Concerning the Spiritual in Art Wassily Kandinsky 2128 downloads.pdf

The Project Gutenberg eBook of Concerning the Spiritual in
Art

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of
the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will
have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using
this eBook.

Title: Concerning the Spiritual in Art

Author: Wassily Kandinsky

Translator: Michael Sadleir

Release date: March 1, 2004 [eBook #5321]
Most recently updated: February 22, 2011

Language: English

Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/5321

Credits: Produced by John Mamoun, Charles Franks and the Online
Distributed Proofreaders Website

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CONCERNING
THE SPIRITUAL IN ART ***

Produced by John Mamoun <mamounjo@umdnj.edu>, Charles

Franks and the Online Distributed Proofreaders Website

CONCERNING THE SPIRITUAL
IN ART
BY WASSILY KANDINSKY [TRANSLATED BY MICHAEL T. H. SADLER]

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FULL-PAGE ILLUSTRATIONS [NOT IN E-TEXT]
TRANSLATOR'S INTRODUCTION

PART I. ABOUT GENERAL AESTHETIC

I. INTRODUCTION II. THE MOVEMENT OF THE TRIANGLE III. SPIRITUAL
REVOLUTION IV. THE PYRAMID

PART II. ABOUT PAINTING

V. THE PSYCHOLOGICAL WORKING OF COLOUR VI. THE LANGUAGE OF FORM
AND COLOUR VII. THEORY VIII. ART AND ARTISTS IX. CONCLUSION

LIST OF FULL-PAGE ILLUSTRATIONS [NOT IN E-TEXT]

Mosaic in S. Vitale, Ravenna

Victor and Heinrich Dunwegge: "The Crucifixion" (in the Alte
Pinakothek, Munich)

Albrecht Durer: "The Descent from the Cross" (in the Alte
Pinakothek, Munich)

Raphael: "The Canigiani Holy Family" (in the Alte Pinakothek,
Munich)

Paul Cezanne: "Bathing Women" (by permission of Messrs.
Bernheim-Jeune, Paris)

Kandinsky: Impression No. 4, "Moscow" (1911)

"Improvisation No. 29 (1912)
"Composition No. 2 (1910)
"Kleine Freuden" (1913)

TRANSLATOR'S INTRODUCTION

It is no common thing to find an artist who, even if he be willing to try, is
capable of expressing his aims and ideals with any clearness and
moderation. Some people will say that any such capacity is a flaw in the
perfect artist, who should find his expression in line and colour, and leave
the multitude to grope its way unaided towards comprehension. This
attitude is a relic of the days when "l'art pour l'art" was the latest battle cry;
when eccentricity of manner and irregularity of life were more important
than any talent to the would-be artist; when every one except oneself was
bourgeois.

The last few years have in some measure removed this absurdity, by
destroying the old convention that it was middle-class to be sane, and that
between the artist and the outer-world yawned a gulf which few could
cross. Modern artists are beginning to realize their social duties. They are
the spiritual teachers of the world, and for their teaching to have weight, it
must be comprehensible. Any attempt, therefore, to bring artist and public
into sympathy, to enable the latter to understand the ideals of the former,
should be thoroughly welcome; and such an attempt is this book of
Kandinsky's.

The author is one of the leaders of the new art movement in Munich. The
group of which he is a member includes painters, poets, musicians,
dramatists, critics, all working to the same end—the expression of the
SOUL of nature and humanity, or, as Kandinsky terms it, the INNERER
KLANG.

Perhaps the fault of this book of theory—or rather the characteristic most
likely to give cause for attack—is the tendency to verbosity. Philosophy,
especially in the hands of a writer of German, presents inexhaustible
opportunities for vague and grandiloquent language. Partly for this reason,
partly from incompetence, I have not primarily attempted to deal with the
philosophical basis of Kandinsky's art. Some, probably, will find in this
aspect of the book its chief interest, but better service will be done to the
author's ideas by leaving them to the reader's judgement than by even the
most expert criticism.

The power of a book to excite argument is often the best proof of its
value, and my own experience has always been that those new ideas are at
once most challenging and most stimulating which come direct from their
author, with no intermediate discussion.

The task undertaken in this Introduction is a humbler but perhaps a more
necessary one. England, throughout her history, has shown scant respect for
sudden spasms of theory. Whether in politics, religion, or art, she demands
an historical foundation for every belief, and when such a foundation is not
forthcoming she may smile indulgently, but serious interest is immediately
withdrawn. I am keenly anxious that Kandinsky's art should not suffer this
fate. My personal belief in his sincerity and the future of his ideas will go
for very little, but if it can be shown that he is a reasonable development of
what we regard as serious art, that he is no adventurer striving for a
momentary notoriety by the strangeness of his beliefs, then there is a chance

that some people at least will give his art fair consideration, and that, of
these people, a few will come to love it as, in my opinion, it deserves.

Post-Impressionism, that vague and much-abused term, is now almost a
household word. That the name of the movement is better known than the
names of its chief leaders is a sad misfortune, largely caused by the over-
rapidity of its introduction into England. Within the space of two short years
a mass of artists from Manet to the most recent of Cubists were thrust on a
public, who had hardly realized Impressionism. The inevitable result has
been complete mental chaos. The tradition of which true Post-
Impressionism is the modern expression has been kept alive down the ages
of European art by scattered and, until lately, neglected painters. But not
since the time of the so-called Byzantines, not since the period of which
Giotto and his School were the final splendid blossoming, has the
"Symbolist" ideal in art held general sway over the "Naturalist." The
Primitive Italians, like their predecessors the Primitive Greeks, and, in turn,
their predecessors the Egyptians, sought to express the inner feeling rather
than the outer reality.

This ideal tended to be lost to sight in the naturalistic revival of the
Renaissance, which derived its inspiration solely from those periods of
Greek and Roman art which were pre-occupied with the expression of
external reality. Although the all-embracing genius of Michelangelo kept
the "Symbolist" tradition alive, it is the work of El Greco that merits the
complete title of "Symbolist." From El Greco springs Goya and the Spanish
influence on Daumier and Manet. When it is remembered that, in the
meantime, Rembrandt and his contemporaries, notably Brouwer, left their
mark on French art in the work of Delacroix, Decamps and Courbet, the
way will be seen clearly open to Cezanne and Gauguin.

The phrase "symbolist tradition" is not used to express any conscious
affinity between the various generations of artists. As Kandinsky says: "the
relationships in art are not necessarily ones of outward form, but are
founded on inner sympathy of meaning." Sometimes, perhaps frequently, a
similarity of outward form will appear. But in tracing spiritual relationship
only inner meaning must be taken into account.

There are, of course, many people who deny that Primitive Art had an
inner meaning or, rather, that what is called "archaic expression" was
dictated by anything but ignorance of representative methods and defective
materials. Such people are numbered among the bitterest opponents of Post-
Impressionism, and indeed it is difficult to see how they could be otherwise.
"Painting," they say, "which seeks to learn from an age when art was,
however sincere, incompetent and uneducated, deliberately rejects the
knowledge and skill of centuries." It will be no easy matter to conquer this
assumption that Primitive art is merely untrained Naturalism, but until it is
conquered there seems little hope for a sympathetic understanding of the
symbolist ideal.

The task is all the more difficult because of the analogy drawn by friends
of the new movement between the neo-primitive vision and that of a child.
That the analogy contains a grain of truth does not make it the less
mischievous. Freshness of vision the child has, and freshness of vision is an
important element in the new movement. But beyond this a parallel is non-
existent, must be non-existent in any art other than pure artificiality. It is
one thing to ape ineptitude in technique and another to acquire simplicity of
vision. Simplicity—or rather discrimination of vision—is the trademark of
the true Post-Impressionist. He OBSERVES and then SELECTS what is
essential. The result is a logical and very sophisticated synthesis. Such a
synthesis will find expression in simple and even harsh technique. But the
process can only come AFTER the naturalist process and not before it. The

child has a direct vision, because his mind is unencumbered by association
and because his power of concentration is unimpaired by a multiplicity of
interests. His method of drawing is immature; its variations from the
ordinary result from lack of capacity.

Two examples will make my meaning clearer. The child draws a
landscape. His picture contains one or two objects only from the number
before his eyes. These are the objects which strike him as important. So far,
good. But there is no relation between them; they stand isolated on his
paper, mere lumpish shapes. The Post-Impressionist, however, selects his
objects with a view to expressing by their means the whole feeling of the
landscape. His choice falls on elements which sum up the whole, not those
which first attract immediate attention.

Again, let us take the case of the definitely religious picture.

[Footnote: Religion, in the sense of awe, is present in all true art. But
here I use the term in the narrower sense to mean pictures of which the
subject is connected with Christian or other worship.]

It is not often that children draw religious scenes. More often battles and
pageants attract them. But since the revival of the religious picture is so
noticeable a factor in the new movement, since the Byzantines painted
almost entirely religious subjects, and finally, since a book of such drawings
by a child of twelve has recently been published, I prefer to take them as
my example. Daphne Alien's religious drawings have the graceful charm of
childhood, but they are mere childish echoes of conventional prettiness. Her
talent, when mature, will turn to the charming rather than to the vigorous.
There could be no greater contrast between such drawing and that of—say
—Cimabue. Cimabue's Madonnas are not pretty women, but huge, solemn
symbols. Their heads droop stiffly; their tenderness is universal. In
Gauguin's "Agony in the Garden" the figure of Christ is haggard with pain

and grief. These artists have filled their pictures with a bitter experience
which no child can possibly possess. I repeat, therefore, that the analogy
between Post-Impressionism and child-art is a false analogy, and that for a
trained man or woman to paint as a child paints is an impossibility.
[Footnote: I am well aware that this statement is at variance with
Kandinsky, who has contributed a long article—"Uber die Formfrage"—to
Der Blaue Reiter, in which he argues the parallel between Post-
Impressionism and child vision, as exemplified in the work of Henri
Rousseau. Certainly Rousseau's vision is childlike. He has had no artistic
training and pretends to none. But I consider that his art suffers so greatly
from his lack of training, that beyond a sentimental interest it has little to
recommend it.]

All this does not presume to say that the "symbolist" school of art is
necessarily nobler than the "naturalist." I am making no comparison, only a
distinction. When the difference in aim is fully realized, the Primitives can
no longer be condemned as incompetent, nor the moderns as lunatics, for
such a condemnation is made from a wrong point of view. Judgement must
be passed, not on the failure to achieve "naturalism" but on the failure to
express the inner meaning.

The brief historical survey attempted above ended with the names of
Cezanne and Gauguin, and for the purposes of this Introduction, for the
purpose, that is to say, of tracing the genealogy of the Cubists and of
Kandinsky, these two names may be taken to represent the modern
expression of the "symbolist" tradition.

The difference between them is subtle but goes very deep. For both the
ultimate and internal significance of what they painted counted for more
than the significance which is momentary and external. Cezanne saw in a
tree, a heap of apples, a human face, a group of bathing men or women,

something more abiding than either photography or impressionist painting
could present. He painted the "treeness" of the tree, as a modern critic has
admirably expressed it. But in everything he did he showed the architectural
mind of the true Frenchman. His landscape studies were based on a
profound sense of the structure of rocks and hills, and being structural, his
art depends essentially on reality. Though he did not scruple, and rightly, to
sacrifice accuracy of form to the inner need, the material of which his art
was composed was drawn from the huge stores of actual nature.

Gauguin has greater solemnity and fire than Cezanne. His pictures are
tragic or passionate poems. He also sacrifices conventional form to inner
expression, but his art tends ever towards the spiritual, towards that
profounder emphasis which cannot be expressed in natural objects nor in
words. True his abandonment of representative methods did not lead him to
an abandonment of natural terms of expression—that is to say human
figures, trees and animals do appear in his pictures. But that he was much
nearer a complete rejection of representation than was Cezanne is shown by
the course followed by their respective disciples.

The generation immediately subsequent to Cezanne, Herbin, Vlaminck,
Friesz, Marquet, etc., do little more than exaggerate Cezanne's technique,
until there appear the first signs of Cubism. These are seen very clearly in
Herbin. Objects begin to be treated in flat planes. A round vase is
represented by a series of planes set one into the other, which at a distance
blend into a curve. This is the first stage.

The real plunge into Cubism was taken by Picasso, who, nurtured on
Cezanne, carried to its perfectly logical conclusion the master's structural
treatment of nature. Representation disappears. Starting from a single
natural object, Picasso and the Cubists produce lines and project angles till
their canvases are covered with intricate and often very beautiful series of

balanced lines and curves. They persist, however, in giving them picture
titles which recall the natural object from which their minds first took flight.

With Gauguin the case is different. The generation of his disciples which
followed him—I put it thus to distinguish them from his actual pupils at
Pont Aven, Serusier and the rest—carried the tendency further. One
hesitates to mention Derain, for his beginnings, full of vitality and promise,
have given place to a dreary compromise with Cubism, without visible
future, and above all without humour. But there is no better example of the
development of synthetic symbolism than his first book of woodcuts.

[Footnote: L'Enchanteur pourrissant, par Guillaume Apollinaire, avec
illustrations gravees sur bois par Andre Derain. Paris, Kahnweiler, 1910.]

Here is work which keeps the merest semblance of conventional form,
which gives its effect by startling masses of black and white, by sudden
curves, but more frequently by sudden angles.

[Footnote: The renaissance of the angle in art is an interesting feature of
the new movement. Not since Egyptian times has it been used with such
noble effect. There is a painting of Gauguin's at Hagen, of a row of Tahitian
women seated on a bench, that consists entirely of a telling design in
Egyptian angles. Cubism is the result of this discovery of the angle, blended
with the influence of Cezanne.]

In the process of the gradual abandonment of natural form the "angle"
school is paralleled by the "curve" school, which also descends wholly from
Gauguin. The best known representative is Maurice Denis. But he has
become a slave to sentimentality, and has been left behind. Matisse is the
most prominent French artist who has followed Gauguin with curves. In
Germany a group of young men, who form the Neue Kunstlevereinigung in

Munich, work almost entirely in sweeping curves, and have reduced natural
objects purely to flowing, decorative units.

But while they have followed Gauguin's lead in abandoning
representation both of these two groups of advance are lacking in spiritual
meaning. Their aim becomes more and more decorative, with an
undercurrent of suggestion of simplified form. Anyone who has studied
Gauguin will be aware of the intense spiritual value of his work. The man is
a preacher and a psychologist, universal by his very unorthodoxy,
fundamental because he goes deeper than civilization. In his disciples this
great element is wanting. Kandinsky has supplied the need. He is not only
on the track of an art more purely spiritual than was conceived even by
Gauguin, but he has achieved the final abandonment of all representative
intention. In this way he combines in himself the spiritual and technical
tendencies of one great branch of Post-Impressionism.

The question most generally asked about Kandinsky's art is: "What is he
trying to do?" It is to be hoped that this book will do something towards
answering the question. But it will not do everything. This—partly because
it is impossible to put into words the whole of Kandinsky's ideal, partly
because in his anxiety to state his case, to court criticism, the author has
been tempted to formulate more than is wise. His analysis of colours and
their effects on the spectator is not the real basis of his art, because, if it
were, one could, with the help of a scientific manual, describe one's
emotions before his pictures with perfect accuracy. And this is impossible.

Kandinsky is painting music. That is to say, he has broken down the
barrier between music and painting, and has isolated the pure emotion
which, for want of a better name, we call the artistic emotion. Anyone who
has listened to good music with any enjoyment will admit to an
unmistakable but quite indefinable thrill. He will not be able, with sincerity,

to say that such a passage gave him such visual impressions, or such a
harmony roused in him such emotions. The effect of music is too subtle for
words. And the same with this painting of Kandinsky's. Speaking for
myself, to stand in front of some of his drawings or pictures gives a keener
and more spiritual pleasure than any other kind of painting. But I could not
express in the least what gives the pleasure. Presumably the lines and
colours have the same effect as harmony and rhythm in music have on the
truly musical. That psychology comes in no one can deny. Many people—
perhaps at present the very large majority of people—have their colour-
music sense dormant. It has never been exercised. In the same way many
people are unmusical—either wholly, by nature, or partly, for lack of
experience. Even when Kandinsky's idea is universally understood there
may be many who are not moved by his melody. For my part, something
within me answered to Kandinsky's art the first time I met with it. There
was no question of looking for representation; a harmony had been set up,
and that was enough.

Of course colour-music is no new idea. That is to say attempts have been
made to play compositions in colour, by flashes and harmonies. [Footnote:
Cf. "Colour Music," by A. Wallace Rimington. Hutchinson. 6s. net.] Also
music has been interpreted in colour. But I do not know of any previous
attempt to paint, without any reference to music, compositions which shall
have on the spectator an effect wholly divorced from representative
association. Kandinsky refers to attempts to paint in colour-counterpoint.
But that is a different matter, in that it is the borrowing from one art by
another of purely technical methods, without a previous impulse from
spiritual sympathy.

One is faced then with the conflicting claims of Picasso and Kandinsky
to the position of true leader of non-representative art. Picasso's admirers
hail him, just as this Introduction hails Kandinsky, as a visual musician. The

methods and ideas of each rival are so different that the title cannot be
accorded to both. In his book, Kandinsky states his opinion of Cubism and
its fatal weakness, and history goes to support his contention. The origin of
Cubism in Cezanne, in a structural art that owes its very existence to matter,
makes its claim to pure emotionalism seem untenable. Emotions are not
composed of strata and conflicting pressures. Once abandon reality and the
geometrical vision becomes abstract mathematics. It seems to me that
Picasso shares a Futurist error when he endeavours to harmonize one item
of reality—a number, a button, a few capital letters—with a surrounding
aura of angular projections. There must be a conflict of impressions, which
differ essentially in quality. One trend of modern music is towards realism
of sound. Children cry, dogs bark, plates are broken. Picasso approaches the
same goal from the opposite direction. It is as though he were trying to
work from realism to music. The waste of time is, to my mind, equally
complete in both cases. The power of music to give expression without the
help of representation is its noblest possession. No painting has ever had
such a precious power. Kandinsky is striving to give it that power, and
prove what is at least the logical analogy between colour and sound,
between line and rhythm of beat. Picasso makes little use of colour, and
confines himself only to one series of line effects—those caused by
conflicting angles. So his aim is smaller and more limited than Kandinsky's
even if it is as reasonable. But because it has not wholly abandoned realism
but uses for the painting of feeling a structural vision dependent for its
value on the association of reality, because in so doing it tries to make the
best of two worlds, there seems little hope for it of redemption in either.

As has been said above, Picasso and Kandinsky make an interesting
parallel, in that they have developed the art respectively of Cezanne and
Gauguin, in a similar direction. On the decision of Picasso's failure or
success rests the distinction between Cezanne and Gauguin, the realist and
the symbolist, the painter of externals and the painter of religious feeling.

Unless a spiritual value is accorded to Cezanne's work, unless he is believed
to be a religious painter (and religious painters need not paint Madonnas),
unless in fact he is paralleled closely with Gauguin, his follower Picasso
cannot claim to stand, with Kandinsky, as a prophet of an art of spiritual
harmony.

If Kandinsky ever attains his ideal—for he is the first to admit that he has
not yet reached his goal—if he ever succeeds in finding a common
language of colour and line which shall stand alone as the language of
sound and beat stands alone, without recourse to natural form or
representation, he will on all hands be hailed as a great innovator, as a
champion of the freedom of art. Until such time, it is the duty of those to
whom his work has spoken, to bear their testimony. Otherwise he may be
condemned as one who has invented a shorthand of his own, and who
paints pictures which cannot be understood by those who have not the key
of the cipher. In the meantime also it is important that his position should be
recognized as a legitimate, almost inevitable outcome of Post-Impressionist
tendencies. Such is the recognition this Introduction strives to secure.

MICHAEL T. H. SADLER

REFERENCE

Those interested in the ideas and work of Kandinsky and his fellow artists
would do well to consult:

DER BLAUE REITER, vol. i. Piper Verlag, Munich, 10 mk. This
sumptuous volume contains articles by Kandinsky, Franz Marc, Arnold

Schonberg, etc., together with some musical texts and numerous
reproductions—some in colour—of the work of the primitive mosaicists,
glass-painters, and sculptors, as well as of more modern artists from Greco
to Kandinsky, Marc, and their friends. The choice of illustrations gives an
admirable idea of the continuity and steady growth of the new painting,
sculpture, and music.

KLANGE. By Wassily Kandinsky. Piper Verlag, Munich, 30 mk. A most
beautifully produced book of prose-poems, with a large number of
illustrations, many in colour. This is Kandinsky's most recent work.

Also the back and current numbers of Der Sturm, a weekly paper
published in Berlin in the defence of the new art. Illustrations by Marc,
Pechstein, le Fauconnier, Delaunay, Kandinsky, etc. Also poems and critical
articles. Price per weekly number 25 pfg. Der Sturm has in preparation an
album of reproductions of pictures and drawings by Kandinsky.

For Cubism cf. Gleizes et Metzinger, "du Cubisme," and Guillaume
Apollinaire, "Les Peintres Cubistes." Collection Les Arts. Paris,
Figuiere, per vol. 3 fr. 50 c.

DEDICATED TO THE MEMORY OF
ELISABETH TICHEJEFF

PART 1: ABOUT GENERAL AESTHETIC

I. INTRODUCTION

Every work of art is the child of its age and, in many cases, the mother of
our emotions. It follows that each period of culture produces an art of its
own which can never be repeated. Efforts to revive the art-principles of the
past will at best produce an art that is still-born. It is impossible for us to
live and feel, as did the ancient Greeks. In the same way those who strive to
follow the Greek methods in sculpture achieve only a similarity of form, the
work remaining soulless for all time. Such imitation is mere aping.
Externally the monkey completely resembles a human being; he will sit
holding a book in front of his nose, and turn over the pages with a
thoughtful aspect, but his actions have for him no real meaning.

There is, however, in art another kind of external similarity which is
founded on a fundamental truth. When there is a similarity of inner
tendency in the whole moral and spiritual atmosphere, a similarity of ideals,
at first closely pursued but later lost to sight, a similarity in the inner feeling
of any one period to that of another, the logical result will be a revival of the
external forms which served to express those inner feelings in an earlier
age. An example of this today is our sympathy, our spiritual relationship,
with the Primitives. Like ourselves, these artists sought to express in their

work only internal truths, renouncing in consequence all consideration of
external form.

This all-important spark of inner life today is at present only a spark. Our
minds, which are even now only just awakening after years of materialism,
are infected with the despair of unbelief, of lack of purpose and ideal. The
nightmare of materialism, which has turned the life of the universe into an
evil, useless game, is not yet past; it holds the awakening soul still in its
grip. Only a feeble light glimmers like a tiny star in a vast gulf of darkness.
This feeble light is but a presentiment, and the soul, when it sees it,
trembles in doubt whether the light is not a dream, and the gulf of darkness
reality. This doubt, and the still harsh tyranny of the materialistic
philosophy, divide our soul sharply from that of the Primitives. Our soul
rings cracked when we seek to play upon it, as does a costly vase, long
buried in the earth, which is found to have a flaw when it is dug up once
more. For this reason, the Primitive phase, through which we are now
passing, with its temporary similarity of form, can only be of short duration.

These two possible resemblances between the art forms of today and
those of the past will be at once recognized as diametrically opposed to one
another. The first, being purely external, has no future. The second, being
internal, contains the seed of the future within itself. After the period of
materialist effort, which held the soul in check until it was shaken off as
evil, the soul is emerging, purged by trials and sufferings. Shapeless
emotions such as fear, joy, grief, etc., which belonged to this time of effort,
will no longer greatly attract the artist. He will endeavour to awake subtler
emotions, as yet unnamed. Living himself a complicated and comparatively
subtle life, his work will give to those observers capable of feeling them
lofty emotions beyond the reach of words.

The observer of today, however, is seldom capable of feeling such
emotions. He seeks in a work of art a mere imitation of nature which can
serve some definite purpose (for example a portrait in the ordinary sense) or
a presentment of nature according to a certain convention ("impressionist"
painting), or some inner feeling expressed in terms of natural form (as we
say—a picture with Stimmung) [Footnote: Stimmung is almost
untranslateable. It is almost "sentiment" in the best sense, and almost
"feeling." Many of Corot's twilight landscapes are full of a beautiful
"Stimmung." Kandinsky uses the word later on to mean the "essential
spirit" of nature.—M.T.H.S.] All those varieties of picture, when they are
really art, fulfil their purpose and feed the spirit. Though this applies to the
first case, it applies more strongly to the third, where the spectator does feel
a corresponding thrill in himself. Such harmony or even contrast of emotion
cannot be superficial or worthless; indeed the Stimmung of a picture can
deepen and purify that of the spectator. Such works of art at least preserve
the soul from coarseness; they "key it up," so to speak, to a certain height,
as a tuning-key the strings of a musical instrument. But purification, and
extension in duration and size of this sympathy of soul, remain one-sided,
and the possibilities of the influence of art are not exerted to their utmost.

Imagine a building divided into many rooms. The building may be large
or small. Every wall of every room is covered with pictures of various
sizes; perhaps they number many thousands. They represent in colour bits
of nature—animals in sunlight or shadow, drinking, standing in water, lying
on the grass; near to, a Crucifixion by a painter who does not believe in
Christ; flowers; human figures sitting, standing, walking; often they are
naked; many naked women, seen foreshortened from behind; apples and
silver dishes; portrait of Councillor So and So; sunset; lady in red; flying
duck; portrait of Lady X; flying geese; lady in white; calves in shadow
flecked with brilliant yellow sunlight; portrait of Prince Y; lady in green. All
this is carefully printed in a book—name of artist—name of picture. People

with these books in their hands go from wall to wall, turning over pages,
reading the names. Then they go away, neither richer nor poorer than when
they came, and are absorbed at once in their business, which has nothing to
do with art. Why did they come? In each picture is a whole lifetime
imprisoned, a whole lifetime of fears, doubts, hopes, and joys.

Whither is this lifetime tending? What is the message of the competent
artist? "To send light into the darkness of men's hearts—such is the duty of
the artist," said Schumann. "An artist is a man who can draw and paint
everything," said Tolstoi.

Of these two definitions of the artist's activity we must choose the
second, if we think of the exhibition just described. On one canvas is a
huddle of objects painted with varying degrees of skill, virtuosity and
vigour, harshly or smoothly. To harmonize the whole is the task of art. With
cold eyes and indifferent mind the spectators regard the work. Connoisseurs
admire the "skill" (as one admires a tightrope walker), enjoy the "quality of
painting" (as one enjoys a pasty). But hungry souls go hungry away.

The vulgar herd stroll through the rooms and pronounce the pictures
"nice" or "splendid." Those who could speak have said nothing, those who
could hear have heard nothing. This condition of art is called "art for art's
sake." This neglect of inner meanings, which is the life of colours, this vain
squandering of artistic power is called "art for art's sake."

The artist seeks for material reward for his dexterity, his power of vision
and experience. His purpose becomes the satisfaction of vanity and greed.
In place of the steady co-operation of artists is a scramble for good things.
There are complaints of excessive competition, of over-production. Hatred,
partisanship, cliques, jealousy, intrigues are the natural consequences of this
aimless, materialist art.

[Footnote: The few solitary exceptions do not destroy the truth of this sad
and ominous picture, and even these exceptions are chiefly believers in the
doctrine of art for art's sake. They serve, therefore, a higher ideal, but one
which is ultimately a useless waste of their strength. External beauty is one
element of a spiritual atmosphere. But beyond this positive fact (that what is
beautiful is good) it has the weakness of a talent not used to the full. (The
word talent is employed in the biblical sense.)]

The onlooker turns away from the artist who has higher ideals and who
cannot see his life purpose in an art without aims.

Sympathy is the education of the spectator from the point of view of the
artist. It has been said above that art is the child of its age. Such an art can
only create an artistic feeling which is already clearly felt. This art, which
has no power for the future, which is only a child of the age and cannot
become a mother of the future, is a barren art. She is transitory and to all
intent dies the moment the atmosphere alters which nourished her.

The other art, that which is capable of educating further, springs equally
from contemporary feeling, but is at the same time not only echo and mirror
of it, but also has a deep and powerful prophetic strength.

The spiritual life, to which art belongs and of which she is one of the
mightiest elements, is a complicated but definite and easily definable
movement forwards and upwards. This movement is the movement of
experience. It may take different forms, but it holds at bottom to the same
inner thought and purpose.

Veiled in obscurity are the causes of this need to move ever upwards and
forwards, by sweat of the brow, through sufferings and fears. When one
stage has been accomplished, and many evil stones cleared from the road,
some unseen and wicked hand scatters new obstacles in the way, so that the

path often seems blocked and totally obliterated. But there never fails to
come to the rescue some human being, like ourselves in everything except
that he has in him a secret power of vision.

He sees and points the way. The power to do this he would sometimes
fain lay aside, for it is a bitter cross to bear. But he cannot do so. Scorned
and hated, he drags after him over the stones the heavy chariot of a divided
humanity, ever forwards and upwards.

Often, many years after his body has vanished from the earth, men try by
every means to recreate this body in marble, iron, bronze, or stone, on an
enormous scale. As if there were any intrinsic value in the bodily existence
of such divine martyrs and servants of humanity, who despised the flesh and
lived only for the spirit! But at least such setting up of marble is a proof that
a great number of men have reached the point where once the being they
would now honour, stood alone.

II. THE MOVEMENT OF THE TRIANGLE

The life of the spirit may be fairly represented in diagram as a large acute-
angled triangle divided horizontally into unequal parts with the narrowest
segment uppermost. The lower the segment the greater it is in breadth,
depth, and area.

The whole triangle is moving slowly, almost invisibly forwards and
upwards. Where the apex was today the second segment is tomorrow; what
today can be understood only by the apex and to the rest of the triangle is an
incomprehensible gibberish, forms tomorrow the true thought and feeling of
the second segment.

At the apex of the top segment stands often one man, and only one. His
joyful vision cloaks a vast sorrow. Even those who are nearest to him in
sympathy do not understand him. Angrily they abuse him as charlatan or
madman. So in his lifetime stood Beethoven, solitary and insulted.

[Footnote: Weber, composer of Der Freischutz, said of Beethoven's
Seventh Symphony: "The extravagances of genius have reached the limit;
Beethoven is now ripe for an asylum." Of the opening phrase, on a
reiterated "e," the Abbe Stadler said to his neighbour, when first he heard it:
"Always that miserable 'e'; he seems to be deaf to it himself, the idiot!"]

How many years will it be before a greater segment of the triangle
reaches the spot where he once stood alone? Despite memorials and statues,
are they really many who have risen to his level? [Footnote 2: Are not many
monuments in themselves answers to that question?]

In every segment of the triangle are artists. Each one of them who can see
beyond the limits of his segment is a prophet to those about him, and helps
the advance of the obstinate whole. But those who are blind, or those who
retard the movement of the triangle for baser reasons, are fully understood
by their fellows and acclaimed for their genius. The greater the segment
(which is the same as saying the lower it lies in the triangle) so the greater
the number who understand the words of the artist. Every segment hungers
consciously or, much more often, unconsciously for their corresponding
spiritual food. This food is offered by the artists, and for this food the
segment immediately below will tomorrow be stretching out eager hands.

This simile of the triangle cannot be said to express every aspect of the
spiritual life. For instance, there is never an absolute shadow-side to the
picture, never a piece of unrelieved gloom. Even too often it happens that
one level of spiritual food suffices for the nourishment of those who are
already in a higher segment. But for them this food is poison; in small

quantities it depresses their souls gradually into a lower segment; in large
quantities it hurls them suddenly into the depths ever lower and lower.
Sienkiewicz, in one of his novels, compares the spiritual life to swimming;
for the man who does not strive tirelessly, who does not fight continually
against sinking, will mentally and morally go under. In this strait a man's
talent (again in the biblical sense) becomes a curse—and not only the talent
of the artist, but also of those who eat this poisoned food. The artist uses his
strength to flatter his lower needs; in an ostensibly artistic form he presents
what is impure, draws the weaker elements to him, mixes them with evil,
betrays men and helps them to betray themselves, while they convince
themselves and others that they are spiritually thirsty, and that from this
pure spring they may quench their thirst. Such art does not help the forward
movement, but hinders it, dragging back those who are striving to press
onward, and spreading pestilence abroad.

Such periods, during which art has no noble champion, during which the
true spiritual food is wanting, are periods of retrogression in the spiritual
world. Ceaselessly souls fall from the higher to the lower segments of the
triangle, and the whole seems motionless, or even to move down and
backwards. Men attribute to these blind and dumb periods a special value,
for they judge them by outward results, thinking only of material well-
being. They hail some technical advance, which can help nothing but the
body, as a great achievement. Real spiritual gains are at best under-valued,
at worst entirely ignored.

The solitary visionaries are despised or regarded as abnormal and
eccentric. Those who are not wrapped in lethargy and who feel vague
longings for spiritual life and knowledge and progress, cry in harsh chorus,
without any to comfort them. The night of the spirit falls more and more
darkly. Deeper becomes the misery of these blind and terrified guides, and

their followers, tormented and unnerved by fear and doubt, prefer to this
gradual darkening the final sudden leap into the blackness.

At such a time art ministers to lower needs, and is used for material ends.
She seeks her substance in hard realities because she knows of nothing
nobler. Objects, the reproduction of which is considered her sole aim,
remain monotonously the same. The question "what?" disappears from art;
only the question "how?" remains. By what method are these material
objects to be reproduced? The word becomes a creed. Art has lost her soul.

In the search for method the artist goes still further. Art becomes so
specialized as to be comprehensible only to artists, and they complain
bitterly of public indifference to their work. For since the artist in such
times has no need to say much, but only to be notorious for some small
originality and consequently lauded by a small group of patrons and
connoisseurs (which incidentally is also a very profitable business for him),
there arise a crowd of gifted and skilful painters, so easy does the conquest
of art appear. In each artistic circle are thousands of such artists, of whom
the majority seek only for some new technical manner, and who produce
millions of works of art without enthusiasm, with cold hearts and souls
asleep.

Competition arises. The wild battle for success becomes more and more
material. Small groups who have fought their way to the top of the chaotic
world of art and picture-making entrench themselves in the territory they
have won. The public, left far behind, looks on bewildered, loses interest
and turns away.

But despite all this confusion, this chaos, this wild hunt for notoriety, the
spiritual triangle, slowly but surely, with irresistible strength, moves
onwards and upwards.

The invisible Moses descends from the mountain and sees the dance
round the golden calf. But he brings with him fresh stores of wisdom to
man.

First by the artist is heard his voice, the voice that is inaudible to the
crowd. Almost unknowingly the artist follows the call. Already in that very
question "how?" lies a hidden seed of renaissance. For when this "how?"
remains without any fruitful answer, there is always a possibility that the
same "something" (which we call personality today) may be able to see in
the objects about it not only what is purely material but also something less
solid; something less "bodily" than was seen in the period of realism, when
the universal aim was to reproduce anything "as it really is" and without
fantastic imagination.

[Footnote: Frequent use is made here of the terms "material" and "non-
material," and of the intermediate phrases "more" or "less material." Is
everything material? or is EVERYTHING spiritual? Can the distinctions we
make between matter and spirit be nothing but relative modifications of one
or the other? Thought which, although a product of the spirit, can be
defined with positive science, is matter, but of fine and not coarse
substance. Is whatever cannot be touched with the hand, spiritual? The
discussion lies beyond the scope of this little book; all that matters here is
that the boundaries drawn should not be too definite.]

If the emotional power of the artist can overwhelm the "how?" and can
give free scope to his finer feelings, then art is on the crest of the road by
which she will not fail later on to find the "what" she has lost, the "what"
which will show the way to the spiritual food of the newly awakened
spiritual life. This "what?" will no longer be the material, objective "what"
of the former period, but the internal truth of art, the soul without which the

body (i.e. the "how") can never be healthy, whether in an individual or in a
whole people.

THIS "WHAT" IS THE INTERNAL TRUTH WHICH ONLY ART CAN DIVINE, WHICH
ONLY ART CAN EXPRESS BY THOSE MEANS OF EXPRESSION WHICH ARE HERS
ALONE.

III. SPIRITUAL REVOLUTION

The spiritual triangle moves slowly onwards and upwards. Today one of the
largest of the lower segments has reached the point of using the first battle
cry of the materialist creed. The dwellers in this segment group themselves
round various banners in religion. They call themselves Jews, Catholics,
Protestants, etc. But they are really atheists, and this a few either of the
boldest or the narrowest openly avow. "Heaven is empty," "God is dead." In
politics these people are democrats and republicans. The fear, horror and
hatred which yesterday they felt for these political creeds they now direct
against anarchism, of which they know nothing but its much dreaded name.

In economics these people are Socialists. They make sharp the sword of
justice with which to slay the hydra of capitalism and to hew off the head of
evil.

Because the inhabitants of this great segment of the triangle have never
solved any problem independently, but are dragged as it were in a cart by
those the noblest of their fellowmen who have sacrificed themselves, they
know nothing of the vital impulse of life which they regard always vaguely
from a great distance. They rate this impulse lightly, putting their trust in
purposeless theory and in the working of some logical method.

The men of the segment next below are dragged slowly higher, blindly,
by those just described. But they cling to their old position, full of dread of
the unknown and of betrayal. The higher segments are not only blind
atheists but can justify their godlessness with strange words; for example,
those of Virchow—so unworthy of a learned man—"I have dissected many
corpses, but never yet discovered a soul in any of them."

In politics they are generally republican, with a knowledge of different
parliamentary procedures; they read the political leading articles in the
newspapers. In economics they are socialists of various grades, and can
support their "principles" with numerous quotations, passing from
Schweitzer's EMMA via Lasalle's IRON LAW OF WAGES, to Marx's
CAPITAL, and still further.

In these loftier segments other categories of ideas, absent in these just
described, begin gradually to appear—science and art, to which last belong
also literature and music.

In science these men are positivists, only recognizing those things that
can be weighed and measured. Anything beyond that they consider as rather
discreditable nonsense, that same nonsense about which they held yesterday
the theories that today are proven.

In art they are naturalists, which means that they recognize and value the
personality, individuality and temperament of the artist up to a certain
definite point. This point has been fixed by others, and in it they believe
unflinchingly.

But despite their patent and well-ordered security, despite their infallible
principles, there lurks in these higher segments a hidden fear, a nervous
trembling, a sense of insecurity. And this is due to their upbringing. They
know that the sages, statesmen and artists whom today they revere, were

yesterday spurned as swindlers and charlatans. And the higher the segment
in the triangle, the better defined is this fear, this modern sense of
insecurity. Here and there are people with eyes which can see, minds which
can correlate. They say to themselves: "If the science of the day before
yesterday is rejected by the people of yesterday, and that of yesterday by us
of today, is it not possible that what we call science now will be rejected by
the men of tomorrow?" And the bravest of them answer, "It is possible."

Then people appear who can distinguish those problems that the science
of today has not yet explained. And they ask themselves: "Will science, if it
continues on the road it has followed for so long, ever attain to the solution
of these problems? And if it does so attain, will men be able to rely on its
solution?" In these segments are also professional men of learning who can
remember the time when facts now recognized by the Academies as firmly
established, were scorned by those same Academies. There are also
philosophers of aesthetic who write profound books about an art which was
yesterday condemned as nonsense. In writing these books they remove the
barriers over which art has most recently stepped and set up new ones
which are to remain for ever in the places they have chosen. They do not
notice that they are busy erecting barriers, not in front of art, but behind it.
And if they do notice this, on the morrow they merely write fresh books and
hastily set their barriers a little further on. This performance will go on
unaltered until it is realized that the most extreme principle of aesthetic can
never be of value to the future, but only to the past. No such theory of
principle can be laid down for those things which lie beyond, in the realm
of the immaterial. That which has no material existence cannot be subjected
to a material classification. That which belongs to the spirit of the future can
only be realized in feeling, and to this feeling the talent of the artist is the
only road. Theory is the lamp which sheds light on the petrified ideas of
yesterday and of the more distant past. [Footnote: Cf. Chapter VII.] And as
we rise higher in the triangle we find that the uneasiness increases, as a city

built on the most correct architectural plan may be shaken suddenly by the
uncontrollable force of nature. Humanity is living in such a spiritual city,
subject to these sudden disturbances for which neither architects nor
mathematicians have made allowance. In one place lies a great wall
crumbled to pieces like a card house, in another are the ruins of a huge
tower which once stretched to heaven, built on many presumably immortal
spiritual pillars. The abandoned churchyard quakes and forgotten graves
open and from them rise forgotten ghosts. Spots appear on the sun and the
sun grows dark, and what theory can fight with darkness? And in this city
live also men deafened by false wisdom who hear no crash, and blinded by
false wisdom, so that they say "our sun will shine more brightly than ever
and soon the last spots will disappear." But sometime even these men will
hear and see.

But when we get still higher there is no longer this bewilderment. There
work is going on which boldly attacks those pillars which men have set up.
There we find other professional men of learning who test matter again and
again, who tremble before no problem, and who finally cast doubt on that
very matter which was yesterday the foundation of everything, so that the
whole universe is shaken. Every day another scientific theory finds bold
discoverers who overstep the boundaries of prophecy and, forgetful of
themselves, join the other soldiers in the conquest of some new summit and
in the hopeless attack on some stubborn fortress. But "there is no fortress
that man cannot overcome."

On the one hand, FACTS are being established which the science of
yesterday dubbed swindles. Even newspapers, which are for the most part
the most obsequious servants of worldly success and of the mob, and which
trim their sails to every wind, find themselves compelled to modify their
ironical judgements on the "marvels" of science and even to abandon them
altogether. Various learned men, among them ultra-materialists, dedicate

their strength to the scientific research of doubtful problems, which can no
longer be lied about or passed over in silence. [Footnote: Zoller, Wagner,
Butleroff (St. Petersburg), Crookes (London), etc.; later on, C. H. Richet, C.
Flammarion. The Parisian paper Le Matin, published about two years ago
the discoveries of the two last named under the title "Je le constate, mais je
ne l'explique pas." Finally there are C. Lombroso, the inventor of the
anthropological method of diagnosing crime, and Eusapio Palladino.]

On the other hand, the number is increasing of those men who put no
trust in the methods of materialistic science when it deals with those
questions which have to do with "non-matter," or matter which is not
accessible to our minds. Just as art is looking for help from the primitives,
so these men are turning to half-forgotten times in order to get help from
their half-forgotten methods. However, these very methods are still alive
and in use among nations whom we, from the height of our knowledge,
have been accustomed to regard with pity and scorn. To such nations belong
the Indians, who from time to time confront those learned in our civilization
with problems which we have either passed by unnoticed or brushed aside
with superficial words and explanations. [Footnote: Frequently in such
cases use is made of the word hypnotism; that same hypnotism which, in its
earlier form of mesmerism, was disdainfully put aside by various learned
bodies.] Mme. Blavatsky was the first person, after a life of many years in
India, to see a connection between these "savages" and our "civilization."
From that moment there began a tremendous spiritual movement which
today includes a large number of people and has even assumed a material
form in the THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY. This society consists of groups
who seek to approach the problem of the spirit by way of the INNER
knowledge. The theory of Theosophy which serves as the basis to this
movement was set out by Blavatsky in the form of a catechism in which the
pupil receives definite answers to his questions from the theosophical point
of view. [Footnote: E. P. Blavatsky, The Key of Theosophy, London, 1889.]

Theosophy, according to Blavatsky, is synonymous with ETERNAL
TRUTH. "The new torchbearer of truth will find the minds of men prepared
for his message, a language ready for him in which to clothe the new truths
he brings, an organization awaiting his arrival, which will remove the
merely mechanical, material obstacles and difficulties from his path." And
then Blavatsky continues: "The earth will be a heaven in the twenty-first
century in comparison with what it is now," and with these words ends her
book.

When religion, science and morality are shaken, the two last by the
strong hand of Nietzsche, and when the outer supports threaten to fall, man
turns his gaze from externals in on to himself. Literature, music and art are
the first and most sensitive spheres in which this spiritual revolution makes
itself felt. They reflect the dark picture of the present time and show the
importance of what at first was only a little point of light noticed by few
and for the great majority non-existent. Perhaps they even grow dark in
their turn, but on the other hand they turn away from the soulless life of the
present towards those substances and ideas which give free scope to the
non-material strivings of the soul.

A poet of this kind in the realm of literature is Maeterlinck. He takes us
into a world which, rightly or wrongly, we term supernatural. La Princesse
Maleine, Les Sept Princesses, Les Aveugles, etc., are not people of past
times as are the heroes in Shakespeare. They are merely souls lost in the
clouds, threatened by them with death, eternally menaced by some invisible
and sombre power.

Spiritual darkness, the insecurity of ignorance and fear pervade the world
in which they move. Maeterlinck is perhaps one of the first prophets, one of
the first artistic reformers and seers to herald the end of the decadence just
described. The gloom of the spiritual atmosphere, the terrible, but all-

guiding hand, the sense of utter fear, the feeling of having strayed from the
path, the confusion among the guides, all these are clearly felt in his works.
[Footnote: To the front tank of such seers of the decadence belongs also
Alfred Kubin. With irresistible force both Kubin's drawings and also his
novel "Die Andere Seite" seem to engulf us in the terrible atmosphere of
empty desolation.]

This atmosphere Maeterlinck creates principally by purely artistic means.
His material machinery (gloomy mountains, moonlight, marshes, wind, the
cries of owls, etc.) plays really a symbolic role and helps to give the inner
note. [Footnote: When one of Maeterlinck's plays was produced in St.
Petersburg under his own guidance, he himself at one of the rehearsals had
a tower represented by a plain piece of hanging linen. It was of no
importance to him to have elaborate scenery prepared. He did as children,
the greatest imaginers of all time, always do in their games; for they use a
stick for a horse or create entire regiments of cavalry out of chalks. And in
the same way a chalk with a notch in it is changed from a knight into a
horse. On similar lines the imagination of the spectator plays in the modern
theatre, and especially in that of Russia, an important part. And this is a
notable element in the transition from the material to the spiritual in the
theatre of the future.] Maeterlinck's principal technical weapon is his use of
words. The word may express an inner harmony. This inner harmony
springs partly, perhaps principally, from the object which it names. But if
the object is not itself seen, but only its name heard, the mind of the hearer
receives an abstract impression only, that is to say as of the object
dematerialized, and a corresponding vibration is immediately set up in the
HEART.

The apt use of a word (in its poetical meaning), repetition of this word,
twice, three times or even more frequently, according to the need of the
poem, will not only tend to intensify the inner harmony but also bring to

light unsuspected spiritual properties of the word itself. Further than that,
frequent repetition of a word (again a favourite game of children, which is
forgotten in after life) deprives the word of its original external meaning.
Similarly, in drawing, the abstract message of the object drawn tends to be
forgotten and its meaning lost. Sometimes perhaps we unconsciously hear
this real harmony sounding together with the material or later on with the
non-material sense of the object. But in the latter case the true harmony
exercises a direct impression on the soul. The soul undergoes an emotion
which has no relation to any definite object, an emotion more complicated,
I might say more super-sensuous than the emotion caused by the sound of a
bell or of a stringed instrument. This line of development offers great
possibilities to the literature of the future. In an embryonic form this word-
power-has already been used in SERRES CHAUDES. [Footnote: SERRES
CHAUDES, SUIVIES DE QUINZE CHANSONS, par Maurice
Maeterlinck. Brussels. Lacomblez.] As Maeterlinck uses them, words which
seem at first to create only a neutral impression have really a more subtle
value. Even a familiar word like "hair," if used in a certain way can
intensify an atmosphere of sorrow or despair. And this is Maeterlinck's
method. He shows that thunder, lightning and a moon behind driving
clouds, in themselves material means, can be used in the theatre to create a
greater sense of terror than they do in nature.

The true inner forces do not lose their strength and effect so easily.
[Footnote: A comparison between the work of Poe and Maeterlinck shows
the course of artistic transition from the material to the abstract.] An the
word which has two meanings, the first direct, the second indirect, is the
pure material of poetry and of literature, the material which these arts alone
can manipulate and through which they speak to the spirit.

Something similar may be noticed in the music of Wagner. His famous
leitmotiv is an attempt to give personality to his characters by something

beyond theatrical expedients and light effect. His method of using a definite
motiv is a purely musical method. It creates a spiritual atmosphere by
means of a musical phrase which precedes the hero, which he seems to
radiate forth from any distance. [Footnote: Frequent attempts have shown
that such a spiritual atmosphere can belong not only to heroes but to any
human being. Sensitives cannot, for example, remain in a room in which a
person has been who is spiritually antagonistic to them, even though they
know nothing of his existence.] The most modern musicians like Debussy
create a spiritual impression, often taken from nature, but embodied in
purely musical form. For this reason Debussy is often classed with the
Impressionist painters on the ground that he resembles these painters in
using natural phenomena for the purposes of his art. Whatever truth there
may be in this comparison merely accentuates the fact that the various arts
of today learn from each other and often resemble each other. But it would
be rash to say that this definition is an exhaustive statement of Debussy's
significance. Despite his similarity with the Impressionists this musician is
deeply concerned with spiritual harmony, for in his works one hears the
suffering and tortured nerves of the present time. And further Debussy
never uses the wholly material note so characteristic of programme music,
but trusts mainly in the creation of a more abstract impression. Debussy has
been greatly influenced by Russian music, notably by Mussorgsky. So it is
not surprising that he stands in close relation to the young Russian
composers, the chief of whom is Scriabin. The experience of the hearer is
frequently the same during the performance of the works of these two
musicians. He is often snatched quite suddenly from a series of modern
discords into the charm of more or less conventional beauty. He feels
himself often insulted, tossed about like a tennis ball over the net between
the two parties of the outer and the inner beauty. To those who are not
accustomed to it the inner beauty appears as ugliness because humanity in
general inclines to the outer and knows nothing of the inner. Almost alone

in severing himself from conventional beauty is the Austrian composer,
Arnold Schonberg. He says in his Harmonielehre: "Every combination of
notes, every advance is possible, but I am beginning to feel that there are
also definite rules and conditions which incline me to the use of this or that
dissonance." [Footnote: "Die Musik," p. 104, from the Harmonielehre
(Verlag der Universal Edition).] This means that Schonberg realizes that the
greatest freedom of all, the freedom of an unfettered art, can never be
absolute. Every age achieves a certain measure of this freedom, but beyond
the boundaries of its freedom the mightiest genius can never go. But the
measure of freedom of each age must be constantly enlarged. Schonberg is
endeavouring to make complete use of his freedom and has already
discovered gold mines of new beauty in his search for spiritual harmony.
His music leads us into a realm where musical experience is a matter not of
the ear but of the soul alone—and from this point begins the music of the
future.

A parallel course has been followed by the Impressionist movement in
painting. It is seen in its dogmatic and most naturalistic form in so-called
Neo-Impressionism. The theory of this is to put on the canvas the whole
glitter and brilliance of nature, and not only an isolated aspect of her.

It is interesting to notice three practically contemporary and totally
different groups in painting. They are (1) Rossetti and his pupil Burne-
Jones, with their followers; (2) Bocklin and his school; (3) Segantini, with
his unworthy following of photographic artists. I have chosen these three
groups to illustrate the search for the abstract in art. Rossetti sought to
revive the non-materialism of the pre-Raphaelites. Bocklin busied himself
with the mythological scenes, but was in contrast to Rossetti in that he gave
strongly material form to his legendary figures. Segantini, outwardly the
most material of the three, selected the most ordinary objects (hills, stones,
cattle, etc.) often painting them with the minutest realism, but he never

failed to create a spiritual as well as a material value, so that really he is the
most non-material of the trio.

These men sought for the "inner" by way of the "outer."

By another road, and one more purely artistic, the great seeker after a
new sense of form approached the same problem. Cezanne made a living
thing out of a teacup, or rather in a teacup he realized the existence of
something alive. He raised still life to such a point that it ceased to be
inanimate.

He painted these things as he painted human beings, because he was
endowed with the gift of divining the inner life in everything. His colour
and form are alike suitable to the spiritual harmony. A man, a tree, an apple,
all were used by Cezanne in the creation of something that is called a
"picture," and which is a piece of true inward and artistic harmony. The
same intention actuates the work of one of the greatest of the young
Frenchmen, Henri Matisse. He paints "pictures," and in these "pictures"
endeavours to reproduce the divine.[Footnote: Cf. his article in KUNST
UND KUNSTLER, 1909, No. 8.] To attain this end he requires as a starting
point nothing but the object to be painted (human being or whatever it may
be), and then the methods that belong to painting alone, colour and form.

By personal inclination, because he is French and because he is specially
gifted as a colourist, Matisse is apt to lay too much stress on the colour.
Like Debussy, he cannot always refrain from conventional beauty;
Impressionism is in his blood. One sees pictures of Matisse which are full
of great inward vitality, produced by the stress of the inner need, and also
pictures which possess only outer charm, because they were painted on an
outer impulse. (How often one is reminded of Manet in this.) His work
seems to be typical French painting, with its dainty sense of melody, raised
from time to time to the summit of a great hill above the clouds.

But in the work of another great artist in Paris, the Spaniard Pablo
Picasso, there is never any suspicion of this conventional beauty. Tossed
hither and thither by the need for self-expression, Picasso hurries from one
manner to another. At times a great gulf appears between consecutive
manners, because Picasso leaps boldly and is found continually by his
bewildered crowd of followers standing at a point very different from that at
which they saw him last. No sooner do they think that they have reached
him again than he has changed once more. In this way there arose Cubism,
the latest of the French movements, which is treated in detail in Part II.
Picasso is trying to arrive at constructiveness by way of proportion. In his
latest works (1911) he has achieved the logical destruction of matter, not,
however, by dissolution but rather by a kind of a parcelling out of its
various divisions and a constructive scattering of these divisions about the
canvas. But he seems in this most recent work distinctly desirous of keeping
an appearance of matter. He shrinks from no innovation, and if colour
seems likely to balk him in his search for a pure artistic form, he throws it
overboard and paints a picture in brown and white; and the problem of
purely artistic form is the real problem of his life.

In their pursuit of the same supreme end Matisse and Picasso stand side
by side, Matisse representing colour and Picasso form.

IV. THE PYRAMID

And so at different points along the road are the different arts, saying what
they are best able to say, and in the language which is peculiarly their own.
Despite, or perhaps thanks to, the differences between them, there has never

been a time when the arts approached each other more nearly than they do
today, in this later phase of spiritual development.

In each manifestation is the seed of a striving towards the abstract, the
non-material. Consciously or unconsciously they are obeying Socrates'
command—Know thyself. Consciously or unconsciously artists are
studying and proving their material, setting in the balance the spiritual value
of those elements, with which it is their several privilege to work.

And the natural result of this striving is that the various arts are drawing
together. They are finding in Music the best teacher. With few exceptions
music has been for some centuries the art which has devoted itself not to the
reproduction of natural phenomena, but rather to the expression of the
artist's soul, in musical sound.

A painter, who finds no satisfaction in mere representation, however
artistic, in his longing to express his inner life, cannot but envy the ease
with which music, the most non-material of the arts today, achieves this
end. He naturally seeks to apply the methods of music to his own art. And
from this results that modern desire for rhythm in painting, for
mathematical, abstract construction, for repeated notes of colour, for setting
colour in motion.

This borrowing of method by one art from another, can only be truly
successful when the application of the borrowed methods is not superficial
but fundamental. One art must learn first how another uses its methods, so
that the methods may afterwards be applied to the borrower's art from the
beginning, and suitably. The artist must not forget that in him lies the power
of true application of every method, but that that power must be developed.

In manipulation of form music can achieve results which are beyond the
reach of painting. On the other hand, painting is ahead of music in several

particulars. Music, for example, has at its disposal duration of time; while
painting can present to the spectator the whole content of its message at one
moment. [Footnote: These statements of difference are, of course, relative;
for music can on occasions dispense with extension of time, and painting
make use of it.] Music, which is outwardly unfettered by nature, needs no
definite form for its expression.

[Footnote: How miserably music fails when attempting to express
material appearances is proved by the affected absurdity of programme
music. Quite lately such experiments have been made. The imitation in
sound of croaking frogs, of farmyard noises, of household duties, makes an
excellent music hall turn and is amusing enough. But in serious music such
attempts are merely warnings against any imitation of nature. Nature has
her own language, and a powerful one; this language cannot be imitated.
The sound of a farmyard in music is never successfully reproduced, and is
unnecessary waste of time. The Stimmung of nature can be imparted by
every art, not, however, by imitation, but by the artistic divination of its
inner spirit.]

Painting today is almost exclusively concerned with the reproduction of
natural forms and phenomena. Her business is now to test her strength and
methods, to know herself as music has done for a long time, and then to use
her powers to a truly artistic end.

And so the arts are encroaching one upon another, and from a proper use
of this encroachment will rise the art that is truly monumental. Every man
who steeps himself in the spiritual possibilities of his art is a valuable helper
in the building of the spiritual pyramid which will some day reach to
heaven.

PART II: ABOUT PAINTING

V. THE PSYCHOLOGICAL WORKING OF COLOUR

To let the eye stray over a palette, splashed with many colours, produces a
dual result. In the first place one receives a PURELY PHYSICAL
IMPRESSION, one of pleasure and contentment at the varied and beautiful
colours. The eye is either warmed or else soothed and cooled. But these
physical sensations can only be of short duration. They are merely
superficial and leave no lasting impression, for the soul is unaffected. But
although the effect of the colours is forgotten when the eye is turned away,
the superficial impression of varied colour may be the starting point of a
whole chain of related sensations.

On the average man only the impressions caused by very familiar
objects, will be purely superficial. A first encounter with any new
phenomenon exercises immediately an impression on the soul. This is the
experience of the child discovering the world, to whom every object is new.
He sees a light, wishes to take hold of it, burns his finger and feels
henceforward a proper respect for flame. But later he learns that light has a
friendly as well as an unfriendly side, that it drives away the darkness,
makes the day longer, is essential to warmth, cooking, play-acting. From
the mass of these discoveries is composed a knowledge of light, which is
indelibly fixed in his mind. The strong, intensive interest disappears and the
various properties of flame are balanced against each other. In this way the
whole world becomes gradually disenchanted. It is realized that trees give
shade, that horses run fast and motor-cars still faster, that dogs bite, that the
figure seen in a mirror is not a real human being.

As the man develops, the circle of these experiences caused by different
beings and objects, grows ever wider. They acquire an inner meaning and
eventually a spiritual harmony. It is the same with colour, which makes only
a momentary and superficial impression on a soul but slightly developed in
sensitiveness. But even this superficial impression varies in quality. The eye
is strongly attracted by light, clear colours, and still more strongly attracted
by those colours which are warm as well as clear; vermilion has the charm
of flame, which has always attracted human beings. Keen lemon-yellow
hurts the eye in time as a prolonged and shrill trumpet-note the ear, and the
gazer turns away to seek relief in blue or green.

But to a more sensitive soul the effect of colours is deeper and intensely
moving. And so we come to the second main result of looking at colours:
THEIR PSYCHIC EFFECT. They produce a corresponding spiritual
vibration, and it is only as a step towards this spiritual vibration that the
elementary physical impression is of importance.

Whether the psychic effect of colour is a direct one, as these last few
lines imply, or whether it is the outcome of association, is perhaps open to
question. The soul being one with the body, the former may well experience
a psychic shock, caused by association acting on the latter. For example, red
may cause a sensation analogous to that caused by flame, because red is the
colour of flame. A warm red will prove exciting, another shade of red will
cause pain or disgust through association with running blood. In these cases
colour awakens a corresponding physical sensation, which undoubtedly
works upon the soul.

If this were always the case, it would be easy to define by association the
effects of colour upon other senses than that of sight. One might say that
keen yellow looks sour, because it recalls the taste of a lemon.

But such definitions are not universally possible. There are many
examples of colour working which refuse to be so classified. A Dresden
doctor relates of one of his patients, whom he designates as an
"exceptionally sensitive person," that he could not eat a certain sauce
without tasting "blue," i.e. without experiencing a feeling of seeing a blue
color. [Footnote: Dr. Freudenberg. "Spaltung der Personlichkeit"
(Ubersinnliche Welt. 1908. No. 2, p. 64-65). The author also discusses the
hearing of colour, and says that here also no rules can be laid down. But cf.
L. Sabanejeff in "Musik," Moscow, 1911, No. 9, where the imminent
possibility of laying down a law is clearly hinted at.] It would be possible to
suggest, by way of explanation of this, that in highly sensitive people, the
way to the soul is so direct and the soul itself so impressionable, that any
impression of taste communicates itself immediately to the soul, and thence
to the other organs of sense (in this case, the eyes). This would imply an
echo or reverberation, such as occurs sometimes in musical instruments
which, without being touched, sound in harmony with some other
instrument struck at the moment.

But not only with taste has sight been known to work in harmony. Many
colours have been described as rough or sticky, others as smooth and
uniform, so that one feels inclined to stroke them (e.g., dark ultramarine,
chromic oxide green, and rose madder). Equally the distinction between
warm and cold colours belongs to this connection. Some colours appear soft
(rose madder), others hard (cobalt green, blue-green oxide), so that even
fresh from the tube they seem to be dry.

The expression "scented colours" is frequently met with. And finally the
sound of colours is so definite that it would be hard to find anyone who
would try to express bright yellow in the bass notes, or dark lake in the
treble.

[Footnote: Much theory and practice have been devoted to this question.
People have sought to paint in counterpoint. Also unmusical children have
been successfully helped to play the piano by quoting a parallel in colour
(e.g., of flowers). On these lines Frau A. Sacharjin-Unkowsky has worked
for several years and has evolved a method of "so describing sounds by
natural colours, and colours by natural sounds, that colour could be heard
and sound seen." The system has proved successful for several years both in
the inventor's own school and the Conservatoire at St. Petersburg. Finally
Scriabin, on more spiritual lines, has paralleled sound and colours in a chart
not unlike that of Frau Unkowsky. In "Prometheus" he has given convincing
proof of his theories. (His chart appeared in "Musik," Moscow, 1911, No.
9.)]

[Footnote: The converse question, i.e. the colour of sound, was touched
upon by Mallarme and systematized by his disciple Rene Ghil, whose book,
Traite du Verbe, gives the rules for "l'instrumentation verbale."—M.T.H.S.]

The explanation by association will not suffice us in many, and the most
important cases. Those who have heard of chromotherapy will know that
coloured light can exercise very definite influences on the whole body.
Attempts have been made with different colours in the treatment of various
nervous ailments. They have shown that red light stimulates and excites the
heart, while blue light can cause temporary paralysis. But when the
experiments come to be tried on animals and even plants, the association
theory falls to the ground. So one is bound to admit that the question is at
present unexplored, but that colour can exercise enormous influence over
the body as a physical organism.

No more sufficient, in the psychic sphere, is the theory of association.
Generally speaking, colour is a power which directly influences the soul.
Colour is the keyboard, the eyes are the hammers, the soul is the piano with

many strings. The artist is the hand which plays, touching one key or
another, to cause vibrations in the soul.

IT IS EVIDENT THEREFORE THAT COLOUR HARMONY MUST REST ONLY ON A
CORRESPONDING VIBRATION IN THE HUMAN SOUL; AND THIS IS ONE OF THE
GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF THE INNER NEED.

[Footnote: The phrase "inner need" (innere Notwendigkeit) means
primarily the impulse felt by the artist for spiritual expression. Kandinsky is
apt, however, to use the phrase sometimes to mean not only the hunger for
spiritual expression, but also the actual expression itself.—M.T.H.S.]

VI. THE LANGUAGE OF FORM AND COLOUR

The man that hath no music in himself, Nor is not mov'd with concord of
sweet sounds, Is fit for treasons, stratagems, and spoils; The motions of his
spirit are dull as night, And his affections dark as Erebus: Let no such man
be trusted. Mark the music. (The Merchant of Venice, Act v, Scene I.)

Musical sound acts directly on the soul and finds an echo there because,
though to varying extents, music is innate in man.

[Footnote: Cf. E. Jacques-Dalcroze in The Eurhythmics of
Jacques-Dalcroze. London, Constable.—M.T.H.S.]

"Everyone knows that yellow, orange, and red suggest ideas of joy and
plenty" (Delacroix). [Footnote: Cf. Paul Signac, D'Eugene Delacroix au
Neo-Impressionisme. Paris. Floury. Also compare an interesting article by
K. Schettler: "Notizen uber die Farbe." (Decorative Kunst, 1901,
February).]

These two quotations show the deep relationship between the arts, and
especially between music and painting. Goethe said that painting must
count this relationship her main foundation, and by this prophetic remark he
seems to foretell the position in which painting is today. She stands, in fact,
at the first stage of the road by which she will, according to her own
possibilities, make art an abstraction of thought and arrive finally at purely
artistic composition. [Footnote: By "Komposition" Kandinsky here means,
of course, an artistic creation. He is not referring to the arrangement of the
objects in a picture.—M.T.H.S.]

Painting has two weapons at her disposal:

1. Colour. 2. Form.

Form can stand alone as representing an object (either real or otherwise)
or as a purely abstract limit to a space or a surface.

Colour cannot stand alone; it cannot dispense with boundaries of some
kind. [Footnote: Cf. A. Wallace Rimington. Colour music (OP. CIT.) where
experiments are recounted with a colour organ, which gives symphonies of
rapidly changing colour without boundaries—except the unavoidable ones
of the white curtain on which the colours are reflected.—M.T.H.S.] A
never-ending extent of red can only be seen in the mind; when the word red
is heard, the colour is evoked without definite boundaries. If such are
necessary they have deliberately to be imagined. But such red, as is seen by
the mind and not by the eye, exercises at once a definite and an indefinite
impression on the soul, and produces spiritual harmony. I say "indefinite,"
because in itself it has no suggestion of warmth or cold, such attributes
having to be imagined for it afterwards, as modifications of the original
"redness." I say "definite," because the spiritual harmony exists without any
need for such subsequent attributes of warmth or cold. An analogous case is
the sound of a trumpet which one hears when the word "trumpet" is

pronounced. This sound is audible to the soul, without the distinctive
character of a trumpet heard in the open air or in a room, played alone or
with other instruments, in the hands of a postilion, a huntsman, a soldier, or
a professional musician.

But when red is presented in a material form (as in painting) it must
possess (1) some definite shade of the many shades of red that exist and (2)
a limited surface, divided off from the other colours, which are undoubtedly
there. The first of these conditions (the subjective) is affected by the second
(the objective), for the neighbouring colours affect the shade of red.

This essential connection between colour and form brings us to the
question of the influences of form on colour. Form alone, even though
totally abstract and geometrical, has a power of inner suggestion. A triangle
(without the accessory consideration of its being acute-or obtuse-angled or
equilateral) has a spiritual value of its own. In connection with other forms,
this value may be somewhat modified, but remains in quality the same. The
case is similar with a circle, a square, or any conceivable geometrical
figure. [Footnote: The angle at which the triangle stands, and whether it is
stationary or moving, are of importance to its spiritual value. This fact is
specially worthy of the painter's consideration.] As above, with the red, we
have here a subjective substance in an objective shell.

The mutual influence of form and colour now becomes clear. A yellow
triangle, a blue circle, a green square, or a green triangle, a yellow circle, a
blue square—all these are different and have different spiritual values.

It is evident that many colours are hampered and even nullified in effect
by many forms. On the whole, keen colours are well suited by sharp forms
(e.g., a yellow triangle), and soft, deep colours by round forms (e.g., a blue
circle). But it must be remembered that an unsuitable combination of form

and colour is not necessarily discordant, but may, with manipulation, show
the way to fresh possibilities of harmony.

Since colours and forms are well-nigh innumerable, their combination
and their influences are likewise unending. The material is inexhaustible.

Form, in the narrow sense, is nothing but the separating line between
surfaces of colour. That is its outer meaning. But it has also an inner
meaning, of varying intensity, [Footnote: It is never literally true that any
form is meaningless and "says nothing." Every form in the world says
something. But its message often fails to reach us, and even if it does, full
understanding is often withheld from us.] and, properly speaking, FORM IS
THE OUTWARD EXPRESSION OF THIS INNER MEANING. To use
once more the metaphor of the piano—the artist is the hand which, by
playing on this or that key (i.e., form), affects the human soul in this or that
way. SO IT IS EVIDENT THAT FORM-HARMONY MUST REST ONLY
ON A CORRESPONDING VIBRATION OF THE HUMAN SOUL; AND
THIS IS A SECOND GUIDING PRINCIPLE OF THE INNER NEED.

The two aspects of form just mentioned define its two aims. The task of
limiting surfaces (the outer aspect) is well performed if the inner meaning is
fully expressed.

[Footnote: The phrase "full expression" must be clearly understood. Form
often is most expressive when least coherent. It is often most expressive
when outwardly most imperfect, perhaps only a stroke, a mere hint of outer
meaning.]

The outer task may assume many different shapes; but it will never fail in
one of two purposes: (1) Either form aims at so limiting surfaces as to
fashion of them some material object; (2) Or form remains abstract,
describing only a non-material, spiritual entity. Such non-material entities,

with life and value as such, are a circle, a triangle, a rhombus, a trapeze,
etc., many of them so complicated as to have no mathematical
denomination.

Between these two extremes lie the innumerable forms in which both
elements exist; with a preponderance either of the abstract or the material.
These intermediate forms are, at present, the store on which the artist has to
draw. Purely abstract forms are beyond the reach of the artist at present;
they are too indefinite for him. To limit himself to the purely indefinite
would be to rob himself of possibilities, to exclude the human element and
therefore to weaken his power of expression.

On the other hand, there exists equally no purely material form. A
material object cannot be absolutely reproduced. For good or evil, the artist
has eyes and hands, which are perhaps more artistic than his intentions and
refuse to aim at photography alone. Many genuine artists, who cannot be
content with a mere inventory of material objects, seek to express the
objects by what was once called "idealization," then "selection," and which
tomorrow will again be called something different.

[Footnote: The motive of idealization is so to beautify the organic form
as to bring out its harmony and rouse poetic feeling. "Selection" aims not so
much at beautification as at emphasizing the character of the object, by the
omission of non-essentials. The desire of the future will be purely the
expression of the inner meaning. The organic form no longer serves as
direct object, but as the human words in which a divine message must be
written, in order for it to be comprehensible to human minds.]

The impossibility and, in art, the uselessness of attempting to copy an
object exactly, the desire to give the object full expression, are the impulses
which drive the artist away from "literal" colouring to purely artistic aims.

And that brings us to the question of composition. [Footnote: Here
Kandinsky means arrangement of the picture.—M.T.H.S.]

Pure artistic composition has two elements:

1. The composition of the whole picture.

2. The creation of the various forms which, by standing in different
relationships to each other, decide the composition of the whole. [Footnote:
The general composition will naturally include many little compositions
which may be antagonistic to each other, though helping—perhaps by their
very antagonism—the harmony of the whole. These little compositions
have themselves subdivisions of varied inner meanings.] Many objects have
to be considered in the light of the whole, and so ordered as to suit this
whole. Singly they will have little meaning, being of importance only in so
far as they help the general effect. These single objects must be fashioned in
one way only; and this, not because their own inner meaning demands that
particular fashioning, but entirely because they have to serve as building
material for the whole composition. [Footnote: A good example is
Cezanne's "Bathing Women," which is built in the form of a triangle. Such
building is an old principle, which was being abandoned only because
academic usage had made it lifeless. But Cezanne has given it new life. He
does not use it to harmonize his groups, but for purely artistic purposes. He
distorts the human figure with perfect justification. Not only must the whole
figure follow the lines of the triangle, but each limb must grow narrower
from bottom to top. Raphael's "Holy Family" is an example of triangular
composition used only for the harmonizing of the group, and without any
mystical motive.]

So the abstract idea is creeping into art, although, only yesterday, it was
scorned and obscured by purely material ideals. Its gradual advance is

natural enough, for in proportion as the organic form falls into the
background, the abstract ideal achieves greater prominence.

But the organic form possesses all the same an inner harmony of its own,
which may be either the same as that of its abstract parallel (thus producing
a simple combination of the two elements) or totally different (in which
case the combination may be unavoidably discordant). However diminished
in importance the organic form may be, its inner note will always be heard;
and for this reason the choice of material objects is an important one. The
spiritual accord of the organic with the abstract element may strengthen the
appeal of the latter (as much by contrast as by similarity) or may destroy it.

Suppose a rhomboidal composition, made up of a number of human
figures. The artist asks himself: Are these human figures an absolute
necessity to the composition, or should they be replaced by other forms, and
that without affecting the fundamental harmony of the whole? If the answer
is "Yes," we have a case in which the material appeal directly weakens the
abstract appeal. The human form must either be replaced by another object
which, whether by similarity or contrast, will strengthen the abstract appeal,
or must remain a purely non-material symbol. [Footnote: Cf. Translator's
Introduction, pp. xviii and xx.—M.T.H.S.]

Once more the metaphor of the piano. For "colour" or "form" substitute
"object." Every object has its own life and therefore its own appeal; man is
continually subject to these appeals. But the results are often dubbed either
sub—or super-conscious. Nature, that is to say the ever-changing
surroundings of man, sets in vibration the strings of the piano (the soul) by
manipulation of the keys (the various objects with their several appeals).

The impressions we receive, which often appear merely chaotic, consist
of three elements: the impression of the colour of the object, of its form,
and of its combined colour and form, i.e. of the object itself.

At this point the individuality of the artist comes to the front
and disposes, as he wills, these three elements. IT IS CLEAR,
THEREFORE, THAT THE CHOICE OF OBJECT (i.e. OF ONE OF THE
ELEMENTS
IN THE HARMONY OF FORM) MUST BE DECIDED ONLY BY A
CORRESPONDING
VIBRATION IN THE HUMAN SOUL; AND THIS IS A THIRD
GUIDING
PRINCIPLE OF THE INNER NEED.

The more abstract is form, the more clear and direct is its appeal. In any
composition the material side may be more or less omitted in proportion as
the forms used are more or less material, and for them substituted pure
abstractions, or largely dematerialized objects. The more an artist uses these
abstracted forms, the deeper and more confidently will he advance into the
kingdom of the abstract. And after him will follow the gazer at his pictures,
who also will have gradually acquired a greater familiarity with the
language of that kingdom.

Must we then abandon utterly all material objects and paint solely in
abstractions? The problem of harmonizing the appeal of the material and
the non-material shows us the answer to this question. As every word
spoken rouses an inner vibration, so likewise does every object represented.
To deprive oneself of this possibility is to limit one's powers of expression.
That is at any rate the case at present. But besides this answer to the
question, there is another, and one which art can always employ to any
question beginning with "must": There is no "must" in art, because art is
free.

With regard to the second problem of composition, the creation of the
single elements which are to compose the whole, it must be remembered

that the same form in the same circumstances will always have the same
inner appeal. Only the circumstances are constantly varying. It results that:
(1) The ideal harmony alters according to the relation to other forms of the
form which causes it. (2) Even in similar relationship a slight approach to or
withdrawal from other forms may affect the harmony. [Footnote: This is
what is meant by "an appeal of motion." For example, the appeal of an
upright triangle is more steadfast and quiet than that of one set obliquely on
its side.] Nothing is absolute. Form-composition rests on a relative basis,
depending on (1) the alterations in the mutual relations of forms one to
another, (2) alterations in each individual form, down to the very smallest.
Every form is as sensitive as a puff of smoke, the slightest breath will alter
it completely. This extreme mobility makes it easier to obtain similar
harmonies from the use of different forms, than from a repetition of the
same one; though of course an exact replica of a spiritual harmony can
never be produced. So long as we are susceptible only to the appeal of a
whole composition, this fact is of mainly theoretical importance. But when
we become more sensitive by a constant use of abstract forms (which have
no material interpretation) it will become of great practical significance.
And so as art becomes more difficult, its wealth of expression in form
becomes greater and greater. At the same time the question of distortion in
drawing falls out and is replaced by the question how far the inner appeal of
the particular form is veiled or given full expression. And once more the
possibilities are extended, for combinations of veiled and fully expressed
appeals suggest new LEITMOTIVEN in composition.

Without such development as this, form-composition is impossible. To
anyone who cannot experience the inner appeal of form (whether material
or abstract) such composition can never be other than meaningless.
Apparently aimless alterations in form-arrangement will make art seem
merely a game. So once more we are faced with the same principle, which
is to set art free, the principle of the inner need.

When features or limbs for artistic reasons are changed or distorted, men
reject the artistic problem and fall back on the secondary question of
anatomy. But, on our argument, this secondary consideration does not
appear, only the real, artistic question remaining. These apparently
irresponsible, but really well-reasoned alterations in form provide one of the
storehouses of artistic possibilities.

The adaptability of forms, their organic but inward variations, their
motion in the picture, their inclination to material or abstract, their mutual
relations, either individually or as parts of a whole; further, the concord or
discord of the various elements of a picture, the handling of groups, the
combinations of veiled and openly expressed appeals, the use of rhythmical
or unrhythmical, of geometrical or non-geometrical forms, their contiguity
or separation—all these things are the material for counterpoint in painting.

But so long as colour is excluded, such counterpoint is confined to black
and white. Colour provides a whole wealth of possibilities of her own, and
when combined with form, yet a further series of possibilities. And all these
will be expressions of the inner need.

The inner need is built up of three mystical elements: (1) Every artist, as
a creator, has something in him which calls for expression (this is the
element of personality). (2) Every artist, as child of his age, is impelled to
express the spirit of his age (this is the element of style)—dictated by the
period and particular country to which the artist belongs (it is doubtful how
long the latter distinction will continue to exist). (3) Every artist, as a
servant of art, has to help the cause of art (this is the element of pure
artistry, which is constant in all ages and among all nationalities).

A full understanding of the first two elements is necessary for a
realization of the third. But he who has this realization will recognize that a

rudely carved Indian column is an expression of the same spirit as actuates
any real work of art of today.

In the past and even today much talk is heard of "personality" in art. Talk
of the coming "style" becomes more frequent daily. But for all their
importance today, these questions will have disappeared after a few hundred
or thousand years.

Only the third element—that of pure artistry—will remain for ever. An
Egyptian carving speaks to us today more subtly than it did to its
chronological contemporaries; for they judged it with the hampering
knowledge of period and personality. But we can judge purely as an
expression of the eternal artistry.

Similarly—the greater the part played in a modern work of art by the two
elements of style and personality, the better will it be appreciated by people
today; but a modern work of art which is full of the third element, will fail
to reach the contemporary soul. For many centuries have to pass away
before the third element can be received with understanding. But the artist
in whose work this third element predominates is the really great artist.

Because the elements of style and personality make up what is called the
periodic characteristics of any work of art, the "development" of artistic
forms must depend on their separation from the element of pure artistry,
which knows neither period nor nationality. But as style and personality
create in every epoch certain definite forms, which, for all their superficial
differences, are really closely related, these forms can be spoken of as one
side of art—the SUBJECTIVE. Every artist chooses, from the forms which
reflect his own time, those which are sympathetic to him, and expresses
himself through them. So the subjective element is the definite and external
expression of the inner, objective element.

The inevitable desire for outward expression of the OBJECTIVE element
is the impulse here defined as the "inner need." The forms it borrows
change from day to day, and, as it continually advances, what is today a
phrase of inner harmony becomes tomorrow one of outer harmony. It is
clear, therefore, that the inner spirit of art only uses the outer form of any
particular period as a stepping-stone to further expression.

In short, the working of the inner need and the development of art is an
ever-advancing expression of the eternal and objective in the terms of the
periodic and subjective.

Because the objective is forever exchanging the subjective expression of
today for that of tomorrow, each new extension of liberty in the use of outer
form is hailed as the last and supreme. At present we say that an artist can
use any form he wishes, so long as he remains in touch with nature. But this
limitation, like all its predecessors, is only temporary. From the point of
view of the inner need, no limitation must be made. The artist may use any
form which his expression demands; for his inner impulse must find
suitable outward expression.

So we see that a deliberate search for personality and "style" is not only
impossible, but comparatively unimportant. The close relationship of art
throughout the ages, is not a relationship in outward form but in inner
meaning. And therefore the talk of schools, of lines of "development," of
"principles of art," etc., is based on misunderstanding and can only lead to
confusion.

The artist must be blind to distinctions between "recognized" or
"unrecognized" conventions of form, deaf to the transitory teaching and
demands of his particular age. He must watch only the trend of the inner
need, and hearken to its words alone. Then he will with safety employ
means both sanctioned and forbidden by his contemporaries. All means are

sacred which are called for by the inner need. All means are sinful which
obscure that inner need.

It is impossible to theorize about this ideal of art. In real art theory does
not precede practice, but follows her. Everything is, at first, a matter of
feeling. Any theoretical scheme will be lacking in the essential of creation
—the inner desire for expression—which cannot be determined. Neither the
quality of the inner need, nor its subjective form, can be measured nor
weighed.

[Footnote: The many-sided genius of Leonardo devised a system of little
spoons with which different colours were to be used, thus creating a kind of
mechanical harmony. One of his pupils, after trying in vain to use this
system, in despair asked one of his colleagues how the master himself used
the invention. The colleague replied: "The master never uses it at all."
(Mereschowski, LEONARDO DA VINCI).]

Such a grammar of painting can only be temporarily guessed at, and
should it ever be achieved, it will be not so much according to physical
rules (which have so often been tried and which today the Cubists are
trying) as according to the rules of the inner need, which are of the soul.

The inner need is the basic alike of small and great problems in painting.
We are seeking today for the road which is to lead us away from the outer to
the inner basis.

[Footnote: The term "outer," here used, must not be confused with the
term "material" used previously. I am using the former to mean "outer
need," which never goes beyond conventional limits, nor produces other
than conventional beauty. The "inner need" knows no such limits, and often
produces results conventionally considered "ugly." But "ugly" itself is a
conventional term, and only means "spiritually unsympathetic," being

applied to some expression of an inner need, either outgrown or not yet
attained. But everything which adequately expresses the inner need is
beautiful.]

The spirit, like the body, can be strengthened and developed by frequent
exercise. Just as the body, if neglected, grows weaker and finally impotent,
so the spirit perishes if untended. And for this reason it is necessary for the
artist to know the starting point for the exercise of his spirit.

The starting point is the study of colour and its effects on men.

There is no need to engage in the finer shades of complicated colour, but
rather at first to consider only the direct use of simple colours.

To begin with, let us test the working on ourselves of individual colours,
and so make a simple chart, which will facilitate the consideration of the
whole question.

Two great divisions of colour occur to the mind at the outset: into warm
and cold, and into light and dark. To each colour there are therefore four
shades of appeal—warm and light or warm and dark, or cold and light or
cold and dark.

Generally speaking, warmth or cold in a colour means an approach
respectively to yellow or to blue. This distinction is, so to speak, on one
basis, the colour having a constant fundamental appeal, but assuming either
a more material or more non-material quality. The movement is an
horizontal one, the warm colours approaching the spectator, the cold ones
retreating from him.

The colours, which cause in another colour this horizontal movement,
while they are themselves affected by it, have another movement of their

own, which acts with a violent separative force. This is, therefore, the first
antithesis in the inner appeal, and the inclination of the colour to yellow or
to blue, is of tremendous importance.

The second antithesis is between white and black; i.e., the inclination to
light or dark caused by the pair of colours just mentioned. These colours
have once more their peculiar movement to and from the spectator, but in a
more rigid form (see Fig. 1).

FIGURE I

First Pair of antitheses. (inner appeal acting on
A and B. the spirit)

A. Warm Cold
Yellow Blue = First antithesis

Two movements:

(i) horizontal

Towards the spectator <——-<<< >>>——-> Away from the spectator
(bodily) (spiritual)

Yellow Blue

(ii) Ex- and concentric

B. Light Dark
White Black = Second Antithesis

Two movements:

(i) discordant

Eternal discord, but with Absolute discord, devoid
possibilities for the White Black of possibilities for the
future (birth) future (death)

(ii) ex-and concentric, as in case of yellow and blue, but more
rigid.

Yellow and blue have another movement which affects the first antithesis
—an ex-and concentric movement. If two circles are drawn and painted
respectively yellow and blue, brief concentration will reveal in the yellow a
spreading movement out from the centre, and a noticeable approach to the
spectator. The blue, on the other hand, moves in upon itself, like a snail
retreating into its shell, and draws away from the spectator. [Footnote:
These statements have no scientific basis, but are founded purely on
spiritual experience.]

In the case of light and dark colours the movement is emphasized. That
of the yellow increases with an admixture of white, i.e., as it becomes
lighter. That of the blue increases with an admixture of black, i.e., as it
becomes darker. This means that there can never be a dark-coloured yellow.
The relationship between white and yellow is as close as between black and
blue, for blue can be so dark as to border on black. Besides this physical
relationship, is also a spiritual one (between yellow and white on one side,

between blue and black on the other) which marks a strong separation
between the two pairs.

An attempt to make yellow colder produces a green tint and checks both
the horizontal and excentric movement. The colour becomes sickly and
unreal. The blue by its contrary movement acts as a brake on the yellow,
and is hindered in its own movement, till the two together become
stationary, and the result is green. Similarly a mixture of black and white
produces gray, which is motionless and spiritually very similar to green.

But while green, yellow, and blue are potentially active, though
temporarily paralysed, in gray there is no possibility of movement, because
gray consists of two colours that have no active force, for they stand the,
one in motionless discord, the other in a motionless negation, even of
discord, like an endless wall or a bottomless pit.

Because the component colours of green are active and have a movement
of their own, it is possible, on the basis of this movement, to reckon their
spiritual appeal.

The first movement of yellow, that of approach to the spectator (which
can be increased by an intensification of the yellow), and also the second
movement, that of over-spreading the boundaries, have a material parallel in
the human energy which assails every obstacle blindly, and bursts forth
aimlessly in every direction.

Yellow, if steadily gazed at in any geometrical form, has a disturbing
influence, and reveals in the colour an insistent, aggressive character.
[Footnote: It is worth noting that the sour-tasting lemon and shrill-singing
canary are both yellow.] The intensification of the yellow increases the
painful shrillness of its note.

[Footnote: Any parallel between colour and music can only be relative.
Just as a violin can give various shades of tone,—so yellow has shades,
which can be expressed by various instruments. But in making such
parallels, I am assuming in each case a pure tone of colour or sound,
unvaried by vibration or dampers, etc.]

Yellow is the typically earthly colour. It can never have profound
meaning. An intermixture of blue makes it a sickly colour. It may be
paralleled in human nature, with madness, not with melancholy or
hypochondriacal mania, but rather with violent raving lunacy.

The power of profound meaning is found in blue, and first in its physical
movements (1) of retreat from the spectator, (2) of turning in upon its own
centre. The inclination of blue to depth is so strong that its inner appeal is
stronger when its shade is deeper.

Blue is the typical heavenly colour.

[Footnote: …The halos are golden for emperors and prophets (i.e. for
mortals), and sky-blue for symbolic figures (i.e. spiritual beings);
(Kondakoff, Histoire de l'An Byzantine consideree principalement dans les
miniatures, vol. ii, p. 382, Paris, 1886-91).]

The ultimate feeling it creates is one of rest.

[Footnote: Supernatural rest, not the earthly contentment of green. The
way to the supernatural lies through the natural. And we mortals passing
from the earthly yellow to the heavenly blue must pass through green.]

When it sinks almost to black, it echoes a grief that is hardly human.

[Footnote: As an echo of grief violet stand to blue as does green in its
production of rest.]

When it rises towards white, a movement little suited to it, its appeal to
men grows weaker and more distant. In music a light blue is like a flute, a
darker blue a cello; a still darker a thunderous double bass; and the darkest
blue of all-an organ.

A well-balanced mixture of blue and yellow produces green. The
horizontal movement ceases; likewise that from and towards the centre. The
effect on the soul through the eye is therefore motionless. This is a fact
recognized not only by opticians but by the world. Green is the most restful
colour that exists. On exhausted men this restfulness has a beneficial effect,
but after a time it becomes wearisome. Pictures painted in shades of green
are passive and tend to be wearisome; this contrasts with the active warmth
of yellow or the active coolness of blue. In the hierarchy of colours green is
the "bourgeoisie"-self-satisfied, immovable, narrow. It is the colour of
summer, the period when nature is resting from the storms of winter and the
productive energy of spring (cf. Fig. 2).

Any preponderance in green of yellow or blue introduces a
corresponding activity and changes the inner appeal. The green keeps its
characteristic equanimity and restfulness, the former increasing with the
inclination to lightness, the latter with the inclination to depth. In music the
absolute green is represented by the placid, middle notes of a violin.

Black and white have already been discussed in general terms. More
particularly speaking, white, although often considered as no colour (a
theory largely due to the Impressionists, who saw no white in nature as a
symbol of a world from which all colour as a definite attribute has
disappeared).

[Footnote: Van Gogh, in his letters, asks whether he may not paint a
white wall dead white. This question offers no difficulty to the non-
representative artist who is concerned only with the inner harmony of

colour. But to the impressionist-realist it seems a bold liberty to take with
nature. To him it seems as outrageous as his own change from brown
shadows to blue seemed to his contemporaries. Van Gogh's question marks
a transition from Impressionism to an art of spiritual harmony, as the
coming of the blue shadow marked a transition from academism to
Impressionism. (Cf. The Letters of Vincent van Gogh. Constable, London.)]

This world is too far above us for its harmony to touch our souls. A great
silence, like an impenetrable wall, shrouds its life from our understanding.
White, therefore, has this harmony of silence, which works upon us
negatively, like many pauses in music that break temporarily the melody. It
is not a dead silence, but one pregnant with possibilities. White has the
appeal of the nothingness that is before birth, of the world in the ice age.

A totally dead silence, on the other hand, a silence with no possibilities,
has the inner harmony of black. In music it is represented by one of those
profound and final pauses, after which any continuation of the melody
seems the dawn of another world. Black is something burnt out, like the
ashes of a funeral pyre, something motionless like a corpse. The silence of
black is the silence of death. Outwardly black is the colour with least
harmony of all, a kind of neutral background against which the minutest
shades of other colours stand clearly forward. It differs from white in this
also, for with white nearly every colour is in discord, or even mute
altogether.

[Footnote: E.g. vermilion rings dull and muddy against white, but against
black with clear strength. Light yellow against white is weak, against black
pure and brilliant.]

Not without reason is white taken as symbolizing joy and spotless purity,
and black grief and death. A blend of black and white produces gray which,
as has been said, is silent and motionless, being composed of two inactive

colours, its restfulness having none of the potential activity of green. A
similar gray is produced by a mixture of green and red, a spiritual blend of
passivity and glowing warmth.

[Footnote: Gray = immobility and rest. Delacroix sought to express rest
by a mixture of green and red (cf. Signac, sup. cit.).]

The unbounded warmth of red has not the irresponsible appeal of yellow,
but rings inwardly with a determined and powerful intensity. It glows in
itself, maturely, and does not distribute its vigour aimlessly (see Fig. 2).

The varied powers of red are very striking. By a skillful use of it in its
different shades, its fundamental tone may be made warm or cold.

[Footnote: Of course every colour can be to some extent varied between
warm and cold, but no colour has so extensive a scale of varieties as red.]

Light warm red has a certain similarity to medium yellow, alike in texture
and appeal, and gives a feeling of strength, vigour, determination, triumph.
In music, it is a sound of trumpets, strong, harsh, and ringing.

Vermilion is a red with a feeling of sharpness, like glowing steel which
can be cooled by water. Vermilion is quenched by blue, for it can support no
mixture with a cold colour. More accurately speaking, such a mixture
produces what is called a dirty colour, scorned by painters of today. But
"dirt" as a material object has its own inner appeal, and therefore to avoid it
in painting, is as unjust and narrow as was the cry of yesterday for pure
colour. At the call of the inner need that which is outwardly foul may be
inwardly pure, and vice versa.

The two shades of red just discussed are similar to yellow, except that
they reach out less to the spectator. The glow of red is within itself. For this

reason it is a colour more beloved than yellow, being frequently used in
primitive and traditional decoration, and also in peasant costumes, because
in the open air the harmony of red and green is very beautiful. Taken by
itself this red is material, and, like yellow, has no very deep appeal. Only
when combined with something nobler does it acquire this deep appeal. It is
dangerous to seek to deepen red by an admixture of black, for black
quenches the glow, or at least reduces it considerably.

But there remains brown, unemotional, disinclined for movement. An
intermixture of red is outwardly barely audible, but there rings out a
powerful inner harmony. Skillful blending can produce an inner appeal of
extraordinary, indescribable beauty. The vermilion now rings like a great
trumpet, or thunders like a drum.

Cool red (madder) like any other fundamentally cold colour, can be
deepened—especially by an intermixture of azure. The character of the
colour changes; the inward glow increases, the active element gradually
disappears. But this active element is never so wholly absent as in deep
green. There always remains a hint of renewed vigour, somewhere out of
sight, waiting for a certain moment to burst forth afresh. In this lies the
great difference between a deepened red and a deepened blue, because in
red there is always a trace of the material. A parallel in music are the sad,
middle tones of a cello. A cold, light red contains a very distinct bodily or
material element, but it is always pure, like the fresh beauty of the face of a
young girl. The singing notes of a violin express this exactly in music.

Warm red, intensified by a suitable yellow, is orange. This blend brings
red almost to the point of spreading out towards the spectator. But the
element of red is always sufficiently strong to keep the colour from
flippancy. Orange is like a man, convinced of his own powers. Its note is
that of the angelus, or of an old violin.

Just as orange is red brought nearer to humanity by yellow, so violet is
red withdrawn from humanity by blue. But the red in violet must be cold,
for the spiritual need does not allow of a mixture of warm red with cold
blue.

Violet is therefore both in the physical and spiritual sense a cooled red. It
is consequently rather sad and ailing. It is worn by old women, and in China
as a sign of mourning. In music it is an English horn, or the deep notes of
wood instruments (e.g. a bassoon).

[Footnote: Among artists one often hears the question, "How are you?"
answered gloomily by the words "Feeling very violet."]

The two last mentioned colours (orange and violet) are the fourth and last
pair of antitheses of the primitive colours. They stand to each other in the
same relation as the third antitheses—green and red—i.e., as
complementary colours (see Fig. 2).

FIGURE II

Second Pair of antitheses (physical appeal of complementary
C and D colours)

C. Red Green = Third antithesis
Movement of the spiritually extinguished
First antithesis

Motion within itself [CIRCLE] = Potentiality of motion
= Motionlessness

Red

Ex-and concentric movements are absent
In optical blend = Gray
In mechanical blend of white and black = Gray

D. Orange Violet = Fourth antithesis

Arise out of the first antithesis from:

1. Active element of the yellow in red = Orange 2. Passive element of the
blue in red = Violet

<—-Orange—-Yellow<—<—<—Red—>—>—>Blue—-Violet—->

In excentric Motion within In Concentric direction itself
direction

As in a great circle, a serpent biting its own tail (the symbol of eternity,
of something without end) the six colours appear that make up the three
main antitheses. And to right and left stand the two great possibilities of
silence—death and birth (see Fig. 3).

FIGURE III.

A
Yellow
/\
/\

/\
DC
B Orange Green B
White | | Black
||
||
CD
Red Violet
\/
\/
\A/
Blue

The antitheses as a circle between two poles, i.e., the life of colours
between birth and death.

(The capital letters designate the pairs of antitheses.)

It is clear that all I have said of these simple colours is very provisional
and general, and so also are those feelings (joy, grief, etc.) which have been
quoted as parallels of the colours. For these feelings are only the material
expressions of the soul. Shades of colour, like those of sound, are of a much
finer texture and awake in the soul emotions too fine to be expressed in
words. Certainly each tone will find some probable expression in words, but
it will always be incomplete, and that part which the word fails to express
will not be unimportant but rather the very kernel of its existence. For this
reason words are, and will always remain, only hints, mere suggestions of
colours. In this impossibility of expressing colour in words with the
consequent need for some other mode of expression lies the opportunity of

the art of the future. In this art among innumerable rich and varied
combinations there is one which is founded on firm fact, and that is as
follows. The actual expression of colour can be achieved simultaneously by
several forms of art, each art playing its separate part, and producing a
whole which exceeds in richness and force any expression attainable by one
art alone. The immense possibilities of depth and strength to be gained by
combination or by discord between the various arts can be easily realized.

It is often said that admission of the possibility of one art helping another
amounts to a denial of the necessary differences between the arts. This is,
however, not the case. As has been said, an absolutely similar inner appeal
cannot be achieved by two different arts. Even if it were possible the second
version would differ at least outwardly. But suppose this were not the case,
that is to say, suppose a repetition of the same appeal exactly alike both
outwardly and inwardly could be achieved by different arts, such repetition
would not be merely superfluous. To begin with, different people find
sympathy in different forms of art (alike on the active and passive side
among the creators or the receivers of the appeal); but further and more
important, repetition of the same appeal thickens the spiritual atmosphere
which is necessary for the maturing of the finest feelings, in the same way
as the hot air of a greenhouse is necessary for the ripening of certain fruit.
An example of this is the case of the individual who receives a powerful
impression from constantly repeated actions, thoughts or feelings, although
if they came singly they might have passed by unnoticed. [Footnote: This
idea forms, of course, the fundamental reason for advertisement.] We must
not, however, apply this rule only to the simple examples of the spiritual
atmosphere. For this atmosphere is like air, which can be either pure or
filled with various alien elements. Not only visible actions, thoughts and
feelings, with outward expression, make up this atmosphere, but secret
happenings of which no one knows, unspoken thoughts, hidden feelings are
also elements in it. Suicide, murder, violence, low and unworthy thoughts,

hate, hostility, egotism, envy, narrow "patriotism," partisanship, are
elements in the spiritual atmosphere.

[Footnote: Epidemics of suicide or of violent warlike feeling, etc., are
products of this impure atmosphere.]

And conversely, self-sacrifice, mutual help, lofty thoughts, love, un-
selfishness, joy in the success of others, humanity, justness, are the elements
which slay those already enumerated as the sun slays the microbes, and
restore the atmosphere to purity.

[Footnote: These elements likewise have their historical periods.]

The second and more complicated form of repetition is that in which
several different elements make mutual use of different forms. In our case
these elements are the different arts summed up in the art of the future. And
this form of repetition is even more powerful, for the different natures of
men respond to the different elements in the combination. For one the
musical form is the most moving and impressive; for another the pictorial,
for the third the literary, and so on. There reside, therefore, in arts which are
outwardly different, hidden forces equally different, so that they may all
work in one man towards a single result, even though each art may be
working in isolation.

This sharply defined working of individual colours is the basis on which
various values can be built up in harmony. Pictures will come to be painted
—veritable artistic arrangements, planned in shades of one colour chosen
according to artistic feeling. The carrying out of one colour, the binding
together and admixture of two related colours, are the foundations of most
coloured harmonies. From what has been said above about colour working,
from the fact that we live in a time of questioning, experiment and
contradiction, we can draw the easy conclusion that for a harmonization on

the basis of individual colours our age is especially unsuitable. Perhaps with
envy and with a mournful sympathy we listen to the music of Mozart. It
acts as a welcome pause in the turmoil of our inner life, as a consolation
and as a hope, but we hear it as the echo of something from another age
long past and fundamentally strange to us. The strife of colours, the sense of
balance we have lost, tottering principles, unexpected assaults, great
questions, apparently useless striving, storm and tempest, broken chains,
antitheses and contradictions, these make up our harmony. The composition
arising from this harmony is a mingling of colour and form each with its
separate existence, but each blended into a common life which is called a
picture by the force of the inner need. Only these individual parts are vital.
Everything else (such as surrounding conditions) is subsidiary. The
combination of two colours is a logical outcome of modern conditions. The
combination of colours hitherto considered discordant, is merely a further
development. For example, the use, side by side, of red and blue, colours in
themselves of no physical relationship, but from their very spiritual contrast
of the strongest effect, is one of the most frequent occurrences in modern
choice of harmony. [Footnote: Cf. Gauguin, Noa Noa, where the artist states
his disinclination when he first arrived in Tahiti to juxtapose red and blue.]
Harmony today rests chiefly on the principle of contrast which has for all
time been one of the most important principles of art. But our contrast is an
inner contrast which stands alone and rejects the help (for that help would
mean destruction) of any other principles of harmony. It is interesting to
note that this very placing together of red and blue was so beloved by the
primitive both in Germany and Italy that it has till today survived,
principally in folk pictures of religious subjects. One often sees in such
pictures the Virgin in a red gown and a blue cloak. It seems that the artists
wished to express the grace of heaven in terms of humanity, and humanity
in terms of heaven. Legitimate and illegitimate combinations of colours,
contrasts of various colours, the over-painting of one colour with another,

the definition of coloured surfaces by boundaries of various forms, the
overstepping of these boundaries, the mingling and the sharp separation of
surfaces, all these open great vistas of artistic possibility.

One of the first steps in the turning away from material objects into the
realm of the abstract was, to use the technical artistic term, the rejection of
the third dimension, that is to say, the attempt to keep a picture on a single
plane. Modelling was abandoned. In this way the material object was made
more abstract and an important step forward was achieved—this step
forward has, however, had the effect of limiting the possibilities of painting
to one definite piece of canvas, and this limitation has not only introduced a
very material element into painting, but has seriously lessened its
possibilities.

Any attempt to free painting from this material limitation together with
the striving after a new form of composition must concern itself first of all
with the destruction of this theory of one single surface—attempts must be
made to bring the picture on to some ideal plane which shall be expressed
in terms of the material plane of the canvas. [Footnote: Compare the article
by Le Fauconnier in the catalogue of the second exhibition of the Neue
Kunstlervereinigung, Munich, 1910-11.] There has arisen out of the
composition in flat triangles a composition with plastic three-dimensional
triangles, that is to say with pyramids; and that is Cubism. But there has
arisen here also the tendency to inertia, to a concentration on this form for
its own sake, and consequently once more to an impoverishment of
possibility. But that is the unavoidable result of the external application of
an inner principle.

A further point of great importance must not be forgotten. There are other
means of using the material plane as a space of three dimensions in order to
create an ideal plane. The thinness or thickness of a line, the placing of the

form on the surface, the overlaying of one form on another may be quoted
as examples of artistic means that may be employed. Similar possibilities
are offered by colour which, when rightly used, can advance or retreat, and
can make of the picture a living thing, and so achieve an artistic expansion
of space. The combination of both means of extension in harmony or
concord is one of the richest and most powerful elements in purely artistic
composition.

VII. THEORY

From the nature of modern harmony, it results that never has there been a
time when it was more difficult than it is today to formulate a complete
theory, [Footnote: Attempts have been made. Once more emphasis must be
laid on the parallel with music. For example, cf. "Tendances Nouvelles,"
No. 35, Henri Ravel: "The laws of harmony are the same for painting and
music."] or to lay down a firm artistic basis. All attempts to do so would
have one result, namely, that already cited in the case of Leonardo and his
system of little spoons. It would, however, be precipitate to say that there
are no basic principles nor firm rules in painting, or that a search for them
leads inevitably to academism. Even music has a grammar, which, although
modified from time to time, is of continual help and value as a kind of
dictionary.

Painting is, however, in a different position. The revolt from dependence
on nature is only just beginning. Any realization of the inner working of
colour and form is so far unconscious. The subjection of composition to
some geometrical form is no new idea (cf. the art of the Persians).
Construction on a purely abstract basis is a slow business, and at first

seemingly blind and aimless. The artist must train not only his eye but also
his soul, so that he can test colours for themselves and not only by external
impressions.

If we begin at once to break the bonds which bind us to nature, and
devote ourselves purely to combination of pure colour and abstract form,
we shall produce works which are mere decoration, which are suited to
neckties or carpets. Beauty of Form and Colour is no sufficient aim by
itself, despite the assertions of pure aesthetes or even of naturalists, who are
obsessed with the idea of "beauty." It is because of the elementary stage
reached by our painting that we are so little able to grasp the inner harmony
of true colour and form composition. The nerve vibrations are there,
certainly, but they get no further than the nerves, because the corresponding
vibrations of the spirit which they call forth are too weak. When we
remember, however, that spiritual experience is quickening, that positive
science, the firmest basis of human thought, is tottering, that dissolution of
matter is imminent, we have reason to hope that the hour of pure
composition is not far away.

It must not be thought that pure decoration is lifeless. It has its inner
being, but one which is either incomprehensible to us, as in the case of old
decorative art, or which seems mere illogical confusion, as a world in which
full-grown men and embryos play equal roles, in which beings deprived of
limbs are on a level with noses and toes which live isolated and of their own
vitality. The confusion is like that of a kaleidoscope, which though
possessing a life of its own, belongs to another sphere. Nevertheless,
decoration has its effect on us; oriental decoration quite differently to
Swedish, savage, or ancient Greek. It is not for nothing that there is a
general custom of describing samples of decoration as gay, serious, sad,
etc., as music is described as Allegro, Serioso, etc., according to the nature
of the piece.

Probably conventional decoration had its beginnings in nature. But when
we would assert that external nature is the sole source of all art, we must
remember that, in patterning, natural objects are used as symbols, almost as
though they were mere hieroglyphics. For this reason we cannot gauge their
inner harmony. For instance, we can bear a design of Chinese dragons in
our dining or bed rooms, and are no more disturbed by it than by a design of
daisies.

It is possible that towards the close of our already dying epoch a new
decorative art will develop, but it is not likely to be founded on geometrical
form. At the present time any attempt to define this new art would be as
useless as pulling a small bud open so as to make a fully blown flower.
Nowadays we are still bound to external nature and must find our means of
expression in her. But how are we to do it? In other words, how far may we
go in altering the forms and colours of this nature?

We may go as far as the artist is able to carry his emotion, and once more
we see how immense is the need for true emotion. A few examples will
make the meaning of this clearer.

A warm red tone will materially alter in inner value when it is no longer
considered as an isolated colour, as something abstract, but is applied as an
element of some other object, and combined with natural form. The variety
of natural forms will create a variety of spiritual values, all of which will
harmonize with that of the original isolated red. Suppose we combine red
with sky, flowers, a garment, a face, a horse, a tree.

A red sky suggests to us sunset, or fire, and has a consequent effect upon
us—either of splendour or menace. Much depends now on the way in which
other objects are treated in connection with this red sky. If the treatment is
faithful to nature, but all the same harmonious, the "naturalistic" appeal of
the sky is strengthened. If, however, the other objects are treated in a way

which is more abstract, they tend to lessen, if not to destroy, the naturalistic
appeal of the sky. Much the same applies to the use of red in a human face.
In this case red can be employed to emphasize the passionate or other
characteristics of the model, with a force that only an extremely abstract
treatment of the rest of the picture can subdue.

A red garment is quite a different matter; for it can in reality be of any
colour. Red will, however, be found best to supply the needs of pure artistry,
for here alone can it be used without any association with material aims.
The artist has to consider not only the value of the red cloak by itself, but
also its value in connection with the figure wearing it, and further the
relation of the figure to the whole picture. Suppose the picture to be a sad
one, and the red-cloaked figure to be the central point on which the sadness
is concentrated—either from its central position, or features, attitude,
colour, or what not. The red will provide an acute discord of feeling, which
will emphasize the gloom of the picture. The use of a colour, in itself sad,
would weaken the effect of the dramatic whole. [Footnote: Once more it is
wise to emphasize the necessary inadequacy of these examples. Rules
cannot be laid down, the variations are so endless. A single line can alter the
whole composition of a picture.] This is the principle of antithesis already
defined. Red by itself cannot have a sad effect on the spectator, and its
inclusion in a sad picture will, if properly handled, provide the dramatic
element. [Footnote: The use of terms like "sad" and "joyful" are only
clumsy equivalents for the delicate spiritual vibrations of the new harmony.
They must be read as necessarily inadequate.]

Yet again is the case of a red tree different. The fundamental value of red
remains, as in every case. But the association of "autumn" creeps in.

The colour combines easily with this association, and there is no
dramatic clash as in the case of the red cloak.

Finally, the red horse provides a further variation. The very words put us
in another atmosphere. The impossibility of a red horse demands an unreal
world. It is possible that this combination of colour and form will appeal as
a freak—a purely superficial and non-artistic appeal—or as a hint of a fairy
story [Footnote: An incomplete fairy story works on the mind as does a
cinematograph film.]—once more a non-artistic appeal. To set this red horse
in a careful naturalistic landscape would create such a discord as to produce
no appeal and no coherence. The need for coherence is the essential of
harmony—whether founded on conventional discord or concord. The new
harmony demands that the inner value of a picture should remain unified
whatever the variations or contrasts of outward form or colour. The
elements of the new art are to be found, therefore, in the inner and not the
outer qualities of nature.

The spectator is too ready to look for a meaning in a picture—i.e., some
outward connection between its various parts. Our materialistic age has
produced a type of spectator or "connoisseur," who is not content to put
himself opposite a picture and let it say its own message. Instead of
allowing the inner value of the picture to work, he worries himself in
looking for "closeness to nature," or "temperament," or "handling," or
"tonality," or "perspective," or what not. His eye does not probe the outer
expression to arrive at the inner meaning. In a conversation with an
interesting person, we endeavour to get at his fundamental ideas and
feelings. We do not bother about the words he uses, nor the spelling of those
words, nor the breath necessary for speaking them, nor the movements of
his tongue and lips, nor the psychological working on our brain, nor the
physical sound in our ear, nor the physiological effect on our nerves. We
realize that these things, though interesting and important, are not the main
things of the moment, but that the meaning and idea is what concerns us.
We should have the same feeling when confronted with a work of art. When

this becomes general the artist will be able to dispense with natural form
and colour and speak in purely artistic language.

To return to the combination of colour and form, there is another
possibility which should be noted. Non-naturalistic objects in a picture may
have a "literary" appeal, and the whole picture may have the working of a
fable. The spectator is put in an atmosphere which does not disturb him
because he accepts it as fabulous, and in which he tries to trace the story
and undergoes more or less the various appeals of colour. But the pure inner
working of colour is impossible; the outward idea has the mastery still. For
the spectator has only exchanged a blind reality for a blind dreamland,
where the truth of inner feeling cannot be felt.

We must find, therefore, a form of expression which excludes the fable
and yet does not restrict the free working of colour in any way. The forms,
movement, and colours which we borrow from nature must produce no
outward effect nor be associated with external objects. The more obvious is
the separation from nature, the more likely is the inner meaning to be pure
and unhampered.

The tendency of a work of art may be very simple, but provided it is not
dictated by any external motive and provided it is not working to any
material end, the harmony will be pure. The most ordinary action—for
example, preparation for lifting a heavy weight—becomes mysterious and
dramatic, when its actual purpose is not revealed. We stand and gaze
fascinated, till of a sudden the explanation bursts suddenly upon us. It is the
conviction that nothing mysterious can ever happen in our everyday life that
has destroyed the joy of abstract thought. Practical considerations have
ousted all else. It is with this fact in view that the new dancing is being
evolved—as, that is to say, the only means of giving in terms of time and
space the real inner meaning of motion. The origin of dancing is probably

purely sexual. In folk-dances we still see this element plainly. The later
development of dancing as a religious ceremony joins itself to the preceding
element and the two together take artistic form and emerge as the ballet.

The ballet at the present time is in a state of chaos owing to this double
origin. Its external motives—the expression of love and fear, etc.—are too
material and naive for the abstract ideas of the future. In the search for more
subtle expression, our modern reformers have looked to the past for help.
Isadora Duncan has forged a link between the Greek dancing and that of the
future. In this she is working on parallel lines to the painters who are
looking for inspiration from the primitives.

[Footnote: Kandinsky's example of Isadora Duncan is not perhaps
perfectly chosen. This famous dancer founds her art mainly upon a study of
Greek vases and not necessarily of the primitive period. Her aims are
distinctly towards what Kandinsky calls "conventional beauty," and what is
perhaps more important, her movements are not dictated solely by the
"inner harmony," but largely by conscious outward imitation of Greek
attitudes. Either Nijinsky's later ballets: Le Sacre du Printemps, L'Apres-
midi d'un Faune, Jeux, or the idea actuating the Jacques Dalcroze system of
Eurhythmics seem to fall more into line with Kandinsky's artistic forecast.
In the first case "conventional beauty" has been abandoned, to the dismay
of numbers of writers and spectators, and a definite return has been made to
primitive angles and abruptness. In the second case motion and dance are
brought out of the souls of the pupils, truly spontaneous, at the call of the
"inner harmony." Indeed a comparison between Isadora Duncan and M.
Dalcroze is a comparison between the "naturalist" and "symbolist" ideals in
art which were outlined in the introduction to this book.—M.T.H.S.]

In dance as in painting this is only a stage of transition. In dancing as in
painting we are on the threshold of the art of the future. The same rules

must be applied in both cases. Conventional beauty must go by the board
and the literary element of "story-telling" or "anecdote" must be abandoned
as useless. Both arts must learn from music that every harmony and every
discord which springs from the inner spirit is beautiful, but that it is
essential that they should spring from the inner spirit and from that alone.

The achievement of the dance-art of the future will make possible the
first ebullition of the art of spiritual harmony—the true stage-composition.

The composition for the new theatre will consist of these three elements:

(1) Musical movement (2) Pictorial movement (3) Physical
movement

and these three, properly combined, make up the spiritual movement,
which is the working of the inner harmony. They will be interwoven in
harmony and discord as are the two chief elements of painting, form and
colour.

Scriabin's attempt to intensify musical tone by corresponding use of
colour is necessarily tentative. In the perfected stage-composition the two
elements are increased by the third, and endless possibilities of combination
and individual use are opened up. Further, the external can be combined
with the internal harmony, as Schonberg has attempted in his quartettes. It is
impossible here to go further into the developments of this idea. The reader
must apply the principles of painting already stated to the problem of stage-
composition, and outline for himself the possibilities of the theatre of the
future, founded on the immovable principle of the inner need.

From what has been said of the combination of colour and form, the way
to the new art can be traced. This way lies today between two dangers. On
the one hand is the totally arbitrary application of colour to geometrical

form—pure patterning. On the other hand is the more naturalistic use of
colour in bodily form—pure phantasy. Either of these alternatives may in
their turn be exaggerated. Everything is at the artist's disposal, and the
freedom of today has at once its dangers and its possibilities. We may be
present at the conception of a new great epoch, or we may see the
opportunity squandered in aimless extravagance.

[Footnote: On this question see my article "Uber die Formfrage"—in
"Der Blaue Reiter" (Piper-Verlag, 1912). Taking the work of Henri
Rousseau as a starting point, I go on to prove that the new naturalism will
not only be equivalent to but even identical with abstraction.]

That art is above nature is no new discovery. [Footnote: Cf. "Goethe", by
Karl Heinemann, 1899, p. 684; also Oscar Wilde, "De Profundis"; also
Delacroix, "My Diary".] New principles do not fall from heaven, but are
logically if indirectly connected with past and future. What is important to
us is the momentary position of the principle and how best it can be used. It
must not be employed forcibly. But if the artist tunes his soul to this note,
the sound will ring in his work of itself. The "emancipation" of today must
advance on the lines of the inner need. It is hampered at present by external
form, and as that is thrown aside, there arises as the aim of composition-
construction. The search for constructive form has produced Cubism, in
which natural form is often forcibly subjected to geometrical construction, a
process which tends to hamper the abstract by the concrete and spoil the
concrete by the abstract.

The harmony of the new art demands a more subtle construction than
this, something that appeals less to the eye and more to the soul. This
"concealed construction" may arise from an apparently fortuitous selection
of forms on the canvas. Their external lack of cohesion is their internal
harmony. This haphazard arrangement of forms may be the future of artistic

harmony. Their fundamental relationship will finally be able to be
expressed in mathematical form, but in terms irregular rather than regular.

VIII. ART AND ARTISTS

The work of art is born of the artist in a mysterious and secret way. From
him it gains life and being. Nor is its existence casual and inconsequent, but
it has a definite and purposeful strength, alike in its material and spiritual
life. It exists and has power to create spiritual atmosphere; and from this
inner standpoint one judges whether it is a good work of art or a bad one. If
its "form" is bad it means that the form is too feeble in meaning to call forth
corresponding vibrations of the soul.

[Footnote: So-called indecent pictures are either incapable of causing
vibrations of the soul (in which case they are not art) or they are so capable.
In the latter case they are not to be spurned absolutely, even though at the
same time they gratify what nowadays we are pleased to call the "lower
bodily tastes."] Therefore a picture is not necessarily "well painted" if it
possesses the "values" of which the French so constantly speak. It is only
well painted if its spiritual value is complete and satisfying. "Good
drawing" is drawing that cannot be altered without destruction of this inner
value, quite irrespective of its correctness as anatomy, botany, or any other
science. There is no question of a violation of natural form, but only of the
need of the artist for such form. Similarly colours are used not because they
are true to nature, but because they are necessary to the particular picture. In
fact, the artist is not only justified in using, but it is his duty to use only
those forms which fulfil his own need. Absolute freedom, whether from
anatomy or anything of the kind, must be given the artist in his choice of

material. Such spiritual freedom is as necessary in art as it is in life.
[Footnote: This freedom is man's weapon against the Philistines. It is based
on the inner need.]

Note, however, that blind following of scientific precept is less
blameworthy than its blind and purposeless rejection. The former produces
at least an imitation of material objects which may be of some use.

[Footnote: Plainly, an imitation of nature, if made by the hand of an
artist, is not a pure reproduction. The voice of the soul will in some degree
at least make itself heard. As contrasts one may quote a landscape of
Canaletto and those sadly famous heads by Denner.—(Alte Pinakothek,
Munich.)]

The latter is an artistic betrayal and brings confusion in its train. The
former leaves the spiritual atmosphere empty; the latter poisons it.

Painting is an art, and art is not vague production, transitory and isolated,
but a power which must be directed to the improvement and refinement of
the human soul—to, in fact, the raising of the spiritual triangle.

If art refrains from doing this work, a chasm remains unbridged, for no
other power can take the place of art in this activity. And at times when the
human soul is gaining greater strength, art will also grow in power, for the
two are inextricably connected and complementary one to the other.
Conversely, at those times when the soul tends to be choked by material
disbelief, art becomes purposeless and talk is heard that art exists for art's
sake alone.

[Footnote: This cry "art for art's sake," is really the best ideal such an age
can attain to. It is an unconscious protest against materialism, against the
demand that everything should have a use and practical value. It is further

proof of the indestructibility of art and of the human soul, which can never
be killed but only temporarily smothered.]

Then is the bond between art and the soul, as it were, drugged into
unconsciousness. The artist and the spectator drift apart, till finally the latter
turns his back on the former or regards him as a juggler whose skill and
dexterity are worthy of applause. It is very important for the artist to gauge
his position aright, to realize that he has a duty to his art and to himself, that
he is not king of the castle but rather a servant of a nobler purpose. He must
search deeply into his own soul, develop and tend it, so that his art has
something to clothe, and does not remain a glove without a hand.

THE ARTIST MUST HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY, FOR MASTERY OVER FORM IS NOT
HIS GOAL BUT RATHER THE ADAPTING OF FORM TO ITS INNER MEANING.

[Footnote: Naturally this does not mean that the artist is to instill forcibly
into his work some deliberate meaning. As has been said the generation of a
work of art is a mystery. So long as artistry exists there is no need of theory
or logic to direct the painter's action. The inner voice of the soul tells him
what form he needs, whether inside or outside nature. Every artist knows,
who works with feeling, how suddenly the right form flashes upon him.
Bocklin said that a true work of art must be like an inspiration; that actual
painting, composition, etc., are not the steps by which the artist reaches
self-expression.]

The artist is not born to a life of pleasure. He must not live idle; he has a
hard work to perform, and one which often proves a cross to be borne. He
must realize that his every deed, feeling, and thought are raw but sure
material from which his work is to arise, that he is free in art but not in life.

The artist has a triple responsibility to the non-artists: (1) He must repay
the talent which he has; (2) his deeds, feelings, and thoughts, as those of

every man, create a spiritual atmosphere which is either pure or poisonous.
(3) These deeds and thoughts are materials for his creations, which
themselves exercise influence on the spiritual atmosphere. The artist is not
only a king, as Peladan says, because he has great power, but also because
he has great duties.

If the artist be priest of beauty, nevertheless this beauty is to be sought
only according to the principle of the inner need, and can be measured only
according to the size and intensity of that need.

THAT IS BEAUTIFUL WHICH IS PRODUCED BY THE INNER
NEED, WHICH SPRINGS FROM THE SOUL.

Maeterlinck, one of the first warriors, one of the first modern artists of
the soul, says: "There is nothing on earth so curious for beauty or so
absorbent of it, as a soul. For that reason few mortal souls withstand the
leadership of a soul which gives to them beauty." [Footnote: De la beaute
interieure.]

And this property of the soul is the oil, which facilitates the slow,
scarcely visible but irresistible movement of the triangle, onwards and
upwards.

IX. CONCLUSION

The first five illustrations in this book show the course of constructive effort
in painting. This effort falls into two divisions:

(1) Simple composition, which is regulated according to an obvious and
simple form. This kind of composition I call the MELODIC.

(2) Complex composition, consisting of various forms, subjected more or
less completely to a principal form. Probably the principal form may be
hard to grasp outwardly, and for that reason possessed of a strong inner
value. This kind of composition I call the SYMPHONIC.

Between the two lie various transitional forms, in which the melodic
principle predominates. The history of the development is closely parallel to
that of music.

If, in considering an example of melodic composition, one forgets the
material aspect and probes down into the artistic reason of the whole, one
finds primitive geometrical forms or an arrangement of simple lines which
help toward a common motion. This common motion is echoed by various
sections and may be varied by a single line or form. Such isolated variations
serve different purposes. For instance, they may act as a sudden check, or to
use a musical term, a "fermata." [Footnote: E.g., the Ravenna mosaic
which, in the main, forms a triangle. The upright figures lean
proportionately to the triangle. The outstretched arm and door-curtain are
the "fermate."] Each form which goes to make up the composition has a
simple inner value, which has in its turn a melody. For this reason I call the
composition melodic. By the agency of Cezanne and later of Hodler
[Footnote: English readers may roughly parallel Hodler with Augustus John
for purposes of the argument.—M.T.H.S.] this kind of composition won
new life, and earned the name of "rhythmic." The limitations of the term
"rhythmic" are obvious. In music and nature each manifestation has a
rhythm of its own, so also in painting. In nature this rhythm is often not
clear to us, because its purpose is not clear to us. We then speak of it as
unrhythmic. So the terms rhythmic and unrhythmic are purely conventional,

as also are harmony and discord, which have no actual existence. [Footnote:
As an example of plain melodic construction with a plain rhythm,
Cezanne's "Bathing Women" is given in this book.]

Complex rhythmic composition, with a strong flavour of the
symphonic, is seen in numerous pictures and woodcuts of the past.
One might mention the work of old German masters, of the
Persians, of the Japanese, the Russian icons, broadsides, etc.
[Footnote: This applies to many of Hodler's pictures.]

In nearly all these works the symphonic composition is not very closely
allied to the melodic. This means that fundamentally there is a composition
founded on rest and balance. The mind thinks at once of choral
compositions, of Mozart and Beethoven. All these works have the solemn
and regular architecture of a Gothic cathedral; they belong to the transition
period.

As examples of the new symphonic composition, in which the melodic
element plays a subordinate part, and that only rarely, I have added
reproductions of four of my own pictures.

They represent three different sources of inspiration:

(1) A direct impression of outward nature, expressed in purely artistic
form. This I call an "Impression."

(2) A largely unconscious, spontaneous expression of inner character, the
non-material nature. This I call an "Improvisation."

(3) An expression of a slowly formed inner feeling, which comes to
utterance only after long maturing. This I call a "Composition." In this,
reason, consciousness, purpose, play an overwhelming part. But of the

calculation nothing appears, only the feeling. Which kind of construction,
whether conscious or unconscious, really underlies my work, the patient
reader will readily understand.

Finally, I would remark that, in my opinion, we are fast approaching the
time of reasoned and conscious composition, when the painter will be proud
to declare his work constructive. This will be in contrast to the claim of the
Impressionists that they could explain nothing, that their art came upon
them by inspiration. We have before us the age of conscious creation, and
this new spirit in painting is going hand in hand with the spirit of thought
towards an epoch of great spiritual leaders.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CONCERNING
THE SPIRITUAL IN ART ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be
renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law
means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the
Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States
without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,
set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying
and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the
PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a
registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook,
except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying
royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge
anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is
very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg
eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do
practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by
U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license,
especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG™ LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any
other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you
agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg License
available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing
Project Gutenberg electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg electronic work,
you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the
terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright)
agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement,
you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg
electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy
of or access to a Project Gutenberg electronic work and you do not agree to
be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on
or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can
do with most Project Gutenberg electronic works even without complying
with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a
lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg electronic works if you
follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to
Project Gutenberg electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation”
or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
Gutenberg electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual
work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are

located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works
based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are
removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing
Project Gutenberg works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for
keeping the Project Gutenberg name associated with the work. You can
easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg License when you
share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a
constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the
laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before
downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating
derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg work.
The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status
of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg work (any work on which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied
or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States
and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License included with
this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in
the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country
where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is derived from
texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice
indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the
work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without
paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a
work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on
the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs
1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
Project Gutenberg trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg electronic work is posted with the
permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply
with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed
by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project
Gutenberg License for all works posted with the permission of the
copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg License
terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any
other work associated with Project Gutenberg.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently
displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or
immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg work in a format other than “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the
official Project Gutenberg website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no
additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of
exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work
in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format
must include the full Project Gutenberg License as specified in paragraph
1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing,
copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg works unless you comply
with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to
or distributing Project Gutenberg electronic works provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the
use of Project Gutenberg works calculated using the method you
already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the
owner of the Project Gutenberg trademark, but he has agreed to donate
royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days
following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to
prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly
marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about
donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does
not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You
must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works
possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all
access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution
of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in
this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3
below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works
not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™
collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and
the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as,
but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription
errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that
damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except
for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to
you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE
THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT
EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE
THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you
discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you
can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the
defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund.

If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to
you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work
electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you
may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR
FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or
the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or
limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable
to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum
disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity
or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance
with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works,
harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause
to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg work, (b)
alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg
work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project
Gutenberg

Project Gutenberg is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic
works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including
obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the

efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of
life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance
they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg’s goals and ensuring
that the Project Gutenberg collection will remain freely available for
generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for
Project Gutenberg and future generations. To learn more about the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations
can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)
(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of
Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service.
The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541.
Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s
laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 41 Watchung Plaza #516,
Montclair NJ 07042, USA, +1 (862) 621-9288. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and
official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the
number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed
in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment

including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are
particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States.
Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort,
much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these
requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not
received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have
not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against
accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us
with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any
statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the
United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods
and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including
checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg
electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with
anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg
eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed editions,
all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a

copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in
compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility:
www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg, including how
to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation,
how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email
newsletter to hear about new eBooks.