottles of    
imitation cut-glass1 the draperies with 
printed rose-buds on them1 the general  
artificial-floweriness and flimsiness   
and superfluity of naughtiness of our   
domestic art4 ,it expresses a feminine  

romance to which the male indulgently   
consents1 as if he were really the      
voluptuous monarch whose mistress the   
female1 aesthetically1 pretends to be4  
,in this world of aesthetic make-believe
 our homes are not respectable2 they    
would scorn to be so1 for to the        
romantic female mind1 when it occupies  
itself with art1 the improper is the    
artistic4  ,but this needs a more       
precise demonstration4 ,we wonder at our
 modern passion for superfluous         
ornament4 ,we shall understand it only  
if we discover its origin4 ,the ,king's 
mistress liked everything about her to  
be ornamented1 because it was a point of
 honour with her to advertise the       
,king's devotion to her in the          
costliness of all her surroundings4 ,he 
loved her so much that he had paid for  
all this ornamentation4 ,she1 like      
,cleopatra1 was always proving the      
potency of her charms by melting pearls 
in vinegar4 ,like a prize ox1 she was   
hung with the trophies of her physical  

pre-eminence4 ,in all the art which we  
call ,louis ,quinze there is this       
advertisement of the labour spent upon  
it4 ,it proclaims that a vast deal of   
trouble has been taken in the making of 
it1 and we can see the artist utterly   
subdued to this trouble1 utterly the    
slave of the mistress's exorbitant      
whims4 ,this advertisement of labour    
spent1 without the reality1 has been the
 mark of all popular domestic art ever  
since4  ,the beautiful is the           
ornamented--namely1 that which looks as 
if it had taken a great deal of trouble 
to make4 ,the trouble now is taken by   
machinery1 and so1 with the cost1 is    
minimized2 and what it produces is      
ugliness1 an ugliness which could not be
 mistaken for beauty but for the notion 
that it does express a desirable state  
of being in those who possess it4 ,and  
this desirable state is the state of the
 ,king's mistress1 of a siren who can   
have whatever she desires because of the
 potency of her charms4 ,how otherwise  

can we explain the passion for          
superfluous machine-made ornament which 
makes our respectable homes so hideous8 
,the machine simulates a trouble that   
has not been taken1 and so gives proof  
of a voluptuous infatuation that does   
not exist4 ,the hardworking mother of a 
family buys out of her scanty allowance 
a scent-bottle that looks as if it had  
been laboriously cut for a ,king's      
mistress1 whereas really it has been    
moulded by machinery to keep up the     
delusion1 unconsciously cherished by    
her1 that she lives in a world of       
irresistible and unscrupulous feminine  
charm4 ,and her husband endures         
indulgently all this superfluous        
ugliness because he1 too1 believes that 
it is the function of art to make the   
drawing-room of the mother of a family  
look like the boudoir of a siren4  ,most
 of this make-believe remains           
unconscious4 ,we are all so used to it  
that we do not see in it the expression 
of the dying harem instinct in women4   

,yet it persists1 even where the harem  
instinct would be passionately          
repudiated4 ,it persists often in the   
dress of the most defiant suffragette1  
in outbreaks of incongruous frivolity1  
forlorn tawdry roses that still whisper 
memories of the ,pompadour and her      
triumphant guilty splendour4  ,but      
besides all this unconscious feminine   
influence upon art1 there is the        
influence of women who care consciously 
for art2 and it also has an enervating  
effect on the artist4 ,for the female   
patron of art1 just because there are so
 few male patrons of it1 is apt to take 
a motherly interest in the artist4 ,to  
her he is a delightful wayward child    
rather than a real man occupied with    
real things1 like her husband or her    
father or her brother3 not one who can  
earn money for her and fight for her and
 protect her1 but rather one who needs  
to be protected and humoured in a world 
which cares so little for art4 ,to her1 
with all her passion for art1 it is     

something in its nature irrational1 and1
 like a child1 delightful because       
irrational4 ,it is an escape from       
reality rather than a part of it4 ,and  
so she will believe whatever the artist 
tells her because he is an artist1 not  
because he is a man of sense2 and she   
encourages him to be more of an artist  
than a man of sense4 ,she encourages him
 to be extravagantly aesthetic1 and     
enjoys all his extravagance as a        
diversion from the sound masculinity of 
her own mankind4 ,there is room in her  
prosperous1 easy world for these        
diversions from business1 just as there 
is room for charity or1 perhaps1        
religion4 ,the world can afford artists 
as it can afford pets2 as it can afford 
beautiful1 cultivated women4 ,and that  
also is the view of her husband1 if he  
is good-natured4 ,but to him1 just      
because art and artists are the proper  
concern of his wife1 they are even less 
serious than they are to her4 ,she may  
persuade herself that she takes them    

quite seriously1 but he pretends to do  
so only out of politeness1 and as he    
would pretend to take her clothes       
seriously4 ,for him the type of the     
artist is still the pianist who gives   
locks of his over-abundant hair to      
ladies4 ,even if the artist is a painter
 and cuts his hair and dresses like a   
man1 he still belongs to the feminine   
world and excites himself about matters 
that do not concern men4 ,men can afford
 him1 and so they tolerate him2 but he  
is one of the expenses they would cut   
down if it were necessary to cut down   
expenses4  ,well1 it is necessary to cut
 down expenses now2 and yet in ages much
 sterner and poorer than our own art was
 the concern of men1 and they afforded  
it because it was not to them a mere    
feminine luxury4 ,they afforded the     
towering churches of the ,middle ,ages  
because they expressed the religious    
passion of all mankind2 and have we     
nothing to express except a dying harem 
instinct and the motherliness of kind   

women to a neglected class8 ,we ought to
 be grateful to this motherliness1 which
 has kept art alive in an age of        
ignorance2 but we should see that it is 
only a pis-aller1 and women should see  
this as well as men4 ,the female        
attitude towards art has been itself the
 result of a wrong relation between     
women and men1 a relation half-animal1  
half-romantic1 and therefore not quite  
real4 ,this relation1 even while it has 
ceased to exist more and more in fact1  
has still continued to express itself   
aesthetically2 and in art it has become 
a mere obsolete nuisance4 ,one may care 
nothing for art and yet long to be rid  
of the meaningless frivolities of our   
domestic art4 ,one may wish to clear    
them away as so much litter and trash2  
and this clearance is necessary so that 
we may purge our vision and see what is 
beautiful4 ,we are almost rid of the    
manners of the ,king's mistress1 and    
most women no longer try to appeal to   
men by their charming unreason4 ,it is  

not merely that the appeal fails now2   
they themselves refuse to make it1 out  
of self-respect4 ,but they still remain 
irrational in their tastes2 or at least 
they have not learned that all this     
aesthetic irrationality misrepresents   
them1 that it is forced upon them by    
tradesmen1 that it is as inexpressive as
 a sentimental music-hall song sung by a
 gramophone4 ,but now that men have     
given women the vote1 and so proved that
 they take them seriously at last1 they 
have the right to speak plainly on this 
matter4 ,the feminine influence upon art
 has been bad4 ,let us admit that it has
 been the result of a bad masculine     
influence upon women1 that it has been  
supreme because men have become         
philistine2 but the fact remains that it
 has been bad4 ,art must be taken       
seriously if it is to be worth anything4
 ,it must be the expression of what is  
serious and real in the human mind4 ,but
 all this feminine art has expressed1   
and has tried to glorify1 something     

false and worthless4 ,therefore it has  
been ugly1 and we are all sick of its   
ugliness4 ,we look to women1 now that   
they are equalled with men by an act of 
legal justice1 to deliver us from it4   
,they disown the ,pompadour in fact2 let
 them disown her in art4                
,an ,unpopular ,master   ,nicholas      
,poussin is one of the great painters of
 the world2 yet it is easier to give    
reasons for disliking him than for      
liking him4 ,after his death there was a
 war of pamphlets about him2 the one    
side1 led by ,lebrun1 holding him up as 
a model for all painters to come1 the   
other side1 under de ,piles1 calling him
 a mere pedant compared with ,rubens4   
,here is a passage from a poem against  
,poussin3--              ,il scavoit    
manier la regle et le compas1           
,parloit de la lumiere et ne l'entendoit
 pas2             ,il estoit de         
l'antique un assez bon copiste1         
,mais sans invention1 et mauvais        
coloriste4             ,il ne pouvait   

marcher que sur le pas d'autruy3        
,le genie a manque1 c'est un malheur    
pour luy4  ,now this is just what the   
criticism of yesterday said about him1  
the criticism of the eighties and       
nineties1 when it was supposed that     
,velasquez had discovered the art of    
seeing1 and with it the art of painting4
 ,it sounds plausible1 but not a word of
 it is true4 ,and yet it remains        
difficult to show why it is not true1 to
 distinguish between the genius of      
,poussin and the pedantry of his        
imitators1 to convince people that he   
was not a bad colourist1 and that he did
 not imitate the antique4  ,this        
difficulty is connected with the age in 
which he happened to live4 ,nobody calls
 ,mantegna a pedant nowadays2 yet one   
might say against him most of the things
 that have been said against ,poussin4  
,but ,mantegna lived in a century that  
we like1 and ,poussin in one that we    
dislike4 ,the seventeenth century is for
 us a time of pictorial platitude2 there

 was nothing then to discover about     
gesture or expression1 and painters1    
even the best of them1 used stock       
gestures and stock expressions without  
any of the eagerness of discovery4 ,now 
,poussin is1 or appears to be1 in many  
of his works a dramatic painter1 and for
 us his drama is platitudinous4 ,take   
the ,plague of ,ashdod1 in the ,national
 ,gallery4 ,there are the gestures that 
we are already a little weary of in     
,raphael's cartoons4 ,the figures       
express horror and fear with uplifted   
hands or contorted features2 but their  
real business seems to be to make the   
picture4 ,the drama is thrust upon us1  
and we cannot ignore it2 yet we feel    
that it is no discovery for the artist1 
but something that he has learnt like a 
second-rate actor--that he has1 in fact1
 a bag of tricks in common with all the 
,italian painters of his time1 and that 
he is only pretending to be surprised by
 his subject4 ,now every age has its    
artistic platitudes2 but these          

platitudes of dramatic expression are   
peculiarly wearisome to us because they 
have persisted in ,european painting up 
to the present day1 and because most    
great painters in modern times have     
struggled in one way or another to      
escape from them4 ,we associate them    
with mediocrity and insincerity2 and we 
do not understand that for many of the  
better painters of the seventeenth      
century they were only a basis for      
discoveries of a different kind4 ,il    
,greco1 for instance1 is often as       
dramatically platitudinous as ,guido    
,reni1 but he also was making           
discoveries in design which happen to   
interest us now1 so that we overlook his
 platitudes4 ,he was trying to express  
his emotions not so much by gesture and 
the play of features as by a rhythm     
really independent of those1 a rhythm   
carried through everything in the       
picture1 to which all his platitudes are
 subject4 ,and because this rhythm is   
new to us now we hardly notice the      

platitudes4 ,poussin was playing the    
same game1 but his rhythm has been      
imitated by so many dull painters that  
we are tempted to think it as           
platitudinous as his drama1 and that is 
where we are unjust to him4  ,poussin   
had a mind that was at once passionate  
and determined to be master of its      
passions4 ,he would not suppress them1  
but he would express them with complete 
composure2 and as ,donne in poetry tried
 to attain to an intellectual mastery   
over his passions by means of conceits1 
so ,poussin in painting tried to attain 
to the same mastery through the         
representation of an ideal world4 ,each 
was enthralled with his experience of   
real life2 but each was dissatisfied    
with the haphazard1 tyrannous nature of 
that experience1 and especially with the
 divorce between passion and intellect1 
which in actual experience is so painful
 to the man who is both passionate and  
intelligent4 ,so each1 in his art1 tried
 to make a new kind of experience1 in   

which passion should be intelligent and 
intellect passionate4 ,this1 no doubt1  
is what every artist tries to do2 but   
the effort was peculiarly fierce in     
,donne and ,poussin because in them     
there was a more than common discord    
between passion and intelligence1       
because they were instantly critical    
both of what they desired and of their  
own process of desire4 ,donne1 at the   
very height of passion1 asked himself   
why he was passionate2 and he could not 
express his passion without trying to   
justify it to his intelligence4 ,so in  
his poetry he endeavoured to experience 
it again with simultaneous intellectual 
justification which in that poetry was a
 part of the experience itself4 ,poussin
 aims not so much at an intellectual    
justification of passion as at an       
expression of it in which there shall be
 also complete intellectual composure4  
,he aims in his art at an experience in 
which the intellect shall be free from  
the bewilderment of the passions and the

 passions also free from the check of   
the intellect2 and to this he attains by
 the representation of an ideal state in
 which the intellect can make all the   
forms through which the passion         
expresses itself4 ,he is1 in fact1      
nearer than most painters to the        
musician2 but still he is a painter and 
appeals to us through the representation
 of objects that we can recognize by    
their likeness to what we have seen     
ourselves4 ,his intellect desires to    
make its forms1 not to have them imposed
 upon it by mere ocular experience1     
since ocular experience for him is full 
of the tyrannous bewilderment of actual 
passion4 ,but at the same time those    
forms which his intellect makes must be 
recognized by their likeness to what men
 see in the world about them4 ,so he    
found a link between his ideal forms and
 what men see in what is vaguely called 
the antique4  ,but he did not go to the 
antique out of any artistic snobbery or 
because he distrusted his own natural   

taste4 ,the antique was not for him an  
aristocratic world of art that he tried 
to enter in the hope of becoming himself
 an aristocrat4 ,he showed that he was  
perfectly at ease in that world by the  
manner in which he painted its subjects4
 ,when1 for instance1 he paints         
,bacchanals1 he is really much less     
overawed by the subject than ,rubens    
would be4 ,rubens1 who was a man of     
culture and an intellectual parvenu1    
tried desperately to combine his natural
 tastes with classical subjects4 ,when  
he painted a ,flemish cook as ,venus he 
really tried to make her look like      
,venus2 and the result is a ,flemish    
cook pretending to be ,venus1 an        
incongruity that betrays a like         
incongruity in the artist's mind4       
,poussin's ,venus1 far less flesh and   
blood1 does belong entirely to the world
 in which he imagines her--indeed1 so   
intensely that1 if we have lost interest
 in that world1 she fails to interest   
us4 ,the ,venetians have done this much 

better1 we think2 and why1 if ,poussin  
was going to paint like ,titian1 did he 
not use ,titian's colour8 ,the answer   
is1 ,because his mood was very far from 
,titian's1 because he makes a comment   
that ,titian never makes upon his       
,venuses and ,bacchanals4 ,rubens makes 
no comment at all3 his attitude towards 
the classical is that of the wondering  
parvenu4 ,titian through the classical  
expresses the ,renaissance liberation   
from scruple and fear4 ,but ,poussin    
gives us a mortal comment upon this     
immortal carelessness and delight4      
,whether his figures are tranquil or    
rapturous1 there is in his colour an    
expression of something far from their  
felicity4 ,indeed1 however voluptuous   
the forms may be1 the colour is always  
ascetic4 ,it is not that he seems to    
disapprove of those glorified pleasures 
of the senses1 but that he cannot       
satisfy himself with his own conception 
of them1 as ,titian could4 ,titian      
represents a world in which all the mind

 consents to delight4 ,his figures are  
not foolish1 but they are like dancers  
or dreamers to the music of their own   
pleasure4 ,he makes us hear that music  
to which his figures dance or dream2    
but1 with ,poussin1 we do not hear it1  
we only see the figures subject to it as
 to some influence from which we are cut
 off2 and that which cuts us off is the 
colour4  ,most painters1 if they wished 
to paint a scene of voluptuous pleasure1
 would conceive it first in colour2 for 
colour is the natural expression of all 
delights of the senses4 ,but ,poussin   
never allows the delight that he paints 
to affect his colour at all4 ,that is   
always an expression of his own         
permanent mind1 of a mind that could not
 dance or dream to the music of any     
pleasure possible in this world4 ,for   
him the ideal world was not merely one  
of perpetual1 intensified pleasure1 but 
one in which all the activities of the  
mind should work like gratified senses  
and yet keep their own character1 in    

which passion should be freed from its  
bewilderment and intellect from its     
questioning4 ,that was what he tried to 
represent2 and his colour was a comment1
 half-unconscious perhaps1 upon its     
impossibility4 ,for the everlasting     
conflict between colour and form does   
itself express that impossibility4      
,whatever he might represent1 ,poussin  
could not1 for one moment1 lose his     
interest in form or subordinate it to   
colour4 ,his figures1 whatever their    
raptures1 must express his own          
intellectual mastery of them2 and it was
 impossible to combine this with a      
colour that should express their        
raptures4 ,but ,poussin1 knowing this   
impossibility1 was not content with a   
compromise4 ,he might have used a       
faintly agreeable colour that would not 
be incongruous with their raptures2 but 
he chose rather to express his own      
exasperation in a colour that was       
violently incongruous with them1 but    
which at the same time heightens his    

emphasis upon form4 ,so1 though there is
 an incongruity between the subject     
itself and the mood in which it is      
treated1 there is none in the treatment4
 ,poussin himself seems to look1 and to 
make us look1 at a mythological         
,paradise1 with the searching1 mournful 
gaze of a human spectator4 ,this glory  
is forbidden to us not merely by our    
circumstances but by the nature of our  
own minds4 ,it is1 indeed1 one of our   
own conceptions of ,heaven1 but         
inadequate like all the rest2 and       
,poussin1 by making the conception clear
 to us1 reveals its inadequacy4  ,he    
paints the subjects of the ,renaissance 
like a man remembering his own youth1   
and sad1 not because he has lost the    
pleasures of youth1 but because he      
wasted himself upon them4 ,here are     
these deities1 he seems to tell us1 but 
there must be a secret in their felicity
 that we do not understand4 ,the joy    
they seem to offer is below us1 and he  
will not pretend to have caught it from 

them in his art4 ,for that art is always
 sad1 not with a particular grief nor   
with mere low spirits1 but with the     
incongruity of the passions and the     
intellect2 and this noble sadness is    
expressed by ,poussin as no other       
painter has expressed it4 ,he was       
himself a melancholy man to whom art was
 the one happiness of life2 but he did  
not use his art to talk of his sorrows4 
,he used it to create a world of clear  
and orderly design1 and satisfied his   
intellect in the creation of it4 ,in his
 art he could exercise the composure    
which actual experience disturbed2 he   
could remake that reality so troubled by
 the conflict of sense1 emotion1 and    
understanding2 but1 even in remaking it1
 he added the comment that it was only  
his in art4 ,and that is the reason why 
his art seems so impersonal to us1 why  
there is the same cold passion in all   
his pictures1 whether religious or      
mythological4 ,in all of them he        
expresses a sharp dissatisfaction with  

the very nature of his actual           
experience4 ,a painter like ,rubens is  
entranced with his own actual vision of 
things2 but ,poussin tells us that he   
has never even seen anything as he      
wanted to see it4 ,he is not a vague    
idealist dissatisfied with reality      
because of the weakness of his own      
senses or understanding4 ,rather he     
seems to cry1 like ,poe1 of everything  
that he draws--                         
,o ,god1 can ,i not grasp               
,them with a tighter clasp8  ,it is the 
very substance and matter of things that
 he tries to master2 and that so        
intensely that he never sees them       
flushed or dimmed by any mood of his    
own4 ,nor does he allow the passions of 
his figures to affect his representation
 of them or of their surroundings4 ,he  
is cold1 himself1 towards these         
passions1 for to him they are only a    
part of the bewilderment of actual      
experience4 ,but in making forms he     
escapes from that bewilderment and shows

 us matter utterly subject to mind4 ,yet
 in this triumph there is always implied
 the sadness that such a triumph is     
impossible in life1 that the artist     
cannot be what he paints4 ,the          
,renaissance had failed1 and ,poussin's 
art was a bitterly sincere announcement 
of its failure4                         
,a ,defence of ,criticism   ,the only   
kind of critic taken seriously in       
,england is the art critic2 and he is   
taken seriously as an expert1 that is to
 say1 as one who will tell us not what  
he has found in a work of art1 but who  
produced it4 ,his very judgment is      
valued not on a matter of art at all1   
but on a matter of business4 ,no one    
wants to know whether a certain picture 
is good or bad4 ,the question is1 ,was  
it painted by ,romney8 ,it might well   
have been and yet be a very bad picture2
 but that is not the point4 ,experts are
 called to say that it is by ,romney2   
and they are proved to be wrong4        
,thereupon ,sir ,thomas ,jackson writes 

to the ,times and says that if people   
learned to think for themselves the     
profession of art critic would be at an 
end4 ,the art critic1 for him1 is one   
who tells people what to think4 ,and    
then he proceeds--       ,it is only for
 the public he writes2 he is of no use  
to      artists4 ,i doubt whether any   
man in any branch of art could be       
found who would honestly say he had ever
 learned anything from      the art     
critic1 who1 after all1 is only an      
amateur4 ,the      criticism we value1  
and that which really helps1 is that of 
our      brother artists1 often sharp   
and unsparing1 but always salutary      
and useful4 ,and if useless to the      
artist1 art criticism is      harmful to
 the public1 who take their opinion from
 it at second      hand4 ,were all art  
criticism made penal for ten years      
lovers of      art would learn to think 
for themselves1 and a truer             
appreciation of art than the commercial 
one would result1 with      the greatest

 benefit both to art and to artists4 ,it
 is the      artist and not the         
professional critic who should be the   
real      instructor of the public      
taste4  ,here there seems to be an      
inconsistency2 for if we are to think   
for ourselves we do not need to be      
instructed by artists any more than by  
critics4 ,but ,sir ,thomas ,jackson may 
mean that the artist is to instruct the 
public only through his works4 ,still1  
the question remains1 ,how is the artist
 to be recognized8 ,there is a          
riddle--,when is an artist not an       
artist8 and the answer is--,nine times  
out of ten4 ,certainly the opinions of  
artists about each other will not bring 
security to the public mind2 and does   
,sir ,t4 ,jackson really believe that   
artists always value the criticism of   
brother artists8 ,does an ,academician  
value the criticism of a ,vorticist1 or 
vice versa8 ,the ,academician1 of       
course1 would say that the ,vorticist   
was not an artist--and vice versa4 ,the 

artist values the opinion of the artist 
who agrees with him2 and at present     
there is less agreement among artists   
than among critics4 ,they condemn each  
other more than the critics condemn     
them4  ,but these are minor points4     
,what ,i am concerned with is ,sir ,t4  
,jackson's notion of the function of    
criticism4 ,for him1 as for most        
,englishmen1 the critic is one who tells
 people what to think2 and the value of 
his criticism depends upon his          
reputation2 we should pay no heed to art
 critics1 because they are not artists4 
,but the critic1 whether of art or of   
anything else2 is a writer2 and he is to
 be judged not by his reputation either 
as artist or as critic1 but by what he  
writes4 ,sir ,t4 ,jackson thinks that he
 is condemning the critic when he says  
that he writes only for the public4 ,he 
might as well think that he condemned   
the artist if he said that he worked    
only for the public4 ,of course the     
critic writes for the public1 as the    

painter paints for the public2 and he   
writes as one of the public1 not as an  
artist4 ,further1 if he is a critic1 he 
does not write to tell the public what  
to think any more than he writes to tell
 the painter how to paint4 ,just as the 
painter in his pictures expresses a     
general interest in the visible world1  
so the critic in his criticism expresses
 a general interest in art2 and his     
justification1 like that of the painter1
 consists in his power of expressing    
this interest4 ,if he cannot express it 
well1 it is useless to talk about his   
reputation either as artist or critic2  
one might as well excuse a bad picture  
of a garden by saying that the painter  
of it was a good gardener and therefore 
a good judge of gardens4  ,it is a      
misfortune that the word critic should  
be derived from a ,greek word meaning   
judge4 ,a critic certainly does arrive  
at judgments2 but the value of his      
criticism1 if it has any1 consists not  
in the judgment1 but in the process by  

which it is arrived at4 ,this fact is   
seldom understood in ,england1 either by
 the public or by artists4 ,the artist  
cares only about the judgment and       
complains that a mere amateur has no    
right to judge him4 ,he would rather be 
judged by himself2 and1 being himself an
 artist1 he must be a better judge4 ,but
 the question to be asked about the     
critic is not whether he is an amateur  
as an artist1 but whether he is an      
amateur as a critic2 and that can be    
decided only by his criticism4 ,the     
greatest artist might prove that he was 
an amateur in criticism2 and he could   
not disprove it by appealing to his art4
 ,sir ,joshua ,reynolds1 for instance1  
thinks like an amateur in some of his   
discourses2 and it is amateur thinking  
to defend him by saying that he does not
 paint like one4  ,certainly much of our
 criticism consists of mere judgments1  
and is therefore worthless as criticism4
 ,but much of our art consists also of  
mere judgments2 it tells us nothing     

except that the artist admires this or  
that1 or believes that the public       
admires it2 and it also is worthless as 
art4 ,but no critic therefore writes to 
the papers to say that1 if only the     
public would learn to feel for          
themselves1 the profession of artist    
would be at an end4 ,we know that the   
business of an artist is not to tell the
 public what to feel about the visible  
world1 or anything else1 but to express 
his own interest in the visible world or
 whatever may be the subject-matter of  
his art4 ,we do not condemn art because 
of its failures4 ,those who know        
anything at all about the nature of art 
know that it has value because it       
expresses the common interests of       
mankind better than most men can express
 them2 and for this reason it has value 
for mankind and not merely for artists4 
,for this reason1 also1 criticism has   
value for mankind and not merely for    
artists or for critics4 ,but the value  
of it does not lie in the judgment of   

the critic any more than the value of   
art lies in the judgment1 taste1        
preference of the artist4 ,the value in 
both cases lies in power of expression2 
and by that art and criticism are to be 
judged4  ,needless to say1 then1        
criticism is not to be judged by the    
help it gives to artists4 ,one might as 
well suppose that philosophy was to be  
judged by the help it gives to the      
,deity4 ,the philosopher does not tell  
the ,deity how ,he ought to have made   
the universe2 nor do we read philosophy 
for the sake of the judgments at which  
philosophers arrive4 ,we do not want to 
know ,kant's opinion because he is      
,kant2 what interests us is the process 
by which he arrives at that opinion1 and
 it is the process which convinces us   
that his opinion is right1 if we are    
convinced4 ,so it is1 or should be1 with
 criticism4 ,it ought to provoke thought
 rather than to suppress it2 and if it  
does not provoke thought it is          
worthless4  ,but in the best criticism  

judgment is rather implied than         
expressed4 ,for the proper              
subject-matter of criticism is the      
experience of works of art4 ,the best   
critic is he who has experienced a work 
of art so intensely that his criticism  
is the spontaneous expression of his    
experience4 ,he tells us what has       
happened to him1 as the artist tells us 
what has happened to him2 and we1 as we 
read1 do not judge either the criticism 
or the art criticized1 but share the    
experience4 ,the value of art lies in   
the fact that it communicates the       
experience and the experiencing power of
 one man to many4 ,when we hear a       
symphony of ,beethoven1 we are for the  
moment ,beethoven2 and we ourselves are 
enriched for ever by the fact that we   
have for the moment been ,beethoven4 ,so
 the value of the best criticism lies in
 the fact that it communicates the      
experience and the experiencing power of
 the critic to his readers and so       
enriches their experiencing power4 ,if  

he is futile1 so is the artist4 ,if we  
cannot read him without danger to our   
own independence of thought1 neither can
 we look at a picture without danger to 
our own independence of vision4 ,but    
believe in the fellowship of mankind1   
believe that one mind can pour into     
another and enrich it with its own      
treasures1 and you will know that       
neither art nor criticism is futile4    
,they stand or fall together1 and the   
artist who condemns the critic condemns 
himself also4  ,there remains the       
contention1 half implied by ,sir ,t4    
,jackson1 that the critic's experience  
of art is of no value because he is not 
an artist4 ,now if it is of no value to 
himself because he is not an artist1    
then art is of no value to anyone except
 the artist1 and the artist who         
practises the same kind of art2 music is
 of value only to musicians1 and        
painting to painters4 ,it cannot be that
 mere technical training gives a man the
 mysterious power of experiencing works 

of art2 for1 as we all know1 it does not
 make an artist4 ,no artist will admit  
that anyone through technical training  
can become a member of the sacred       
brotherhood of those who understand the 
mystery of art4 ,therefore they had all 
better admit that there is no mystery   
about it1 or1 rather1 a mystery for us  
all4 ,either art is of value to us all1 
and our own experience of it is of value
 to us2 or art has no value whatever to 
anyone1 but is the meaningless activity 
of a few oddities who would be better   
employed in agriculture4  ,but if our   
own experience of art is of value to us1
 then it is possible for us to          
communicate that experience to others so
 that it may be of value to them2 as it 
is possible for the painter to          
communicate to others his experience of 
the visible world4 ,if he denies this1  
once again he denies himself4 ,he shuts 
himself within the prison of his own    
arrogance1 from which he can escape only
 by a want of logic4 ,but1 further1 if  

our experience of art is of value to    
ourselves1 and if it is possible for us 
to communicate that experience to       
others1 it is also possible for us to   
arrive at conclusions about that        
experience which may be of value both to
 ourselves and to others4 ,hence        
scientific or philosophic criticism1    
which is based not1 as some artists seem
 to think1 upon a fraudulent pretence of
 the critic that he himself is an       
artist1 but upon that experience of art 
which is1 or may be1 common to all men4 
,the philosophic critic writes not as   
one who knows how to produce that which 
he criticizes better than he who has    
produced it1 but as one who has         
experienced art2 and his own experience 
is really the subject-matter of his     
criticism4 ,if he is a philosophic      
critic1 he will know that his experience
 is itself necessarily imperfect4 ,as   
some one has said3 ,we do not judge     
works of art2 they judge us2 and the    
critic is to be judged by the manner in 

which he has experienced art1 as the    
painter is to be judged by the manner in
 which he has experienced the visible   
world4 ,all the imperfections of his    
experience will be betrayed in his      
criticism2 where he is insensitive1     
there he will fail1 both as artist and  
as philosopher2 and of this fact he must
 be constantly aware4 ,so if he gives   
himself the airs of a judge1 if he      
relies on his own reputation to make or 
mar the reputation of a work of art1 he 
ceases to be a critic and deserves all  
that artists in their haste have said   
about him4 ,still1 it is a pity that    
artists1 in their haste1 should say     
these things2 for when they do so they1 
too1 become critics of the wrong sort1  
critics insensitive to criticism4 ,they 
may think that they are upholding the   
cause of art2 but they are upholding the
 cause of stupidity1 that common enemy  
of art and of criticism4                
,the ,artist and his ,audience          
,according to ,whistler art is not a    

social activity at all2 according to    
,tolstoy it is nothing else4 ,but art is
 clearly a social activity and something
 more2 yet no one has yet reconciled the
 truth in ,whistler's doctrine with the 
truth in ,tolstoy's4 ,each leaves out an
 essential part of the truth1 and they  
remain opposed in their mixture of error
 and truth4 ,the main point of          
,whistler's ,ten o'clock is that art is 
not a social activity4 ,listen1 he      
cries1 there never was an artistic      
period4 ,there never was an art-loving  
nation4 ,in the beginning man went forth
 each day--some to battle1 some to the  
chase2 others again to dig and to delve 
in the field--all that they might gain  
and live or lose and die4 ,until there  
was found among them one1 differing from
 the rest1 whose pursuits attracted him 
not1 and so he stayed by the tents with 
the women1 and traced strange devices   
with a burnt stick upon a gourd4 ,this  
man1 who took no joy in the ways of his 
brethren1 who cared not for conquest and

 fretted in the field1 this designer of 
quaint patterns1 this deviser of the    
beautiful1 who perceived in ,nature     
about him curious curvings1 as faces are
 seen in the fire--this dreamer apart   
was the first artist4  ,then1 he says1  
the hunters and the workers drank from  
the artists' goblets1 taking no note the
 while of the craftsman's pride1 and    
understanding not his glory in his work2
 drinking at the cup not from choice1   
not from a consciousness that it was    
beautiful1 but because1 forsooth1 there 
was none other6 ,luxury grew1 and the   
great ages of art came4 ,greece was in  
its splendour1 and art reigned          
supreme--by force of fact1 not by       
election4 ,and the people questioned    
not1 and had nothing to say in the      
matter4 ,in fact art flourished because 
mankind did not notice it4 ,but there   
arose a new class1 who discovered the   
cheap1 and foresaw fortune in the       
manufacture of the sham4 ,then1         
according to ,whistler1 a strange thing 

happened4 ,the heroes filled from the   
jugs and drank from the bowls--with     
understanding4444 ,and the people--this 
time--had much to say in the matter1 and
 all were satisfied4 ,and ,birmingham   
and ,manchester arose in their might1   
and art was relegated to the curiosity  
shop4  ,whistler does not explain why1  
if no one was aware of the existence of 
art except the artist1 those who were   
not artists began to imitate it4 ,if no 
one prized art1 why should sham art have
 come into existence8 ,according to him 
it was the sham that made men aware of  
the true2 yet the sham could not exist  
until men were aware of the true4 ,but  
the account he gives of the decadence of
 art is historically untrue as well as  
unintelligible4 ,we know little of the  
primitive artist2 but we have no proof  
that he was utterly different from other
 men1 or that they did not enjoy his    
activities4 ,if they had not enjoyed    
them they would probably have killed    
him4 ,the primitive artist survived1 no 

doubt1 because he was an artist in his  
leisure2 and all we know of more        
primitive art goes to prove that it was1
 and is1 practised not by a special     
class but by the ordinary primitive man 
in his leisure4 ,peasant art is produced
 by peasants1 not by lonely artists4    
,some1 of course1 have more gift for it 
than others1 but all enjoy it1 though   
they do not call it art4 ,whistler saw  
himself in every primitive artist2 and  
seeing himself as a dreamer apart       
misunderstood by the common herd1 he saw
 the primitive artist as one living in a
 primitive ,white ,house1 and producing 
primitive nocturnes for his own         
amusement1 unnoticed1 happily1 by       
primitive critics4  ,but his view1      
though refuted both by history and by   
common sense1 is still held by many     
artists and amateurs4 ,they themselves  
make much of art1 but do not see that   
their theory makes little of it1 makes  
it a mere caprice of the human mind1    
like the collecting of postage stamps4  

,if art has any value or importance for 
mankind1 it is because it is a social   
activity4 ,if no one but an artist can  
enjoy art1 it seems to follow that no   
art can be completely enjoyed except by 
him who has produced it2 for in relation
 to that art he alone is an artist4 ,all
 other artists1 even1 are the public2   
and1 according to ,whistler1 the public 
has nothing to do with art2 it          
flourishes best when they are not aware 
of its existence4 ,he is very           
contemptuous of taste4 ,all judgment of 
art must be based on expert knowledge1  
for art1 he says1 is based upon laws as 
rigid and defined as those of the known 
sciences4 ,yet whereas no polished      
member of society is at all affected by 
admitting himself neither engineer1     
mathematician1 nor astronomer1 and      
therefore remains willingly discreet and
 taciturn upon these subjects1 still he 
would be highly offended were he        
supposed to have no voice in what       
clearly to him is a matter of taste4 ,so

 to ,whistler art has no more to do with
 the life of the ordinary man than      
astronomy or mathematics4 ,his mention  
of engineering is an unfortunate slip1  
for1 although we are not engineers we   
all knew1 when the ,tay ,bridge broke   
down and threw hundreds of passengers   
into the water1 that it was not a good  
bridge4 ,we are all concerned with      
engineering in spite of our ignorance of
 it1 because we make use of its works4  
,whistler assumes that we make no use of
 works of art except as objects of use2 
and since pictures1 poems1 music are not
 objects of use1 we can have no concern 
with them whatever--which is absurd4    
,but here comes ,tolstoy1 who tells us  
that all works of art are merely objects
 of use and are to be judged therefore  
by the extent of their use4 ,a work of  
art that few can enjoy fails as much as 
a railway that few can travel by4 ,art1 
,tolstoy says1 is a human activity1     
consisting in this--that one man        
consciously1 by means of certain        

external signs1 hands on to others      
feelings he has lived through1 and that 
other people are infected by these      
feelings and also experience them4 ,so  
it is the essence of a work of art that 
it shall infect others with the feelings
 of the artist4 ,now certainly a work of
 art is a work of art to us only if it  
does so infect us1 but ,tolstoy is not  
content with that4 ,the individual is   
not to judge the work of art by its     
infection of himself4 ,he is to consider
 also the extent of its infection4 ,for 
a work to be esteemed good and to be    
approved of and diffused it will have to
 satisfy the demands1 not of a few      
people living in identical and often    
unnatural conditions1 but it will have  
to satisfy the demands of all those     
great masses of people who are situated 
in the natural conditions of laborious  
life4  ,the two views are utterly       
irreconcilable4 ,according to ,whistler 
the public are not to judge art at all  
because they have no concern with it1   

and it flourishes most when they do not 
pretend to have any concern with it4    
,according to ,tolstoy the individual is
 to judge it1 not by the effect it      
produces on him1 but by the effect it   
produces on others1 on all those great  
masses of people who are situated in the
 natural conditions of laborious life4  
,now1 if we find ourselves intimidated  
by one or other of these views1 if we   
seem forced to accept one of them       
against our will1 it is a relief and    
liberation from the tyranny of          
,whistler's or ,tolstoy's logic to ask  
ourselves simply what does actually     
happen to us in our own experience and  
enjoyment of a work of art4 ,the fact   
that we are able to enjoy and experience
 a work of art does liberate us at once 
from the tyranny of ,whistler2 for      
clearly1 if we can experience and enjoy 
a work of art1 we are concerned with it4
 ,it is vain for ,whistler to tell us   
that we ought not to be1 or that we do  
injury to art by our concern4 ,the fact 

of our enjoyment and experience makes   
art for us a social activity2 we know   
that our enjoyment of it is good2 we    
know also that the artist likes us to   
enjoy it2 and we do not believe that    
either the primitive artist or the      
primitive man was different from us in  
this respect4 ,there is now1 and always 
has been1 some kind of social relation  
between the artist and the public2 the  
only question is how far that relation  
is the essence of art4  ,tolstoy tells  
us that it is the essence of art1       
because the proper aim of art is to do  
good4 ,this is implied in his doctrine  
that art can be good only if it is      
intelligible to most men4 ,the assertion
 that art may be good art and at the    
same time incomprehensible to a great   
number of people1 is extremely unjust2  
and its consequences are ruinous to art 
itself4 ,the word unjust implies the    
moral factor4 ,i am not to enjoy a work 
of art if ,i know that others cannot    
enjoy it1 because it is not fair that ,i

 should have a pleasure not shared by   
them4 ,if ,i know that others cannot    
share it1 ,i am to take no account of my
 own experience1 but to condemn the     
work1 however good it may seem to me4   
,from this logic also ,i can liberate   
myself by concerning myself simply with 
my own experience4 ,again1 if ,i        
experience and enjoy a work of art1 ,i  
know that my experience of it is good2  
and1 in my judgment of the work of art1 
,i do not need to ask myself how many   
others enjoy it4 ,i may wish them to    
enjoy it and try to make them do so1 but
 that effort of mine is not aesthetic   
but moral4 ,it does not affect my       
judgment of the work of art1 but is a   
result of that judgment4 ,and1 as a     
matter of fact1 if ,i am to experience a
 work of art at all1 ,i cannot be asking
 myself how many others enjoy it4       
,judgments of art are not formed in that
 way and cannot be2 they are1 and must  
be1 always formed out of our own        
experience of art4 ,if art is to be art 

to us1 we cannot think of it in terms of
 something else4 ,there would be no     
public for art at all if we all agreed  
to judge it in terms of each other's    
enjoyment or understanding4 ,each       
individual of the great masses of people
 who are situated in the natural        
conditions of laborious life would also 
have to ask himself whether the rest of 
the masses were enjoying and            
understanding1 before he could judge2   
indeed1 he would not feel a right to    
enjoy until he knew that the rest were  
enjoying4 ,that is to say1 no individual
 would ever enjoy art at all4 ,the fact 
is that art is produced by the          
individual artist and experienced by the
 individual man4 ,tolstoy says that it  
is experienced by mankind in the mass1  
and not as individuals2 ,whistler that  
it is not experienced at all1 either by 
the mass or by the individual4 ,each is 
a heretic with some truth in his heresy2
 what is the true doctrine8  ,it is     
clear that every artist desires an      

audience1 not merely so that he may win 
pudding and praise from them1 nor so    
that he may do them good2 none of these 
aims will make him an artist2 he can    
accomplish all of them without          
attempting to produce a work of art4 ,it
 is also clear that his artistic success
 is not his success in winning an       
audience4 ,those great masses of people 
who are situated in the natural         
conditions of laborious life are a      
figment of ,tolstoy's mind4 ,no         
conditions are natural in the sense in  
which he uses the word2 nor do any      
existing conditions make one man a      
better judge of art than another4 ,there
 is no multitude of simple1 normal1     
unspoilt men able and willing to enjoy  
any real art that is presented to them4 
,the right experience of art comes with 
effort1 like right thought and right    
action2 and no ,russian peasant has it  
because he works in the fields4 ,nor1 on
 the other hand1 are there any artists  
who are mere sports occupied with a     

queer game of their own self-expression 
which no one else can enjoy4 ,there is a
 necessary relation between the work of 
art and its audience1 even if no actual 
audience for it exists2 and the fact    
that this relation must be1 even when   
there is no audience in existence1 is   
the paradox and problem of art4 ,a work 
of art claims an audience1 entreats it1 
is indeed made for it2 but must have it 
on its own terms4 ,men are artists      
because they are men1 because they have 
a faculty1 at its height1 which is      
shared by all men4 ,in that ,croce is   
right2 and his doctrine that all men are
 artists in some degree1 and that the   
very experience of art is itself an     
aesthetic activity1 contains a truth of 
great value4 ,but his aesthetic ignores1
 or seems to ignore1 the fact that art  
is not merely1 as he calls it1          
expression1 but is also a means of      
address2 in fact1 that we do not express
 ourselves except when we address       
ourselves to others1 even though we     

speak to no particular1 or even         
existing1 audience4 ,yet this fact is   
obvious2 for all art gets its very form 
from the fact that it is a method of    
address4 ,a story is a story because it 
is told1 and told to some one not the   
teller4 ,a picture is a picture because 
it is painted to be seen4 ,it has all   
its artistic qualities because it is    
addressed to the eye4 ,and music is     
music1 and has the form which makes it  
music1 because it is addressed to the   
ear4 ,without this intention of address 
there could be no form in art and no    
distinction between art and             
day-dreaming4 ,day-dreaming is not      
expression1 is not art1 because it is   
addressed to no one but is a purposeless
 activity of the mind4 ,it becomes art  
only when there is the purpose of       
address in it4 ,that purpose will give  
it form and turn it from day-dreaming   
into art4 ,even in an object of use     
which is also a work of art1 the art is 
the effort of the maker to emphasize1   

that is1 to point out1 the beauty of    
that which he has made4 ,it is this     
emphasis that turns building into       
architecture2 and it implies that the   
building is made not merely for the     
builder's or for anyone else's use1 but 
that its aim also is to address an      
audience1 to speak to the eye as a      
picture speaks to it4 ,art is made for  
men as surely as boots are made for     
them4  ,but not as ,tolstoy thinks1 for 
any particular class of men or even for 
the whole mass of existing mankind4 ,the
 artist will not and cannot judge his   
work by its effects on any actual men1  
any more than we can or will judge it by
 its effects on anyone except ourselves4
 ,as we1 in our experience of it1 must  
be completely individual2 so must he in 
his production of it4 ,he is not a      
public servant1 but a man speaking for  
himself1 and with no thought of effects1
 to anyone who will hear4 ,his audience 
consists only of those who will hear1 of
 those individuals who can understand   

his individual expression which is also 
communication4 ,in his art he seeks the 
individual who will hear4 ,he has       
something to say2 but he can say it only
 to others1 not to himself2 it is what  
it is because he says it to others4 ,yet
 he says it also for its own sake and   
not for theirs4 ,the particular likes   
and dislikes1 stupidities1 limitations1 
demands1 of individual men or classes   
are nothing to him4 ,the condition of   
his art is this alone1 that he does     
address it to an audience4 ,so the      
relation between the artist and his     
audience is the most important fact of  
his art1 even if he has no actual       
audience4 ,it is his attitude towards   
the audience that makes him do his best 
or his worst1 makes him a good artist or
 a bad one1 that sets him free to       
express all he has to say or hampers him
 with inhibitions4 ,his business is not 
to find an audience1 but to find the    
right attitude towards one1 the attitude
 which is that of the artist and not of 

the tradesman1 or peacock1 or           
philanthropist4 ,and it is plain that in
 his effort to find this right attitude 
he may be helped or hindered much by his
 actual fellow-men4 ,the artist is also 
a man and subject to all the temptations
 of men4 ,whistler1 when he said that   
art happens1 ignored this fact1 ignored 
the whole social relation of mankind and
 the whole history of the arts2 while   
,tolstoy ignored no less the mind of the
 artist1 and the minds of all those who 
do actually experience art4 ,to         
,whistler the artist is a ,chimaera     
bombinans in vacuo2 to ,tolstoy he is a 
philanthropist4 ,for ,whistler the      
public has no function whatever in      
relation to art2 for ,tolstoy the artist
 himself has no function whatever except
 a moral one4 ,in fact he denies the    
existence of the artist1 as ,whistler   
denies the existence of the public4     
,whistler's truth is that the public    
must not tell the artist what he is to  
do2 ,tolstoy's1 that a public with a    

right relation to the artist will help  
the artist to have a right relation to  
the public4  ,artists are not sports1   
but men2 and men engaged in one of the  
most difficult of human activities4     
,they are subject to aesthetic          
temptation and sin1 as all men are      
subject to temptation and sin of all    
kinds4 ,their public may tempt them to  
think more of themselves than of what   
they have to express1 either by perverse
 admiration or by ignorant contempt4 ,an
 actual audience may be an obstruction  
between them and the ideal audience to  
which every artist should address       
himself4 ,every artist must desire that 
his ideal audience should exist1 and may
 mistake an actual audience for it4 ,in 
the ideal relation between an artist and
 his audience1 it is the universal in   
him that speaks to the universal in     
them1 and yet this universal finds an   
intensely personal expression4 ,art1    
which is personal expression1 tells1 not
 of what the artist wants1 but of what  

he values4 ,but if his ego is provoked  
by the ego in a particular audience1    
then he begins to tell of what he wants 
or of what they want4 ,the audience may 
demand of him that he shall please them 
by indulging their particular vanities1 
appetites1 sentimental desires1 that he 
shall present life to them as they wish 
it to be2 and if he yields to that      
demand it is because of the demands of  
his own particular ego4 ,there is a     
transaction between him and that        
audience1 in its essence commercial4    
,his art is the particular supplying    
some kind of goods to the particular1   
not the universal pouring itself out to 
the universal4  ,the function of the    
audience is not to demand but to        
receive4 ,it should not allow its own   
expectations to hinder its              
receptiveness2 to that extent ,whistler 
is right4 ,art happens as the beauty of 
the universe happens2 and it is the     
business of the audience to experience  
it1 not to dictate how it shall happen4 

,it has been said3 ,it is not we who    
judge works of art2 they judge us4 ,the 
artist speaks and we listen2 but still  
he speaks to us and by listening wisely 
we help him to speak his best1 for man  
is a social being2 and all life1 in so  
far as it is what it wishes to be1 is a 
fellowship4 ,never is it so completely a
 fellowship as in the relation between  
an artist and his audience4 ,there      
,tolstoy is right1 but the fellowship   
has to be achieved by both the artist   
and the audience4 ,there is no body of  
simple peasants1 any more than there are
 rich or cultured people1 to whom he    
must address himself or whose demands he
 must satisfy4 ,art that tries to       
satisfy any particular demand is of use 
neither to the flesh nor to the spirit4 
,it is neither meat nor music4 ,but     
where all is well with it1 the spirit in
 the artist speaks to the spirit in his 
audience4 ,there is a common quality in 
both1 with which he speaks and they     
listen2 and where this common quality is

 found art thrives4                     
,wilfulness and ,wisdom   ,there are    
people to whom the war was merely the   
running amuck of a criminal lunatic2 and
 they get what pleasure they can from   
calling that lunatic all the names they 
can think of4 ,to them the ,germans are 
different in kind from all other        
peoples1 utterly separated from the rest
 of us by their crimes4 ,we could learn 
nothing from them except how to crush   
them2 and1 having done so1 we shall need
 to learn nothing except how to keep    
them down4 ,but such minds never learn  
anything from experience1 because they  
believe that there is nothing to be     
learnt4 ,they consume all their mental  
energy in anger and the expression of   
it2 and in doing so they grow more and  
more like those with whom they are      
angry4 ,wisdom always goes contrary to  
what our passions tell us1 especially   
when they take the form of righteous    
indignation4 ,the creative power of the 
mind begins with refusal of all those   

tempting fierce delights which the      
passions offer to it4 ,wisdom must be   
cold before it can become warm2 it must 
suppress the comforting heat of the     
flesh before it can kindle with the pure
 fire of the spirit4 ,above all1 when we
 say that we are not as other men1 as   
the ,germans1 for instance1 it must     
insist that we are1 and that we shall   
avoid the ,german crime only by         
recognizing our likeness to those who   
have committed it4  ,the ,germans have  
committed the great crime2 but they have
 been born and nurtured in an atmosphere
 which made that crime possible2 and we 
live in the same atmosphere4 ,their     
error1 though they carried it to an     
extreme in theory and in practice with  
the native extravagance of their race1  
is the error of the whole ,western      
world2 and we shall not understand what 
it is unless we are aware of it in      
ourselves as well as in them4 ,for it is
 a world-error and one against which men
 have been warned for ages2 but in their

 pride they will not listen to the      
warning4 ,many of the old warnings1 in  
the ,gospels and elsewhere1 sound like  
platitudes to us2 we expect the         
clergyman to repeat them in church2 but 
we should never think of applying them  
to this great1 successful1 progressive  
,western world of ours4 ,if we are not  
happy2 if we do not even see the way to 
happiness2 if all our power merely helps
 us to destroy each other1 or to make   
the rich more vulgarly rich and the poor
 more squalidly poor2 if the great      
energy of ,germany has hurried her to   
her own ruin2 still we do not ask       
whether we may not have made some       
fundamental mistake about our own nature
 and the nature of the universe1 and    
whether ,germany has not merely made it 
more systematically and more            
philosophically than the rest of us4    
,but the ,german1 because he is         
systematic and philosophical1 may reveal
 to us what that error is in us as well 
as in himself4 ,we do not state it as if

 it were a splendid truth2 we merely act
 upon it4 ,he stated it for us with such
 histrionic and towering absurdity that 
we can laugh at his statement of it2 but
 we must not laugh at him without       
learning to laugh at ourselves4 ,all    
this talk about the iron will1 about set
 teeth and ruthlessness1 what does it   
mean except that the ,german chose to   
glorify openly and to carry to a logical
 extreme the peculiar error of the whole
 ,western world--the belief that the    
highest function of man is to work his  
will upon people and things outside him1
 that he can change the world without   
changing himself8  ,the ,christian      
doctrine1 preached so long in vain and  
now almost forgotten1 is the opposite of
 this4 ,it insists that man is by nature
 a passive1 an experiencing creature1   
and that he can do nothing well in      
action unless he has first learned a    
right passivity4 ,only by that passivity
 can he enrich himself2 and when he has 
enriched himself he will act rightly4   

,man has a will2 but he must apply it at
 the right point1 or it will seem to him
 merely a blind impulse4 ,he must apply 
it to the manner in which he experiences
 things2 he must free himself from his  
will to live or his will to power1 and  
see all men and things not as they are  
of material use to him1 but with the    
object of loving whatever there is of   
beauty or virtue in them4 ,his will1 in 
fact1 must be the will to love1 which is
 the will to experience in a certain    
way2 and out of that will to love right 
action will naturally ensue4 ,is this a 
platitude8 ,if it is1 it is flatly      
contradicted by the ,german doctrine of 
wilfulness4 ,for the ,germanic hero     
exercises his will always upon other men
 and things1 not upon himself2 and we   
all admire this ,germanic hero1 when he 
is not an obvious danger to us all1 and 
when he is not made ridiculous by the   
,german presentment of him4 ,we all     
believe that the will is to be exercised
 first of all in action1 that it is the 

function of the great man to change the 
world1 not to change himself4 ,to us the
 great man is one who does work a change
 upon the world1 no matter what that    
change may be4 ,he may change it only as
 an explosion changes things1 and at the
 end he may be left among the ruins he  
has made2 but still we admire him4 ,we  
compare him to the forces of nature1 we 
say that there is something elemental in
 him1 even though he has been merely an 
elemental nuisance4 ,we value force in  
itself1 and do not ask what it can find 
to value in itself when it has exhausted
 itself upon the world4 ,but out of this
 worship of wilfulness there comes1     
sooner or later1 a profound scepticism  
and discouragement4 ,for while these    
wilful heroes do produce some violent   
effect1 it is not the effect they aimed 
at4 ,something happens2 something has   
happened to ,germany as the result of   
,bismarck's wilfulness2 but it is not   
what he willed4 ,the wilful hero is a   
cause in that he acts2 but the effect is

 not what he designed1 and so he seems  
to himself1 and to the world1 only a    
link in an unending chain of cause and  
effect2 and as for his sense of will1 it
 is nothing but the illusion that he is 
all cause and not at all effect4  ,quem 
,deus vult perdere dementat prius4 ,that
 old tag puts a truth wrongly4 ,god does
 not interfere to afflict the wilful man
 with madness1 but he has never thrown  
himself open to the wisdom of ,god4 ,his
 mind is like a machine that acts with  
increasing speed and fury because there 
is less and less material for it to act 
upon4 ,one act leads to another in a    
blind chain of cause and effect2 he does
 this merely because he has done that1  
and seems to be driven by fate on and on
 to his own ruin4 ,so it was with       
,napoleon in his later years4 ,he had   
lost the sense of any reality whatever  
except his own action2 he saw the world 
as a passive object to be acted upon by 
himself4 ,and that is how the ,germans  
saw it two years ago4 ,they could not   

understand that it was possible for the 
world to react against them4 ,it was    
merely something that they were going to
 remake1 to work their will upon4 ,the  
war1 at its beginning1 was not to them a
 conflict between human beings2 it was a
 process by which they would make of    
things what they willed4 ,there was no  
reality except in themselves and their  
own will2 for1 in their worship of      
action1 they had lost the sense of      
external reality1 they had come to      
believe that there was nothing to learn 
from it except what a craftsman learns  
from his material by working in it4 ,it 
is by making that he learns2 and they   
thought that there was no learning      
except by making4  ,but that is the     
mistake of the whole ,western world1    
though we have none of us carried it so 
far as ,germany4 ,other men are to us   
still men1 they still have some reality 
to us2 but we see external reality as a 
material for us to work in2 we are to   
ourselves entirely active and not at all

 passive beings4 ,even among all the    
evil and sorrow of the war we still took
 a pride in the enormous power of our   
instruments of destruction1 as if we    
were children playing with big1         
dangerous toys4 ,but these toys are     
themselves the product of a society that
 must always be making and never        
thinking or feeling4 ,they express the  
will for action that has ousted the will
 to experience2 and all the changes     
which we work on the face of the earth  
express that will too4 ,we could not    
live in the cities we have made for     
ourselves if we thought that we had     
anything to learn from the beauty of the
 earth4 ,they are for us merely places  
in which we learn to act1 in which no   
one could learn to think or feel4       
,passive experience is impossible in    
them and they do not consider the       
possibility of it4 ,so they express in  
every building1 in every object1 in the 
very clothes of their inhabitants1 an   
utter poverty of passive experience4 ,in

 what we make we give out no stored     
riches of the mind2 we make only so that
 we may act1 never so that we may       
express ourselves2 and we have little   
art because our making is entirely      
wilful4 ,our attempts at art are        
themselves entirely wilful4 ,we will    
have art1 we say2 and so we plaster our 
utilities with the ornaments of the     
past1 as if we could get the richness of
 experience secondhand from our         
ancestors4 ,and in the same way we are  
always finding for our blind activities 
moral motives1 those motives which are  
real only when they spring out of right 
experience4 ,we rationalize all that we 
do1 but the rationalizing is secondhand 
ornament to blind impulse2 it is an     
attempt to persuade ourselves that our  
actions spring out of the experience    
which we lack4 ,there is among us an    
incessant activity both of thought and  
of art2 but much of it is entirely      
wilful4 ,the thinker makes theories to  
justify what is done2 he1 too1 sees all 

life in terms of action1 he is the      
parasite of action4 ,for a ,german      
professor the whole process of history  
was but a prelude to the wilfulness of  
,germany2 he could not experience the   
past except in terms of what ,germany   
willed to do2 and the aim of his        
theorizing was to remove all scrupulous 
impediments to the action of ,germany   
which she may have inherited from the   
past4 ,think so that you may be stronger
 to do what you wish to do2 that is the 
modern notion of thought1 and that is   
the reason why we throw up theories so  
easily2 for thinking of this kind needs 
no experience1 it needs merely an       
activity of the mind1 the activity which
 collects facts and does with them what 
it will4 ,and these theories are eagerly
 accepted so long as the impulse lasts  
which they justify4 ,when that is spent 
they are forgotten1 and new theories    
take their place to justify fresh       
impulses4 ,and so it is with the        
incessant new movements in art4 ,art now

 is conceived entirely as action4 ,the  
artist is as wilful as the ,germanic    
hero2 the will to make excludes in him  
the will to experience4 ,the painter    
cannot look at the visible world without
 considering at once what kind of       
picture he will make of it4 ,it is to   
him mere passive material for his       
artistic will1 not an independent       
reality to enrich his mind so that it   
will give out its riches in the form of 
art4 ,and as he is always willing to    
make pictures so he must will the kind  
of pictures he will make1 as the        
,germans willed the kind of world they  
would make4 ,but this willing of his is 
a kind of theorizing to justify his own 
action2 and it changes incessantly      
because he never can be satisfied with  
his own poverty of experience4 ,but     
still he will do anything rather than   
try to enrich that poverty4  ,and that  
is the secret of all our restlessness1  
the restlessness that forced the        
,germans into the folly and crime of    

war4 ,we are always dissatisfied with   
our poverty of experience2 and we try to
 get rid of our dissatisfaction in more 
blind activity1 throwing up new theories
 all the while as reasons why we should 
act4 ,we fidget about the earth as if we
 were children1 that could not read1    
left in a library2 and1 like them1 we do
 mischief4 ,and that is just what we    
are3 children that have not learnt to   
read let loose upon the library of the  
universe2 and all that we can do is to  
pull the books about and play games with
 them and scribble on their pages4      
,everywhere the earth is defaced with   
our meaningless scribbling1 and we tell 
ourselves that it means something       
because we want to scribble4 ,or        
sometimes we tell ourselves that there  
is no meaning in anything1 no more in   
the books than in our scribble4  ,the   
only remedy is that we should learn to  
read2 and for this we need above all    
things humility2 not merely the personal
 humility of a man who knows that other 

men excel him1 but a generic humility   
which acknowledges in the universe a    
greater wisdom1 power1 righteousness    
than his own4 ,that is formally         
acknowledged by our religion1 but it is 
not practically acknowledged in our way 
of life1 in our conduct or our thought4 
,we think and feel and behave as if we  
were the best and wisest creatures in   
the universe1 as if it existed only for 
us to make use of it2 and in so far as  
we learn from it at all1 we learn only  
to make use of it4 ,that is our idea of 
knowledge and wisdom2 more and more it  
is our idea of science2 and as for      
philosophy1 we pay no heed to it        
because1 in its nature1 it is not       
concerned with making use of things4 ,in
 every way we betray the fact that we   
cannot listen humbly1 because we do not 
believe there is anything to listen to4 
,for a few of the devout ,god spoke long
 ago1 but ,he is not speaking now4 ,the 
kings of modern thought are dumb1 said  
,matthew ,arnold2 but that is because   

everything outside the mind of man is   
dumb2 all must be dumb to those who will
 not listen4 ,if we assume that there1  
is no intelligence anywhere but in      
ourselves1 we shall find none anywhere  
else4 ,there will be no meaning for us  
in anything but our own actions2 and    
they will become more and more          
meaningless to us as they become more   
and more wilful1 until at last we shall 
be to ourselves like squirrels in a     
cage1 or prisoners on a universal       
treadmill4 ,years ago the war must have 
seemed a meaningless treadmill to the   
,germans1 but they cannot escape from   
its consequences2 they have done and    
they must suffer4 ,but will they learn  
from their sufferings1 shall we all     
learn1 that doing is not everything8    
,are we humbled enough to listen to the 
wisdom of the ages1 which tells us that 
we can be wise only if we listen for a  
wisdom that is not ours8                
,the ,magic ,flute   ,when ,the ,magic  
,flute was produced by the already dying

 ,mozart it had little success4 ,at the 
first performance1 it is said1 when the 
applause was faint1 the leader of the   
orchestra stole up to ,mozart1 who was  
conducting1 and kissed his hand2 and    
,mozart stroked him on the head4 ,we may
 guess that the leader knew what the    
music meant and that ,mozart knew that  
he knew4 ,neither could put it into     
words and it is not put into words in   
the libretto4 ,but the libretto need not
 be an obstruction to the meaning of the
 music if only the audience will not ask
 themselves what the libretto means4    
,after ,mozart's death the opera was    
successful1 no doubt because the        
audience had given up asking what the   
libretto meant and had learnt something 
of the meaning of the music4  ,there are
 worse librettos--librettos which have  
some clear unmusical meaning of their   
own beyond which the audience cannot    
penetrate to the meaning of the music1  
if it has any4 ,this libretto1 apart    
from the music1 is so nearly            

meaningless1 it has so little coherence1
 that one can easily pass through it to 
the music4 ,the author1 ,schickaneder1  
was ,mozart's friend1 and he had wit    
enough to understand the mood of        
,mozart4 ,that mood does express itself 
in the plot and the incidents of the    
libretto1 although in them it is empty  
of value or passion4 ,schickaneder1 in  
fact1 constructed a mere diagram to     
which ,mozart gave life4 ,the life is   
all in the music1 but the diagram has   
its use1 in that it supplies a shape1   
which we recognize1 to the life of the  
music4 ,the characters live in the      
music1 but in the words they tell us    
something about themselves which enables
 us to understand their musical speech  
better4 ,papageno tells us that he is a 
bird-catcher and a child of nature4 ,the
 words are labels1 but through them we  
pass more quickly to an understanding of
 his song4 ,only we shall miss that     
understanding if we try to reach it     
through the words1 if we look for the   

story of the opera in them4 ,in the     
words the events of the opera have no   
connexion with each other4 ,there is no 
reason why one should follow another4   
,the logic of it is all in the music1   
for the music creates a world in which  
events happen naturally1 in which one   
tune springs out of another1 or         
conflicts with it1 like the forces of   
nature or the thoughts and actions of   
man4 ,this world is the universe as     
,mozart sees it2 and the whole opera is 
an expression of his peculiar faith4 ,it
 is therefore a religious work1 though  
free from that meaningless and timid    
solemnity which we associate with       
religion4 ,mozart1 in this world1 was   
like an angel who could not but laugh1  
though without any malice1 at all the   
bitter earnestness of mankind4 ,even the
 wicked were only absurd to him2 they   
were naughty children whom1 if one had  
the spell1 one could enchant into       
goodness4 ,and in ,the ,magic ,flute the
 spell works4 ,it works in the flute    

itself and in ,papageno's lyre when the 
wicked negro ,monostatos threatens him  
and ,tamino with his ugly attendants4   
,papageno has only to play a beautiful  
childish tune on his lyre and the       
attendants all march backwards to an    
absurd goose-step in time with it4 ,they
 are played off the stage2 and the music
 convinces one that they must yield to  
it4 ,so1 we feel if we had had the      
music1 we could have made the ,prussians
 march their goose-step back to         
,potsdam2 so we could play all solemn   
perversity off the stage of life4 ,if we
 had the music--but there is solemn     
perversity in us too2 by reason of which
 we can hardly listen to the music1 much
 less play it1 hardly listen to it or   
understand it even when ,mozart makes it
 for us4 ,for he had the secret of it2  
he was a philosopher who spoke in music 
and so simply that the world missed his 
wisdom and thought that he was just a   
beggar playing tunes in the street4 ,a  
generation ago he was commonly said to  

be too tuney1 as you might say that a   
flower was too flowery4 ,people would no
 more consider him than they would      
consider the lilies of the field4 ,they 
preferred ,wagner in all his glory4     
,even now you can enjoy ,the ,magic     
,flute as a more than usually absurd    
musical comedy with easy1 old-fashioned 
tunes4 ,you can enjoy it anyway1 if you 
are not solemn about it1 as you can     
enjoy ,hamlet for a bloody melodrama4   
,but1 like ,hamlet1 it has depths and   
depths of meaning beyond our full       
comprehension4 ,papageno is a pantomime 
figure1 but he is also one of the       
greatest figures in the drama of the    
world4 ,he is everyman1 like ,hamlet1 if
 only we had the wit to recognize       
ourselves in him4 ,or rather he is that 
element in us which we all like and     
despise in others1 but which we will    
never for one moment confess to in      
ourselves--the coward1 the boaster1 the 
liar1 but the child of nature4 ,he1     
because he knows himself for all of     

these1 can find his home in ,sarostro's 
paradise4 ,he does not want ,sarostro's 
high wisdom2 what he does want is a     
,papagena1 an ,eve1 a child of nature   
like himself2 and she is given to him4  
,he has the wit to recognize his mate1  
almost a bird like himself1 and to them 
,mozart gives their bird-duet1 so that1 
when they sing it1 we feel that we might
 all sing it together4 ,it is not above 
our capacity of understanding or        
delight4 ,the angel has learnt our      
earthly tongue1 but transformed it so   
that he makes a heaven of the earth1 a  
heaven that is not too high or difficult
 for us1 a wild-wood heaven1            
half-absurd1 in which we can laugh as   
well as sing1 and in which the angels   
will laugh at us and with us1 laugh our 
silly sorrows into joy4  ,there is      
,mozart himself in ,papageno1 the faun  
domesticated and sweetened by centuries 
of ,christian experience1 yet still a   
faun and always ready to play a trick on
 human solemnity2 and in this paradise  

which ,mozart makes for us the faun has 
his place and a beauty not incongruous  
with it1 like the imps and gargoyles of 
a ,gothic church4 ,at any moment the    
music will turn from sublimity into fun1
 and in a moment it can turn back to    
sublimity2 and always the change seems  
natural4 ,it is like a great cathedral  
with ,high ,mass and children playing   
hide-and-seek behind the pillars2 and   
the ,mass would not be itself without   
the children4 ,that is the mind of      
,mozart which people have called        
frivolous1 just because in his heaven   
there is room for everything except the 
vulgar glory of ,solomon and cruelty and
 stupidity and ugliness4 ,there never   
was anything in art more profound or    
beautiful than ,sarostro's initiation   
music1 but it is not1 like the          
solemnities of the half-serious1        
incongruous with the twitterings of     
,papageno4 ,mozart's religion is so real
 that it seems to be not religion1 but  
merely beauty1 as real saints seem to be

 not good1 but merely charming4 ,and    
there are people to whom his beauty does
 not seem to be art1 because it is just 
beauty2 they think that he had the trick
 of it and could turn it on as he chose2
 they prefer the creaking of effort and 
egotism4 ,his gifts are so purely gifts 
and so lavish that they seem to be      
cheap2 and ,the ,magic ,flute is an     
absurdity which he wrote in a hurry to  
please the crowd4  ,we can hardly expect
 to see a satisfying performance of it  
on the stage of to-day1 but we must be  
grateful for any performance1 for the   
life of the music is in it4 ,one can see
 from it what ,the ,magic ,flute might  
be4 ,the music is so sung1 so played    
that it does transfigure the peculiar   
theatrical hideousness of our time4     
,tamino and ,panina may look like       
figures out of an ,academy picture1 as  
heroes and heroines of opera always do4 
,they may wear clothes that belong to no
 world of reality or art1 clothes that  
suggest the posed and dressed-up model4 

,but the music mitigates even these1 and
 it helps every one to act1 or rather to
 forget what they have learnt about     
acting4 ,it evidently brings happiness  
and concord to those who sing it1 so    
that they seem to be taking part in a   
religious act rather than in an act of  
the theatre4 ,one feels this most in the
 concerted music1 when the same wind    
from paradise seems to be blowing       
through all the singers and they move to
 it like flowers1 in spite of their     
absurd clothes4  ,but what is needed for
 a satisfying performance is a world    
congruous to the eye as well as to the  
ear2 and for this we need a break with  
all our theatrical conventions4         
,sarostro1 for instance1 lives among    
,egyptian scenery--very likely the      
architecture of his temple was ,egyptian
 at the first performance--but1 for all 
that1 this ,egyptian world does not suit
 the music1 and to us it suggests the   
miracles of the ,egyptian ,hall4 ,but   
there is one world which would perfectly

 suit the music1 a world in which it    
could pass naturally from absurdity to  
beauty1 and in which all the figures    
could be harmonious and yet distinct1   
and that is the ,chinese world as we    
know it in ,chinese art4 ,for in that   
there is something fantastic yet        
spiritual1 something comic but          
beautiful1 a mixture of the childish and
 the sacred1 which might say to the eye 
what ,mozart's music says to the ear4   
,only in ,chinese art could ,papageno be
 a saint2 only in that world1 which     
ranges from the willow-pattern plate to 
the ,rishi in his mystical ecstasy in   
the wilderness1 could the soul of       
,mozart1 with its laughter and its      
wisdom1 be at home4 ,that too is the    
world in which flowers and all animals  
are of equal import with mankind2 it is 
the world of dragons in which the       
serpent of the first act would not seem 
to be made of pasteboard1 and in which  
all the magic would not seem to be mere 
conjuring4 ,in that world one might have

 beautiful landscapes and beautiful     
figures to suit them4 ,there ,sarostro  
would not be a stage magician1 but a    
priest2 from ,papageno and the lovers to
 him would be only the change from ,ming
 to ,sung1 which would seem no change at
 all4 ,chinese art1 in fact1 is the     
world of the magic flute1 the world     
where silver bells hang on every        
flowering tree and the thickets are full
 of enchanted nightingales4 ,it is the  
world of imps and monsters1 and yet of  
impassioned contemplation1 where the    
sage sits in a moonlit pavilion and     
smiles like a lover1 and where the      
lovers smile like sages2 where          
everything is to the eye what the music 
of ,mozart is to the ear4  ,in the      
,chinese world we could be rid of all   
the drawling erotics of the modern      
theatre1 we could give up the orchid for
 the lotus and the heavy egotism of     
,europe for the self-forgetful gaiety of
 the ,east4 ,it may be only an ideal    
world1 empty of the horrors of reality1 

but it is one which the art of ,china   
makes real to us and with which we are  
familiar in that art2 and there is a    
smiling wisdom in it1 there is a gaiety 
which comes from conquest rather than   
refusal of reality1 just like the gaiety
 and wisdom of ,mozart's music4 ,he knew
 sorrow well1 but would not luxuriate in
 it2 he took the beauty of the universe 
more seriously than himself4 ,to him    
wickedness was a matter of imps and     
monsters rather than of villains1 and of
 imps and monsters that could be        
exorcized by music4 ,he was the ,orpheus
 of the world who might tame the beast  
in all of us if we would listen to him1 
the wandering minstrel whom the world   
left to play out in the street4 ,and yet
 his ultimate seriousness and the last  
secret of his beauty is pity1 not for   
himself and his own little troubles1 but
 for the whole bitter earnestness of    
mortal children4 ,and in this pity he   
seems not to weep for us1 still less for
 himself1 but to tell us to dry our     

tears and be good1 and listen to his    
magic flute4 ,that is what he would have
 told the ,prussians1 after he had set  
them marching the goose-step backwards4 
,even they would not be the villains of 
a tragedy for him1 but only beasts to be
 tamed with his music until they should 
be fit to sing their own bass part in   
the last chorus of reconciliation4 ,and 
this pity of his sounds all through ,the
 ,magic ,flute and gives to its beauty a
 thrill and a wonder far beyond what any
 fleshly passion can give4 ,sarostro is 
a priest1 not a magician1 because there 
is in him the lovely wisdom of pity1    
because he has a place in his paradise  
for ,papageno1 the child of nature1     
where he shall be made happy with his   
mate ,papagena4 ,there is a moment when 
,papageno is about to hang himself      
because there is no one to love him2 he 
will hang himself in ,sarostro's lonely 
paradise4 ,but there is a sly laughter  
in the music which tells us that he will
 be interrupted with the rope round his 

neck4 ,and so he is1 and ,papagena is   
given to him1 and the paradise is no    
longer lonely2 and the two sing their   
part in the chorus of reconciliation at 
the end4 ,and we are sure that the      
,queen of ,night1 and the ugly negro and
 all his goose-stepping attendants1 are 
not punished4 ,they have been naughty   
for no reason that anyone can discover1 
just like ,prussians and other human    
beings2 and now the magic flute triumphs
 over their naughtiness1 and the silver 
bells ring from every tree and the      
enchanted nightingales sing in all the  
thickets1 and the sages and the lovers  
smile like children2 and the laughter   
passes naturally into the divine beauty 
of ,mozart's religion1 which is solemn  
because laughter and pity are reconciled
 in it1 not rejected as profane4        
,process or ,person8   ,nearly all war  
pictures in the past have been merely   
pictures that happened to represent war4
 ,paolo ,uccello's battle scenes are but
 pretexts for his peculiar version of   

the visible world4 ,they might as well  
be still life for all the effect the    
subject has had upon his treatment of   
it4 ,leonardo1 in his lost battle       
picture1 was no doubt dramatic1 and     
expressed in it his infinite curiosity2 
he has left notes about the manner in   
which fighting men and horses ought to  
be represented1 but he had this detached
 curiosity about all things4            
,michelangelo's battle picture1 also    
lost1 expressed his interest in the nude
 in violent action1 like his picture of 
the ,last ,judgment4 ,titian's ,battle  
of ,cadore1 which we know from the copy 
of a fragment of it1 was a landscape    
with figures in violent action4         
,tintoret's battle scenes are parade    
pictures4 ,those of ,rubens are like his
 hunting scenes or his ,bacchanals1     
expressions of his own overweening      
energy4 ,in none of these1 except       
perhaps in ,leonardo's1 was there       
implied any criticism of war1 or any    
sense that it is an abnormal activity of

 man4 ,the men who take part in it are  
just men fighting2 they are not men seen
 differently because they are fighting1 
or in any way robbed of their humanity  
because of their inhuman business4 ,as  
for ,meissonier1 he paints a battle     
scene just as if he were a second-rate  
,dutchman painting a genre picture2 and 
most other modern military painters make
 merely a patriotic appeal4 ,war to them
 also is a normal occupation2 and they  
paint battle pictures as they might     
paint sporting pictures1 because there  
is a public that likes them4  ,in ,mr4  
,nevinson's war pictures there is       
expressed a modern sense of war as an   
abnormal occupation2 and this sense     
shows itself in the very method of the  
artist4 ,he was something of a ,cubist  
before the war2 but in these pictures he
 has found a new reason for being one2  
for his cubist method does express1 in  
the most direct way1 his sense that in  
war man behaves like a machine or part  
of a machine1 that war is a process in  

which man is not treated as a human     
being but as an item in a great         
instrument of destruction1 in which he  
ceases to be a person and is lost in a  
process4 ,the cubist method1 with its   
repetition and sharp distinction of     
planes1 expresses this sense of         
mechanical process better than any other
 way of representation4 ,perhaps it came
 into being to express the modern sense 
of process as the ultimate reality of   
all things1 even of life and growth4    
,this is the age of mechanism2 and      
machines have affected even our view of 
the universe2 we are overawed by our own
 knowledge and inventions4 ,samuel      
,butler imagined a future in which      
machines would come to life and make us 
their slaves2 but it is not so much that
 machines have come to life as that we  
ourselves have lost the pride and       
sweetness of our humanity2 not that the 
machines seem more and more like us1 but
 that we seem more and more like the    
machines4 ,everywhere we see processes  

to which we are subject and of which our
 humanity is the result1 though in the  
past we have harboured the delusion that
 our humanity was in some way           
independent of processes4 ,now that     
delusion is fading away from us2 and it 
fades away most of all in war1 where all
 humanity is evidently dominated by the 
struggle for life1 and is but a part of 
it1 as raindrops are part of a storm4   
,it is this sense of tyrannous process  
that ,mr4 ,nevinson expresses in his    
battle pictures1 with1 we suspect1 a    
bitter feeling of resentment against it4
 ,his pictures look like a visible      
reductio ad absurdum of it all4 ,that is
 how men look1 he seems to say1 when    
they are fighting in modern war2 and1   
being men1 they ought not to look so4   
,that1 at least1 is the effect the      
pictures produce on us4 ,they are a     
bitter satire on all the modern power of
 man and the uses to which he has put   
it4 ,he has allowed it to make him its  
slave and to set him to a business which

 has no purpose whatever1 which is as   
blind as the process of the universe    
seems to one who has no faith4 ,this    
struggle for life might just as well be 
called a struggle for death4 ,it is1 in 
fact1 merely a struggle between two     
machines intent on wrecking each other2 
and part of the machines are the bodies 
of men1 which behave as if there were no
 souls in them1 as if there were not    
even life1 but merely energy2 so that   
they collide and destroy each other like
 masses of matter in space4 ,nothing can
 be said of them except that they obey  
certain laws2 we call their obedience   
discipline1 but it is only the          
discipline of things subject to a       
process4  ,now it is the sense of       
process1 as the ultimate reality in the 
universe1 which has produced war against
 the conscience of mankind1 and even of 
many ,germans4 ,conscience was powerless
 to prevent it because conscience had   
ceased to believe in its own power1 had 
come to think of itself as a vain and   

inexplicable rebellion against the      
nature of things4 ,this rebellion we    
call sentimentality1 meaning thereby    
that it is really not even moral2 for   
true morality would recognize the       
process to which the nature of man is   
subject1 of which that nature is itself 
a part2 and would cure man of his futile
 rebellions so that he should not suffer
 needlessly from them4 ,it would cure   
man of pity1 because it is through pity 
that he suffers4 ,he is a machine1 and1 
if he is a conscious machine1 he should 
be conscious of the fact that he is one4
 ,such is the belief that has been      
growing upon us for fifty years or more 
with many strange effects4 ,it has not  
destroyed our sense of pity1 but has    
confused and exasperated it4 ,we pity   
and love still1 but with desperation1   
not like ,christians assured that these 
things are according to the order of the
 universe1 but fearing that they are    
wilful exceptions to that order1 costly 
luxuries that we indulge in at our own  

peril4 ,we seem to ourselves lonely in  
our pity and love2 the supreme process  
knows nothing of them2 the ,god1 who is 
love1 does not exist4  ,in the past wars
 have happened with the consent of      
mankind2 but this war did not happen so4
 ,even in ,germany there was something  
hysterical in the praise of war1 as if  
it were the worship of an idol both     
hated and feared4 ,we must praise war1  
the ,german worshippers of force seem to
 say1 so that we may survive4 ,we must  
forgo the past hopes of man so that we  
may find something real to hope for4 ,we
 must habituate ourselves to the        
universe as it is1 and break ourselves  
and all mankind in to the bitter truth4 
,they praised war as we used in ,england
 to praise industry4 ,labour1 we        
believed1 when all the labour of the    
poor had been made joyless by the       
industrial revolution1 was the result of
 the curse laid upon man by ,god4       
,therefore1 man must labour without joy 
and never dream of happy work4 ,and so  

now the very worshippers of war believe 
that it is a curse laid upon man by the 
nature of things4 ,they may not believe 
in the fall of man1 but they do believe 
that he can never rise1 since he is     
himself part of a process which is      
always war2 and1 if he tries to escape  
from it1 he will become extinct4 ,so    
they exhort us to consent to that       
process even with our conscience2 the   
more completely we consent to it1 the   
more we shall succeed in it4 ,but all   
the while they are doing violence to our
 natures and to their own4 ,they try to 
think like machines1 like the slaves of 
a process2 but thought itself is        
inconsistent with their effort2 their   
very praises of the heroism of their    
victims are inconsistent with it4 ,there
 is a gaping incongruity between the    
obsolete ,german romanticism and the new
 ,german atheism which exploited it1    
between their talk about ,siegfried and 
their talk about the struggle for life4 
,and there is the same incongruity      

between the cubist effort to see the    
visible world as a mechanical process   
and art itself4 ,the cubist seems to    
force himself with a savage irony into  
this caricature of nature2 we have      
emptied reality of its content in our   
thought and he will empty it of its     
content to our eyes2 that is not how we 
really see things1 but it is how we     
ought to see them if what we believe    
about the nature of things is true4     
,this irony we find in ,mr4 ,nevinson's 
pictures of the war1 whether it be a    
despairing irony or the rebellion of an 
unshaken faith4 ,he has emptied man of  
his content1 just as the ,prussian drill
 sergeant would empty him of his content
 for the purposes of war2 and only a    
,prussian drill sergeant could consent  
to this version of man with any joy4    
,that1 perhaps1 is how we shall all come
 to see everything if we continue for   
some centuries to believe that process  
and not person is the ultimate reality4 
,emptying ourselves of all our content  

in thought1 we shall at last empty      
ourselves of all content in reality2 we 
shall become what now we fear we are1   
and our very senses will be obedient to 
our unfaith4 ,for unfaith is the belief 
in process2 and faith is the belief in  
person4 ,it is the belief in process    
that makes men sacrifice other men in   
thousands to some idol2 it is the belief
 in person that makes them refuse to    
sacrifice anyone but themselves2 and    
they are afraid when they sacrifice     
others1 but confident when they         
sacrifice themselves4 ,ultimately       
process has no value and can have no    
value for us4 ,it is merely what exists 
or what we believe to exist1 and our    
effort to value it is only the          
obsequiousness of the slave to the power
 that he fears4 ,all our values come    
from the sense of person as more real   
than process4 ,we will not do wrong to a
 man because he is a man2 if he is to us
 only part of a process1 we cannot value
 him and we can do what we will to him  

without any sense of wrong4 ,all the old
 cruelties and iniquities of the world  
arose out of a belief in process and a  
fear of it4 ,it is not a modern         
scientific discovery1 but the oldest and
 darkest superstition that has oppressed
 the mind of man4 ,to all religious     
persecutors salvation was a process1    
like that struggle for life which is the
 modern form of the struggle for        
salvation to the superstitious4 ,and    
because salvation was a process human   
beings were sacrificed to it4 ,it did   
not matter how they were tortured1      
provided this abstract process was      
maintained4 ,so it does not matter now  
how they are slaughtered1 provided the  
abstract process of the struggle for    
life is maintained4 ,to the ,german this
 war was part of a process1 the         
historical process of the triumph of    
,germany1 and it did not matter how many
 ,germans were killed in furthering it4 
,if they were all killed ,germany would 
still have asserted her faithless faith 

in process and would have reduced it to 
a glorious absurdity4  ,so1 if we fought
 for anything beyond ourselves1 we      
fought for the belief in person as      
against the belief in process4 ,indeed1 
it is the chief glory of ,england1 among
 her many follies and crimes1 that she  
has always believed in person rather    
than in process2 and that is what we    
mean when we say that we refuse to      
sacrifice facts to theories4 ,men       
themselves are to us facts1 and we      
distrust theories that empty them of    
content4 ,if we act like brutes1 we     
would rather do so because the brute has
 mastered us for the moment than because
 we believe that humanity is            
inconsistent with the process that      
dominates the world4 ,we ourselves had  
rather be inconsistent than empty       
ourselves of all reality for the sake of
 a theory4 ,and there is an intellectual
 as well as a moral basis to this       
inconsistency of ours4 ,for if you      
believe that person1 not process1 is the

 ultimate reality1 you must offer some  
defiance to the material facts of life4 
,there is evidently a conflict between  
person and process2 and in that conflict
 the process1 which you perceive with   
your intelligence1 will be less real to 
you than the person of whom you are     
aware with all your faculties4 ,so you  
will trust in this union of all the     
faculties rather than in the exercise of
 the pure intelligence2 for to you the  
pure intelligence will be part of the   
person and will share in the person's   
universal imperfection4 ,in fact it will
 not be pure intelligence at all1 but   
rather a faculty that may be obsequious 
to all the lower passions4 ,nothing will
 free you from them1 except the respect 
for persons1 except1 in fact1 loving    
your neighbour as yourself4 ,there is no
 way to consistency but through that1   
and no way to the exercise of the pure  
intelligence4 ,never sacrifice a person 
to a process and you will never         
sacrifice a person to your own lower    

passions4 ,but1 if you believe in       
process rather than in person1 you will 
see your passions as part of the process
 and glorify them when you think you are
 glorifying the nature of the universe4 
,cubism and all those new methods of art
 which subject facts to the tyranny of a
 process may be good satire1 but they   
will never1 ,i think1 produce an        
independent beauty of their own4 ,like  
all satire1 they are parasitic upon past
 art1 negative and rebellious4 ,they    
tell us what the universe may look like 
to us if we lose all faith in ourselves 
and each other2 and1 when they are the  
result of a desperate effort to see the 
universe so1 they are unconscious       
satire4 ,the complete1 convinced cubist 
reduces his own method1 his own beliefs1
 his own state of mind1 to an absurdity4
 ,the more sincere he is1 the more      
complete is the reduction4 ,for he1     
rejecting all that has been the         
subject-matter of painting in the past1 
all the human values and the complexes  

of association which have invested the  
visible world with beauty for men1      
proves to us in his tortured diagrams   
that he has found nothing to take their 
place1 ,he gives us a ,chimaera         
bombinans in vacuo1 that vacuum which   
the universe is to the human spirit when
 it denies itself4 ,he tries to make    
art1 having cut himself off from all the
 experience and belief that produce art4
 ,for art springs always out of a       
supreme value for the personal and is an
 expression of that value4 ,it is an    
effort1 no matter in what medium1 to    
find the personal in all things1 to see 
trees as men walking2 and the new       
abstract methods in painting reverse    
this process1 they empty all things1    
even men1 of personality and subject    
them to a process invented by the       
artist1 which expresses1 if it expresses
 anything1 his own loss of personal     
values and nothing else4 ,the result may
 be ingenious1 it may still have a kind 
of beauty remembered from the great     

design of past art2 but it will lead    
nowhere1 since it is cut off from the   
very experience1 the passionate personal
 interest in people and things1 which   
gave design to the great art of the     
past4 ,it is at best satirical1 at worst
 parasitic1 using up all devices of     
design and turning from one to another  
in a restless ennui which of itself can 
give no enrichment4 ,it may have its    
uses1 since it insists upon the supreme 
importance of design and provides a new 
method for the expression of three      
dimensions2 but this method will be     
barren unless those who practise it     
enrich it with their own observation and
 delight4 ,already some of them seem to 
be weary of the barrenness of pure      
abstraction2 they see that any fool can 
hide his own commonplace in cubism as an
 ostrich hides its head in the sand2 but
 we would rather have honest            
chocolate-box ladies than the           
kaleidoscopic but betraying             
chocolate-box fragments of the futurist4

                          ,the ,artist  
and the ,tradesman   ,the ,exhibition of
 the ,arts and ,crafts at ,burlington   
,house was an acknowledgment of the fact
 that there are other arts besides those
 of painting1 sculpture1 and            
architecture1 or rather perhaps that the
 arts subsidiary to architecture are    
arts and not merely commercial          
activities4 ,burlington ,house would    
protest1 of course1 that it is not a    
shop2 but now at last objects are to be 
shown in it which the great mass of the 
public expects to see only in shops and 
expects to be produced merely to sell4  
,we remember how ,lord ,grimthorpe      
called ,morris a poetic upholsterer4 ,he
 meant there was something incongruous  
in the combination of an upholsterer and
 a poet2 he would have seen nothing     
incongruous in the combination of a poet
 and a painter1 because he would have   
called a painter an artist2 but an      
upholsterer was to him merely a         
tradesman1 and tradesmen are not        

expected to write poetry4 ,their        
business is to sell things and to make  
objects for sale4  ,in that respect he  
thought like the mass of the public now4
 ,for them the painter has some         
prestige1 because he is supposed not to 
be a tradesman1 not to paint his        
pictures merely so that he may sell     
them4 ,he has to live by his art1 of    
course1 but he practises it also because
 he enjoys it2 and1 if he is an artist1 
he will not paint bad pictures merely   
because they are what the public wants4 
,but it is the business of those who    
make furniture and such things to       
produce what the public wants4 ,no one  
would blame them for producing what they
 do not like themselves1 any more than  
one would blame a pill-maker for        
producing pills that he would not       
swallow himself4 ,the pill-maker and the
 furniture-maker are both tradesmen     
producing objects in answer to a demand4
 ,they have no prestige and no          
conscience is expected of them4  ,now in

 ,italy in the fifteenth century this   
distinction between the artist and the  
tradesman did not exist4 ,the painter   
was a tradesman2 he kept a shop and he  
had none of that peculiar prestige which
 he possesses now4 ,but of the tradesman
 more was expected than is expected now2
 for instance1 good workmanship and     
material were expected of him and also  
good design4 ,he did not produce        
articles merely to sell1 whether they   
were pictures or wedding-chests or      
jewelry or pots and pans4 ,he made all  
these other things just as he made      
pictures1 with some pleasure and        
conscience in his own work2 and it was  
the best craftsman who became a painter 
or sculptor1 merely because those were  
the most difficult crafts4 ,now it is   
the gentleman with artistic faculty who 
becomes a painter2 the poor man1 however
 much of that faculty he possesses1     
remains a workman without any artistic  
prestige and without any temptation to  
consider the quality of his work or to  

take any pleasure in it4 ,this is a     
commonplace1 no doubt2 but it remains a 
fact1 however often it may have been    
repeated1 and a social fact with a      
constant evil effect upon all the arts4 
,because the painter is supposed to be  
an artist and nothing else and the      
craftsman a tradesman and nothing else1 
we do not expect the virtues of the     
craftsman from the painter nor the      
virtues of the artist from the          
craftsman4 ,for us there is nothing but 
mystery in the work of the artist and no
 mystery at all in the work of the      
craftsman4 ,the painter can be as silly 
as he likes1 and we do not laugh at him1
 if we are persons of culture1 because  
his art is a sacred mystery4 ,but1 as   
for the craftsman1 there is nothing     
sacred about his work4 ,it is sold in a 
shop and made to be sold2 and all we    
expect of it is that it shall be in the 
fashion1 which means that it shall be   
what the commercial traveller thinks he 
can sell4 ,there are1 of course1 a few  

craftsman who are thought of as artists1
 and their work at once becomes a sacred
 mystery1 like pictures4 ,they too have 
a right to be as silly as they like2 and
 some people will buy their work1       
however silly it may be1 as they would  
buy pictures--that is to say1 for the   
good of their souls and not because they
 like it4  ,how are we to get rid of    
this distinction we have made between   
the artist and the tradesman8 ,how are  
we to recover for the artist the virtues
 of the craftsman and for the craftsman 
the virtues of the artist8 ,at present  
we get from neither what we really like4
 ,art remains to us a painful mystery2  
most of us would define it1 if we were  
honest1 as that which human beings buy  
because they do not like it4 ,while1 as 
for objects of use1 they are bought     
mainly because they are sold2 they are  
forced upon us as a conjurer forces a   
card4 ,we think we like them while they 
remain the fashion2 but soon they are   
like women's clothes of two years ago1  

if they last long enough to be outmoded4
 ,it is vain for us to reproach either  
the artist or the tradesman4 ,the fault 
is in ourselves2 we have as a whole     
society yielded to the most subtle      
temptation of ,satan4 ,we have lost the 
power of knowing what we like--that is  
to say1 the power of loving4 ,we value  
nothing for itself1 but everything for  
its associations4 ,the man of culture   
buys a picture1 not because he likes it1
 but because he thinks it is art2 at    
most what he enjoys is not the picture  
itself but the thought that he is       
cultured enough to enjoy it4 ,that      
thought comes between him and the       
picture1 and makes it impossible for him
 to experience the picture at all4 ,and 
so he is ready to accept anything that  
the painter chooses to give him1 if only
 he believes the painter to be a real   
artist4 ,this is bad for the painter1   
who has every temptation to become a    
charlatan1 and to think of his art as a 
sacred mystery which no one can         

understand but himself and a few other  
painters of his own sect4 ,but in this  
matter the man of culture is just like  
the vulgar herd1 as he would call them4 
,their attitude to the arts of use is   
the same as his attitude to pictures4   
,they do not buy furniture or china     
because they like them1 but because the 
shopman persuades them that what they   
buy is the fashion4 ,or perhaps they    
recognize it themselves as the fashion  
and therefore instantly believe that    
they like it4 ,in both cases the buyer  
is hypnotized2 he has lost the faculty  
of finding out for himself what he      
really likes1 and his mind1 being empty 
of real affection1 is open to the seven 
devils of suggestion4 ,he cannot enjoy  
directly any beautiful thing1 all he can
 enjoy is the belief that he is enjoying
 it2 and he can harbour this belief     
about any nonsense or trash4  ,it is a  
very curious disease that has become    
endemic in the whole of ,europe4 ,people
 impute it to machinery1 but unjustly4  

,there are objects made by machinery1   
such as motor-cars1 which have real     
beauty of design2 and people do         
genuinely and unconsciously enjoy this  
beauty1 just because they never think of
 it as beauty4 ,they like the look of a 
car because they can see that it is well
 made for its purpose4 ,if only they    
would like the look of any object of use
 for the same reason1 the arts of use   
would once again begin to flourish among
 us4 ,but when once we ask ourselves    
whether any thing is beautiful1 we      
become incapable of knowing our real    
feelings about it4 ,any tradesman or    
artist can persuade us that we think it 
beautiful when we do nothing of the     
kind4 ,we are all like the crowd who    
admired the ,emperor's clothes2 and     
there is no child to tell us that the   
,emperor has no clothes on at all4 ,we  
are not so with human beings2 we cannot 
be persuaded that we like a man when    
really we dislike him2 if we could1 our 
whole society would soon dissolve in a  

moral anarchy4 ,but with regard to the  
works of man1 or that part of them which
 is supposed to aim at beauty1 we are in
 a state of aesthetic anarchy1 because  
there is a whole vast conspiracy1 itself
 unconscious for the most part1 to      
persuade us that we like what no human  
being out of a madhouse could like4  ,so
 the real problem for us is to discover1
 not merely in pictures1 but in all     
things that are supposed to have beauty1
 what we really do like4 ,and we can    
best do that1 perhaps1 if we dismiss the
 notions of art and beauty for a time   
from our minds2 not because art and     
beauty do not exist1 but because our    
notions of them are wrong and           
misleading4 ,the very words intimidate  
us1 as people used to be intimidated by 
the jargon of pietistic religion1 so    
that they would believe that a very     
unpleasant person was a saint4 ,when    
once we look for beauty in anything1 we 
look no longer for good design1 good    
workmanship1 or good material4 ,it is   

because we do not look for beauty in    
motor-cars that we enjoy the excellence 
of their design1 workmanship1 and       
material1 which is beauty1 if only we   
knew it4 ,beauty1 in fact1 is a symptom 
of success in things made by man1 not of
 success in selling1 but of success in  
making4 ,if an object made by man gives 
us pleasure in itself1 then it has      
beauty2 if we got pleasure only from the
 belief that in it we are enjoying what 
we ought to enjoy1 then very likely it  
is as naked of beauty as the ,emperor   
was of clothes4 ,the great mass of      
people now have a belief that ornament  
is necessarily beauty1 that1 without it1
 nothing can be beautiful4 ,but ornament
 is often only added ugliness1 like a   
wen on a man's face4 ,it is always added
 ugliness when it is machine-made1 and  
when it is put on to hide cheapness of  
material and faults of design and       
workmanship4 ,unfortunately1 it does    
hide these things from us2 we accept    
ornament as a substitute for that beauty

 which can only come of good design1    
material1 and workmanship2 and we do not
 recognize these things when we see     
them1 except in objects like motor-cars1
 which we prefer plain because we do    
unconsciously enjoy their real beauty4  
,so1 in the matter of ornament1 we need 
to make a self-denying ordinance2 not   
because ornament is necessarily bad--it 
is the natural expression of the        
artist's superfluous energy and         
delight--but because we ourselves cannot
 be trusted with ornament1 as a drunkard
 cannot be trusted with strong drink4   
,we must learn to see things plain      
before we can see them at all1 or enjoy 
them for their own real qualities and   
not for what we think we see in them4 ,a
 man whose taste is for bad poetry can  
only improve it by reading good1 plain  
prose4 ,he must become rational before  
he can enjoy the real beauties of       
literature4 ,and so we need to become   
rational before we can enjoy art1       
whether in pictures or in objects of    

use4 ,the unreason of our painting has  
the same cause as the unreason of our   
objects of use2 and the cause is in us1 
not in the artist4 ,we think of taste as
 something in its nature irrational4 ,it
 is no more so than conscience is4      
,indeed1 there is conscience in all good
 taste as in all the good workmanship   
that pleases it4 ,but where the public  
has not this conscience1 the artist will
 not possess it either4 ,at best he will
 have only what he calls his artistic   
conscience--that is to say1 a           
determination to follow his own whims   
rather than the taste of the public4    
,but where the public knows what it     
likes1 and the artist makes what he     
likes1 there is more than a chance that 
both will like the same thing1 as they  
have in the great ages of art4 ,for a   
real liking must be a liking for        
something good4 ,it is ,satan who       
persuades us that we like what is bad by
 filling our mind with sham likings1    
which are always really the expression  

of our egotism disguised4               
,professionalism in ,art                
,professionalism is a dull1 ugly word2  
but it means dull1 ugly things1 a       
perversion of the higher activities of  
man1 of art1 literature1 religion1      
philosophy2 and a perversion to which we
 are all apt to be blind4 ,we know that 
in these activities specialization is a 
condition of excellence4 ,as ,keats said
 to ,shelley1 in art it is necessary to 
serve both ,god and ,mammon2 and as     
,samuel ,butler said1 ,that is not easy1
 but then nothing that is really worth  
doing ever is easy4 ,the poet may be    
born1 not made2 but no man can start    
writing poetry as if it had never been  
written before4 ,in every art there is a
 medium1 and the poet1 like all other   
artists1 learns from the poets of the   
past how to use his medium4 ,often he   
does this unconsciously by reading them 
for delight4 ,he first becomes a poet   
because he loves the poetry of others4  
,and the painter becomes a painter      

because he loves the pictures of others4
 ,each of them is apt to begin--        
,as if his whole vocation               
,were endless imitation4  ,so the artist
 insists to himself upon the value of   
hard work4 ,he is impatient of all the  
talk about inspiration2 for he knows    
that1 though nothing can be done without
 it1 it comes only with command of the  
medium4 ,and this command1 like all     
craftsmanship1 is traditional1 handed   
down from one generation to another4    
,any kind of expression in this         
imperfect world is as difficult as      
virtue itself4 ,for expression1 like    
virtue1 is a kind of transcendence4 ,in 
it the natural man rises above his      
animal functions1 above living so that  
he may continue to live2 he triumphs    
over those animal functions which hold  
him down to the earth as incessantly as 
the attraction of gravity itself4 ,but1 
like the airman1 he can triumph only by 
material means1 and by means gradually  
perfected in the practice of others4    

,yet there is always this difference1   
that in mechanics anyone can learn to   
make use of an invention2 but in the    
higher activities1 invention1 if it     
becomes mechanical1 destroys the        
activity itself1 even in the original   
inventor4 ,the medium is always a       
medium1 not merely a material2 and if it
 becomes merely a material to be        
manipulated1 it ceases to be a medium4  
,now professionalism is the result of a 
false analogy between mechanical        
invention and the higher activities4 ,it
 happens whenever the medium is regarded
 merely as material to be manipulated1  
when the artist thinks that he can learn
 to fly by mastering some other artist's
 machine1 when his art is to him a      
matter of invention gradually perfected 
and necessarily progressing through the 
advance of knowledge and skill4 ,one    
often finds this false analogy in books 
about the history of the arts1          
especially of painting and music4 ,it is
 assumed1 for instance1 that ,italian   

painting progressed mechanically from   
,giotto to ,titian1 that ,titian had a  
greater power of expression than ,giotto
 because he had command of a number of  
inventions in anatomy and perspective   
and the like that were unknown to       
,giotto4 ,so we have histories of the   
development of the symphony1 in which   
,haydn1 ,mozart1 ,beethoven are treated 
as if they were mechanical inventors    
each profiting by the discoveries of his
 predecessors4 ,beethoven was the       
greatest of the three because he had the
 luck to be born last1 and ,beethoven's 
earliest symphonies are necessarily     
better than ,mozart's latest because    
they were composed later4 ,but in such  
histories there always comes a point at 
which artists cease to profit by the    
inventions of their predecessors4 ,after
 ,michelangelo1 perhaps after           
,beethoven1 is the decadence4 ,then     
suddenly there is talk of inspiration1  
or the lack of it4 ,mere imitators      
appear1 and the historian who reviles   

them does not see that they have only   
practised1 and refuted1 his theory of   
art4 ,they also have had the luck to be 
born later2 but it has been bad luck1   
not good1 for them1 because to them     
their art has been all a matter of      
mechanical invention1 of                
professionalism4  ,the worst of it is   
that the greatest artists are apt       
themselves to fall in love with their   
own inventions1 not to see that they are
 mechanical inventions because they     
themselves have discovered them4        
,michelangelo in his ,last ,judgment is 
very professional2 ,titian was          
professional through all his middle age2
 ,tintoret was professional whenever he 
was bored with his work1 which happened 
often2 ,shakespeare1 whenever he was    
lazy1 which was not seldom4 ,beethoven1 
we now begin to see1 could be very      
earnestly professional2 and as for      
,milton--consider this end of the last  
speech of ,manoah1 in ,samson           
,agonistes1 where we expect a simple    

cadence3--                 ,the virgins 
also shall on feastful days             
,visit his tomb with flowers1 only      
bewailing                ,his lot       
unfortunate in nuptial choice1          
,from whence captivity and loss of eyes 
,milton was tempted into the jargon of  
these last two lines1 which are like a  
bad translation of a ,greek play1 by    
professionalism4 ,he was trying to make 
his poetry as much unlike ordinary      
speech as he could2 he was for the      
moment a slave to a tradition1 and none 
the less a slave because it was the     
tradition of his own past4              
,professionalism is a device for making 
expression easy2 and it is one used by  
the greatest artists sometimes because  
their business is to be always          
expressing themselves1 and even they    
have not always something to express4   
,but expression is so difficult1 even   
for those who have something to express1
 that they must be always practising it 
if they are ever to succeed in it4      

,wordsworth1 for instance1 was a        
professed enemy of professionalism in   
poetry2 yet he1 too1 was for ever       
writing verses4 ,it was a hobby with him
 as well as an art2 and his             
professionalism was merely less         
accomplished than that of ,milton or    
,spenser3--                    ,fair    
,ellen ,irwin1 when she sate            
,upon the ,braes of ,kirtle1            
,was lovely as a ,grecian maid          
,adorned with wreaths of myrtle4  ,why  
adorned with wreaths of myrtle8         
,wordsworth himself tells us4 ,his      
subject had already been treated in     
,scotch poems in simple ballad strain1  
so1 he says1 at the outset ,i threw out 
a classical image to prepare the reader 
for the style in which ,i meant to treat
 the story1 and so to preclude all      
comparison4 ,no one1 whose object was   
just to tell the story1 would compare   
,ellen with a ,grecian maid and her     
wreaths of myrtle2 but ,wordsworth must 
do so to show us how he means to tell   

it1 and1 as he forgets to mention1 so   
that he may rhyme with ,kirtle4 ,that is
 all professionalism1 all a device for  
making expression easy1 practised by a  
great poet because at the moment he had 
nothing to express4 ,but art is always  
difficult and cannot be made easy by    
this means4 ,we need not take a         
malicious pleasure in such lapses of the
 great poet2 but it is well to know when
 ,homer nods1 even though he uses all   
his craft to pretend that he is wide    
awake4 ,criticism may have a negative as
 well as a positive value4 ,it may set  
us on our guard against professionalism 
even in the greatest artists1 and most  
of all in them4 ,for it is they who     
begin professionalism and1 with the mere
 momentum of their vitality1 make it    
attractive4 ,because they are great men 
and really accomplished1 they can say   
nothing with a grand air2 and these     
grand nothings of theirs allure us just 
because they are nothings and make no   
demands upon our intelligence4 ,that is 

art indeed1 we cry3 and we intoxicate   
ourselves with it because it is merely  
art4 ,the quality of mercy is not       
strained is far more popular than       
,lear's speech1 ,no1 no1 no6 ,come1     
let's away to prison1 because it is     
professional rhetoric2 it is what       
,shakespeare could write at any moment1 
whereas the speech of ,lear is what     
,lear said at one particular moment4    
,the contrast between the two is the    
contrast well put in the epigram about  
,barry and ,garrick in their renderings 
of ,king ,lear3--        ,a king1 aye1  
every inch a king1 such ,barry doth     
appear4       ,but ,garrick's quite     
another thing2 he's every inch ,king    
,lear4  ,we admire the great artist when
 he is every inch a king more than when 
he has lost his kingship in his passion4
  ,he no doubt knows the difference well
 enough4 ,but he wishes to do everything
 well1 he has a natural human delight in
 his own accomplishment2 and a job to   
finish4 ,shakespeare1 ,michelangelo1    

,beethoven were not slaves to their own 
professionalism2 no doubt they could    
laugh at it themselves4 ,but there is   
always a danger that we shall be        
enslaved by it2 and it is the business  
of criticism to free us from that       
slavery1 to make us aware of this last  
infirmity of great artists4 ,we are on  
our guard easily enough against a       
professionalism that is out of fashion4 
,the ,wagnerian of a generation ago     
could sneer at the professionalism of   
,mozart2 but the professionalism of     
,wagner seemed to him to be inspiration 
made constant and certain by a new      
musical invention4 ,we know now only too
 well1 from ,wagner's imitators1 that he
 did not invent a new method of tapping 
inspiration2 we ought to know that no   
one can do that4 ,the more complete the 
method the more tiresome it becomes1    
even as practised by the inventor4      
,decadence in art is always caused by   
professionalism1 which makes the        
technique of art too difficult1 and so  

destroys the artist's energy and joy in 
his practice of it4 ,teachers of the    
arts are always inclined to insist on   
their difficulty and to set hard tasks  
to their pupils for the sake of their   
hardness2 and often the pupil stays too 
long learning until he thinks that      
anything which is difficult to do must  
therefore be worth doing4 ,this notion  
also overawes the general public so that
 they value what looks to them          
difficult2 but in art that which seems  
difficult to us fails with us1 we are   
aware of the difficulty1 not of the art4
 ,the greater the work of art the easier
 it seems to us4 ,we feel that we could 
have done it ourselves if only we had   
had the luck to hit upon that way of    
doing it2 indeed1 where our aesthetic   
experience of it is complete1 we feel as
 if we were doing it ourselves2 our     
minds jump with the artist's mind2 we   
are for the moment the artist himself in
 his very act of creation4 ,but we are  
always apt to undervalue this true and  

complete aesthetic experience1 because  
it seems so easy and simple1 and we     
mistake for it a painful sense of the   
artist's skill1 of his professional     
accomplishment4 ,so we demand of        
artists1 that they shall impress us with
 their accomplishment2 we have not had  
our money's worth unless we feel that we
 could not possibly do ourselves what   
they have done4 ,no doubt1 when the     
,songs of ,innocence were first         
published1 anyone who did happen to read
 them thought them doggerel4 ,blake in a
 moment had freed himself from all the  
professionalism of the followers of     
,pope1 and even now they make poetry    
seem an easy art to us1 until we try to 
write songs of innocence ourselves3--   
,when the voices of children are heard  
on the green1               ,and        
laughing is heard on the hill1          
,my heart is at rest within my breast1  
,and everything else is still4          
,then come home1 my children1 the sun is
 gone down1               ,and the dews 

of night arise2           ,come1 come1  
leave off play1 and let us away1        
,till the morning appears in the skies4 
,we call it artless1 with still a hint  
of depreciation in the word1 or at least
 of wonder that we should be so moved by
 such simple means4 ,it is a kind of    
cottage-poetry1 and has that beauty     
which in a cottage moves us more than   
all the art of palaces4 ,but we never   
learn the lesson of that beauty because 
it seems to us so easily won2 and so our
 arts are always threatened by the      
decadence of professionalism4 ,but      
poetry in ,england has been a living art
 so long because it has had the power of
 freeing itself from professionalism and
 choosing the better path with ,mary and
 with ,ruth4 ,the value of the ,romantic
 movement lay1 not in its escape to the 
wonders of the past1 but in its escape  
from professionalism and all its        
self-imposed and easy difficulties4 ,for
 it is much easier to write professional
 verses in any style than to write songs

 of innocence2 and that is why          
professionalism in all the arts tempts  
all kinds of artists4 ,anyone can       
achieve it who has the mind4 ,it is a   
substitute for expression1 as mere duty 
is a substitute for virtue4 ,but1 as a  
forbidding sense of duty makes virtue   
itself seem unattractive1 so            
professionalism destroys men's natural  
delight in the arts4 ,like the artist   
himself1 his public becomes anxious1    
perverse1 exacting2 afraid lest it shall
 admire the wrong thing1 because it has 
lost the immediate sense of the right   
thing4 ,just as it expects art to be    
difficult1 so it expects its own        
pleasure in art to be difficult2 and    
thus we have attained to our present    
notion about art which is like the      
,puritan notion about virtue1 that it is
 what no human being could possibly     
enjoy by nature4 ,and if we do enjoy it1
 like a meadow gale in spring1 it cannot
 be good art4  ,but in painting as in   
poetry1 all the new movements of value  

are escapes from professionalism2 and   
they begin by shocking the public       
because they seem to make the art too   
easy4 ,dickens was horrified by an early
 work of ,millais2 ,ruskin was enraged  
by a nocturne of ,whistler4 ,he said it 
was cockney impudence because it lacked 
the professionalism he expected4        
,artists and critics alike are always   
binding burdens on the arts2 and they   
are always angry with the artist who    
cuts the burden off his back4 ,they     
think he is merely shirking             
difficulties4 ,but the difficulty of    
expression is so much greater than the  
self-imposed difficulties of mere       
professionalism that any man who is     
afraid of difficulties will try to be a 
professional rather than an artist4  ,in
 art there is always humility1 in       
professionalism pride4 ,and it is this  
pride that makes art more ugly and      
tiresome than any other work of man4    
,nothing is stranger in human nature    
than the tyranny of boredom it will     

endure in the pursuit of art2 and the   
more bored men are1 the more they are   
convinced of artistic salvation4 ,our   
museums are cumbered with monstrous     
monuments of past professionalism2 our  
bookshelves groan with them4 ,always we 
are trying to like things because they  
seem to us very well done2 never do we  
dare to say to ourselves3 ,it may be    
well done1 but it were better if it were
 not done at all2 and the artist is     
still to us a dog walking on his hind   
legs1 a performer whose merit lies in   
the unnatural difficulty of his         
performance4                            
,waste or ,creation8   ,the ,william    
,morris ,celebration was not so         
irrelevant to these times as it may     
seem4 ,morris was always foretelling a  
catastrophe to our society1 and it has  
come4 ,that commercial system of ours1  
which seems to so many part of the order
 of ,nature1 was to him as evil and     
unnatural as slavery4 ,his quarrel with 
it was not political1 but human2 it was 

the quarrel not of the oppressed1 for he
 was not the man to be oppressed in any 
society1 but of the workman4 ,he was    
sure that a society which encouraged bad
 work and discouraged good must in some 
way or other come to a bad end2 and he  
would have seen in this war the end that
 he predicted4 ,whatever its result1    
there must be a change in the order of  
our society1 whether it sinks through   
incessant wars1 national and commercial1
 into barbarism or is shocked into an   
effort to attain to civilization4 ,there
 were particular sayings of ,morris's to
 which no one at the time paid much     
heed4 ,they seemed mere grumblings      
against what must be4 ,he was1 for      
instance1 always crying out against our 
waste of labour4 ,if only all men did   
work that was worth doing--       ,think
 what a change that would make in the   
world6 ,i tell you ,i      feel dazed at
 the thought of the immensity of the    
work which is      undergone for the    
making of useless things4 ,it would be  

an      instructive day's work1 for any 
one of us who is strong enough1      to 
walk through two or three of the        
principal streets of ,london      on a  
weekday1 and take accurate note of      
everything in the shop      windows     
which is embarrassing or superfluous to 
the daily life      of a serious man4   
,nay1 the most of these things no one1  
serious      or unserious1 wants at all2
 only a foolish habit makes even the    
lightest-minded of us suppose that he   
wants them2 and to many      people1    
even of those who buy them1 they are    
obvious      encumbrances to real work1 
thought1 and pleasure4  ,at the time    
most people said that this waste of     
labour was all a matter of demand and   
supply1 and thought no more about it2   
some said that it was good for trade4   
,very few saw1 with ,morris1 that demand
 for such things is something willed and
 something that ought not to be willed4 
,but then it was generally believed that
 we could afford this waste of labour2  

and so it went on until1 after a year or
 two of war1 we found that we could not 
afford it4 ,then even the most ignorant 
and thoughtless learned1 from facts1 not
 from books1 certain lessons of         
political economy4 ,they learned that1  
in war-time at least1 a nation that     
wastes its labour will be overcome by   
one that does not4 ,at once the common  
will was set against the waste of       
labour2 and1 what would have seemed     
strangest of all forty years ago1 the   
,government1 with the consent of the    
people1 set to work to stop the waste of
 labour1 and did to a great extent      
succeed in stopping it4 ,when people    
thought in terms of munitions1 instead  
of in terms of general well-being1 they 
saw that the waste of labour must be1   
and could be1 stopped4 ,they talked no  
longer about the laws of supply and     
demand1 but about munitions4 ,those who 
had made trash must be set to make      
munitions1 or to fight1 or in some way  
to second the ,army4 ,those who still   

were ready to waste labour on trash for 
themselves were no longer obeying the   
laws of supply and demand2 they were    
diverting labour from its proper task2  
they were unpatriotic1 they were helping
 the ,germans4 ,money1 in fact1 had no  
longer the right to an absolute command 
over labour4 ,a man1 before he spent a  
sovereign1 must ask himself whether he  
was spending it for the good of the     
nation2 and if he did not ask himself   
that1 the ,government would ask it for  
him4  ,so much the war taught us1 for   
purposes of war4 ,but ,morris many years
 ago tried to teach it for purposes of  
peace4 ,when he wrote those words which 
we have quoted1 he was not talking      
politics but ordinary common sense4 ,he 
was not even talking art1 but rather    
economics2 and he was talking it not to 
any vague abstraction called the        
community1 but to each individual human 
being4 ,at that time every one thought  
of economics as something which         
concerned society or the universe4 ,it  

was1 so to speak1 a natural science2 it 
observed phenomena as if they were in   
the heavens2 and stated laws about them1
 laws not human but natural4 ,perhaps it
 was the greatest achievement of ,morris
 in the way of thought that he saw      
economics1 even more clearly than       
,ruskin1 as a matter not of natural     
laws1 but of conscience and duty4 ,he   
did not talk about economics at all1 but
 about the waste of labour1 just as we  
talk about it now4 ,the only difference 
is that he saw it to be one of the chief
 causes of poverty in time of peace1    
whereas we see it as a hindrance to     
victory in time of war4 ,we have1 for   
war purposes1 acquired the conscience   
that he wished us to acquire for all    
purposes4 ,the question is whether we   
shall keep it in peace4  ,upon that     
depends the question how soon we shall  
recover from the war4 ,for there is no  
doubt that we shall not be able to      
afford our former waste of labour2 and1 
if we persist in it1 we shall be        

bankrupt as a society4 ,it may be said  
that we shall not have the money1 the   
power1 to waste labour4 ,but we shall   
certainly have some superfluous energy1 
more and more1 it is to be hoped1 as    
time goes on2 and our future recovery   
will depend upon the use we make of this
 superfluous energy4 ,we can waste it1  
as we wasted it before the war2 or we   
can keep the conscience we have acquired
 in war and ask ourselves in peace1 with
 every penny we spend1 whether we are   
wasting labour4 ,it is true that what   
may be waste to one will not be waste to
 another2 but in that matter every one  
must obey his own conscience4 ,the      
important thing is that every one should
 have a conscience and obey it4 ,there  
will be plenty of people to tell us that
 no one can define waste of labour4 ,no 
one can define sin2 but each man has his
 own conscience on that point and lives 
well or ill as he obeys it or disobeys  
it4 ,besides1 there are many things1 all
 the trash that ,morris speaks about in 

the shop windows1 that every one knows  
to be waste4 ,we need not trouble       
ourselves about the fact that art will  
seem waste to the philistine and not to 
the artist4 ,we must allow for          
differences on that point as on most    
others4 ,some things that might have    
been waste to ,samuel ,smiles would have
 been to ,morris a symptom of           
well-being4 ,but he knew1 and often     
said1 that we cannot have the beauty    
which was to him a symptom of well-being
 unless we end the waste of labour on   
trash4 ,of luxury he said3--       ,by  
those who know of nothing better it has 
even been taken for      art1 the divine
 solace of human labour1 the romance of 
each      day's hard practice of the    
difficult art of living4 ,but ,i say1   
art cannot live beside it nor           
self-respect in any class of      life4 
,effeminacy and brutality are its       
companions on the right      hand and   
the left4  ,there is1 we have all       
discovered now1 only a certain amount of

 labour in the country1 in the world4   
,even the most ignorant are aware at    
last that money does not create labour  
but only commands it1 and may command it
 to do what will or will not benefit us 
all4 ,we were1 for the purposes of the  
war1 much more of a fellowship than we  
had ever been before4 ,we acknowledged a
 duty to each other1 the duty of        
commanding labour to the common good4   
,we asked with every sovereign we spent 
whether it would help or hinder us in   
the war4 ,morris would have us ask also 
whether it will help or hinder us in the
 advance towards a general happiness4   
,and he put a further question1 which in
 time of war unfortunately we could not 
put1 a question not only about the work 
but about the workman4 ,are we1 with our
 money1 forcing him to work that is for 
him worth doing2 are we1 to use an old  
phrase1 considering the good of his     
soul8 ,morris insisted on our duty to   
the workman more even than on our duty  
to society4 ,he saw that where great    

masses of men do work that they know to 
be futile there must be a low standard  
of work and incessant discontent4 ,the  
workman may not even know the cause of  
his discontent4 ,he may think he is     
angry with the rich because they are    
rich2 but the real source of his anger  
is the work that they set him to do with
 their riches4 ,and no class war1 no    
redistribution of wealth1 will end that 
discontent if the same waste of labour  
continues4 ,double the wages of every   
workman in the country1 and if he spends
 the increase on trash no one will be   
any better off in mind or body4 ,there  
will still be poverty and still         
discontent1 with the work if not with   
the wages4  ,the problem for us1 for    
every modern society now1 is not so much
 to redistribute wealth2 that at best   
can be only a means to an end2 but to   
use our superfluous energy to the best  
purpose1 no longer to waste it          
piecemeal4 ,that problem we solved1 to a
 great extent1 in war4 ,we have to solve

 it also in peace if the peace is to be 
worth having and is not to lead to      
further wars at home or abroad4 ,the war
 itself has given us a great            
opportunity4 ,it has opened our eyes1 if
 only we do not shut them again4 ,it has
 taught every one in the country the    
most important of all lessons in        
political economy which the books often 
seem to conceal4 ,and1 better still1 it 
has taught us that in economics we can  
exercise our own wills1 that they       
concern each individual man and woman as
 much as morals2 that they are morals1  
and not abstract mathematics2 that we   
have the same duty towards the country1 
towards mankind1 that we have to our own
 families4 ,the proverb1 ,waste not1    
want not1 does not apply merely to each 
private income4 ,we have accounts to    
settle not only with our bankers1 but   
with the community4 ,it will thrive or  
not according as we are thrifty or      
thriftless2 and our thrift depends upon 
how we spend our income1 not merely on  

how much we spend of it4 ,for all that  
part of it which we do not spend on     
necessaries is the superfluous energy of
 mankind1 and we determine how it shall 
be exercised2 each individual determines
 that1 not an abstraction called        
society4  ,one may present the thrift of
 labour as a matter of duty to society4 
,but ,morris saw that it was more than  
that2 and he lit it with the sunlight of
 the warmer virtues4 ,it is not merely  
society that we have to consider1 or the
 direction of its superfluous energy4   
,it is also the happiness1 the life1 of 
actual men and women4 ,we shall not     
cease to waste work until we think      
always of the worker behind it1 until we
 see that it is our duty1 if with our   
money we have command over him1 to set  
him to work worth doing4 ,capital now is
 to most of those who own it a means of 
earning interest4 ,we should think of it
 as creative1 as the power which may    
make the wilderness blossom like the    
rose and change the slum into a home for

 men and women2 and1 better still1 as   
the power that may train and set men to 
do work that will satisfy their souls1  
so that they shall work for the work's  
sake and not only for the wages4 ,until 
capital becomes so creative in the hands
 of those who own it there will always  
be a struggle for the possession of it2 
and to those who do possess it it will  
bring merely superfluities and not      
happiness4 ,if it becomes creative1 no  
one will mind much who possesses it4    
,the class war will be ended by a league
 of classes1 their aim not merely peace1
 but those things which make men resolve
 not to spoil peace with war4  ,we shall
 be told that this is a dream1 as we are
 always told that the ending of war is a
 dream4 ,so long as human nature is what
 it is there will always be war4 ,those 
who talk thus think of human nature as  
something not ourselves making for      
unrighteousness4 ,it is not their own   
nature4 ,they know that they themselves 
do not wish for war2 but1 looking at    

mankind in the mass and leaving         
themselves out of that mass1 they see it
 governed by some force that is not     
really human nature1 but merely nature  
red in tooth and claw1 a process become 
a malignant goddess1 who forces mankind 
to act contrary to their own desires1   
contrary even to their own interests4   
,she has taken the place for us of the  
old original sin2 and the belief in her 
is far more primitive than the belief in
 original sin4 ,she is in fact but a    
modern name for all the malignant idols 
that savages have worshipped with       
sacrifices of blood and tears that they 
did not wish to make4 ,it is strange    
that1 priding ourselves as we do on our 
modern scepticism which has taught us to
 disbelieve in the miracle of the       
,gadarene swine1 we yet have not dared  
to affirm the plain fact that this      
nature1 this human nature1 does not     
exist4 ,there is no force1 no process1  
whether within us or outside us1 that   
compels us to act contrary to our       

desires and our interests4 ,there is    
nothing but fear2 and fear can be       
conquered1 as by individuals1 so by the 
collective will of man4 ,it is fear that
 produces war1 the fear that other men  
are not like ourselves1 that they are   
hostile animals governed utterly by the 
instinct of self-preservation4  ,so it  
is fear that produces the class war and 
the belief that it must always continue4
 ,it is our own fears that cut us off   
from happiness by making us despair of  
it4 ,the man who has capital sees it as 
a means of protecting himself and his   
children from poverty2 it is to him a   
negative1 defensive thing1 at best the  
safeguard of a negative1 defensive      
happiness4 ,so others see it as         
something which he has and they have    
not1 something they would like to snatch
 from him if they could4 ,but if he saw 
capital as a creative thing1 like the   
powers of the mind1 like the genius of  
the artist1 then it would be to him a   
means of positive happiness both for    

himself and for others4 ,he would say to
 himself1 not ,how can ,i protect myself
 with this against the tyranny of the   
struggle for life8 not ,how can ,i      
invest this8 but ,what can ,i do with   
this8 ,he would see it as ,michelangelo 
saw the marble when he looked for the   
shape within it4 ,and then he would rise
 above the conception of mere duty as   
something we do against our own wills1  
or of virtue as a luxury of the spirit  
to which we escape in our little leisure
 from the struggle for life4 ,virtue1   
duty1 would be for him life itself2 in  
creation he would attain to that harmony
 of duty and pleasure which is          
happiness4  ,if only we could see that  
the superfluous energy of mankind is    
something out of which to make the      
happiness of mankind we should find our 
own happiness in the making of it4      
,there is still for us a gulf between   
doing good to others and the delight of 
the artist1 the craftsman1 in his work4 
,the artist is one kind of man and the  

philanthropist another2 the artist is a 
selfish person whom we like1 and the    
philanthropist an unselfish person whom 
we do not like4 ,what we need is to fuse
 them in our use of capital1 in our     
exercise of the superfluous energy of   
mankind4 ,there are single powerful     
capitalists who know this joy of        
creation1 who are benevolent despots1   
and yet are suspect to the poor because 
of their great power4 ,but it never     
enters the head of the smaller investor 
that he1 too1 might create instead of   
merely investing2 that1 instead of being
 a shareholder in a limited liability   
company1 he might be one of a creative  
fellowship1 not merely earning dividends
 but transforming cities1 exalting      
things of use into things of beauty1    
giving to himself and to mankind work   
worth doing for its own sake1 work in   
which all the obsolete conflicts of rich
 and poor could be forgotten in a       
commonwealth4 ,that is the vision of    
peace which our sacrifices in the war   

may earn for us4 ,we have learned       
sacrifice and the joy of it2 but1 so    
far1 only so that we may overcome an    
enemy of our own kind4 ,there remains to
 be overcome1 by a sacrifice more joyful
 and with far greater rewards1 this     
other old enemy not of our own kind1 the
 enemy we call nature or human nature1  
the enemy that is so powerful merely    
because we dare not believe that she    
does not exist4                         
,,printed ,,by ,,morrison ,,and ,,gibb  
,,ltd41 ,,edinburgh