Lecture on Modern Art

Toronto, April 4th, 1927.

by
Katherine S. Dreier, President Société Anonyme, Inc., New York.

Oscar Wilde, that brilliant English poet and writer, stated that Art preceded Nature. It was one of his daring, challenging remarks to startle people into the realization that Art **should be prophetic**. I presume few writers have done more to make the English-speaking public think rightly along the lines of Art than he—not barring Ruskin—for, though Ruskin was more erudite in his writings, Wilde's humor and daring in presenting his points of view, which are fundamentally as sound as Ruskin's, were more challenging and they were more challenging because Ruskin turned to the past, whereas Wilde turned to the future.

In nature all forms exist. But we are so busy and use our eyes so little, that our attention is rarely called to any form or type, but the one which fashion for the moment emphasizes—and since this is so with our daily life, it is even more so with Art.

To have an understanding of Modern Art, or what it represents, one must first come to a decision as to what Art per se means to the individual. Is it simply personal taste, based on representative art, which awakens pleasant memories, or is it something more profound? To the true artist or art lover, to whom Art is a stern taskmistress, such an easy-going definition as the first is unbearable. To them Art is as profound and deep as religion, a sign-post to the road they should travel, a developer and refiner. As scorching and disturbing a process at times as when the dross is burned away to reveal the gold.

The tragedy, however, is that most people have accepted Art solely as something all wellbred people should like, as one is supposed to like olives. They have never gone beyond the surface and, therefore, do not realize that Art has fundamental principles on which it is based—laws which must be adhered to as rigidly as the laws pertaining to the universe, for all these laws are akin and, if disregarded, create, as everywhere, chaos.

Not knowing the laws on which Art is based, they rarely can distinguish what is good in the old art, or what is mere representation. Neither, therefore, can they distinguish between the chaotic presentation of the hangers-on in Modern Art and the creators who have a definite idea which they present in a definite form. All new forms may appear chaotic to the onlooker because he does not know the fundamental principles on which all Art is constructed—the new as well as the old, the old as well as the new. Therefore, to those who never realized that Art is profound and should be prophetic, the modern movement appears chaotic.

ART LIBRARY
YALE UNIVERSITY

But whoever has made a study of the underlying principles upon which all Art is based, realizes that there are certain fundamentals which cause all Art to spring from one root. They govern the Byzantine Art, the Art which followed it, as well as Modern Art, and each cleavage has simply enlarged the vision of Art. It is foolish, therefore, when men try to set aside the old art, or do not revere it, just as it is equally foolish when they refuse to recognize that we are living in a period when a distinct contribution has been made to Art which has not existed heretofore.

In New York we are all talking about the Newer Generation and how different their point of view is to that of ours. But how many stop to think how much our physical life has changed in the last thirty years. Take the element of time. Consider how we have eliminated both time and space, or shortened it, through the automobile, the aeroplane and the telephone. Formerly, when we wanted to communicate with a friend, we had to write a letter, the letter was then posted or carried by messenger, the boy had to wait while the answer was written, then carry it back. In all this transaction the element of time came into play. Now, if we want to communicate with a friend, we go to the telephone, take down the receiver, dial our number, and, through the unseen wire, come into personal contact. Time and space have, through this invention, been almost eliminated when one considers that one can now talk to London. Stop for a moment and consider how you would interpret as an artist this new form, this new way of reaching a friend. I do not mean as an illustration, but as a creative artist, how would you interpret this symbol of your time in terms of paint?

Or take as another example the farmer in 1927, a subject Professor Henri Barzun, for whom a chair has been created at New York Fordham University, to teach the new approach in all the Arts, likes to speak on. You can hardly distinguish the farmer of to-day from any other business man. Through his telephone he is in constant touch with the market as to the price of his commodity, he has his up-to-date banking system, his tractors. Would Millet's famous picture of "The Angelus" portray to your mind an up-to-date farmer? Why, of course not.

When speaking of this example in Buffalo I found to my amazement that many in the audience thought I was referring only to the different implements—the difference between the scythe and the tractor—but both Professor Barzun and I did not have that in mind, but the whole spirit of those times which the painting revealed. The average American has no understanding of the spirit of man who responds to the angelus and who guards his hard-earned savings in some old family chest. So the picture only speaks in part.

If life outwardly has changed so radically, is it strange if creative Art, which should be prophetic, has changed also? The difference is that in our everyday life we call this change "progress"—keeping up with the times—but when it comes to

2

Art most of us are found napping—napping in a way which would amaze us if applied to any other form of everyday living. For, for some reason, we on this continent do not yet believe that Art belongs to the essentials of everyday life.

Because of the need of Art in our everyday living, and because to keep Art alive it must be flowing, the Société Anonyme came into existence to do its part. Our task, therefore, is educational and our point of view is the promotion of the study of the prophetic in Art, based on the fundamental principles for students in America, and renders aid to conserve the vigor and vitality of the new expressions of beauty in the Art of to-day. One of our tenets is that we do not exhibit sketches, but only the complete expression of a thought.

We were very conscious of the unfairness to American youth—for everyone cannot go to Europe—to let local history repeat the experience of 1913, when the Armory Exhibition, organized by the late John Quinn and Arthur B. Davies, presented the latest movements in European Art of the past 40 years. The names of Picasso, Duchamp, Braque and Villon were hardly known in Europe in 1913, but they were no less unknown in the United States than the names of Cézanne, Van Gogh, Matisse and Hodler—men who were then as well known in Europe as Manet, Monet, Renoir or Degas are well known names to-day. The realization of this truth came as a terrible shock, and, therefore, in 1920, seven years after the Armory Show, the Société Anonyme came into existence.

When it first gave out its aim, it used the word "experimental" in place of "prophetic". But it soon found that there was a curious difference of opinion as to what the word "experimental" meant. Miss Elizabeth Cary, our eminent Art Critic of the New York Times, interpreted it as implying that we were on the road, but had not yet arrived. Whereas we called it "experimental" because to us the thought expressed held within itself further fruition. Mr. Ernest Peixoto, an American artist from California now living in New York and teaching American art students Art in Paris in the summer months, gave our word "experimental" another twist, which was that he considered the works failures, stating that in former years artists had too much self-respect to unload their experiments upon the public. It is of great value to know how much variation one word can contain when it passes through different types of mind. And I mention this for it will help you to understand that, even where the average mind thinks a clear statement is made, different conceptions of the same word have been received.

To the Société Anonyme the term Modern Art, or The New Primitives, represents a distinct point of view and holds within itself a definite meaning, which is that it is an expression of the new cosmic forces coming to the fore, which in time will change our vision of life, as well as that of Art, as radically as when Giotto broke with the Byzantine. Therefore, the Exhibition gathered together was not a haphazard affair, as many people

3

seem to think, or a collection of Contemporary Art, which has
failed to include certain points of view which are making their
appearance in Europe and here. But, using the term Modern
Art as we do, it guided us definitely in our selection of paintings.
Therefore, the criticism that we are out-of-date and should
hardly call this Exhibition Modern Art, again shows a confusion
of what is meant by that term, not only to us but to most people.

I have been asked why I did not include certain groups who
are called Modernists, as, for instance, such men as Vlaminck,
Derain and Rouault, or groups in Germany who now call them-
selves "Die Neue Sachlichkeit", which has been translated as
"The New Reality". To us, they do not include our point of
view, which, for lack of a better name, we have called "Modern
Art" or The New Primitives, but are rather a natural normal
continuation of the Art of the past which had its break when
the Italian Primitives left the Byzantine painters.

We, therefore, who have made a study of the underlying
principles upon which all Art is based, which I have already
mentioned, realize that there are certain fundamentals which
cause all Art to spring from one root. They govern the Byzantine
Art, the Art that followed it, as well as Modern Art, and each
cleavage has simply enlarged the vision of Art. We do not feel
that this new expression would be an enlargement of Art unless
it were closely related to life. As the Byzantine revered, above
everything, the awe and divinity of God, as the Italian Primitives
created a point of view which raised humanity and its standard,
so we feel that our contribution is a contribution of creating in
terms of Art subjects of the mind and ear which heretofore have
not been rendered in painting and sculpture—living ideas which
add to or precede the thoughts that are now in existence and
which as yet can only be revealed and accepted by the eye. We
like to have our minds stimulated through our eyes, not alone
through reading—but through vision.

We believe with Emerson that beauty is for the seeing eye
and that God brings together beauty and the eye. I cannot
express this thought so exquisitely as he did and so I will quote
just the last lines of his beautiful poem, called "Rhodora":

"Rhodora! If the sages ask thee why
This charm is wasted on the earth and sky,
Tell them, dear, that if eyes were made for seeing,
Then beauty is its own excuse for being.
Why thou wert there, oh rival of the rose,
I never thought to ask—I never knew,
But in my simple ignorance supposed
The selfsame power that brought me there, brought you."

Many people feel that the only value of the new expression
in Art is because we make people think and because we jack up
the average painter to a finer technique, but that our services
end therewith. But we believe that Art is a silent language of
the eye and, through the eyes, opens long vistas to the soul.

4

Wordsworth drew attention to the value of that inner eye and
its joy in his poem, "The Daffodils", when he said:

"They flash upon that inward eye,
Which is the bliss of solitude."

Without that inner eye the world of the art of painting,
sculpture or architecture is closed. For it is the eye of the soul
which reveals the beauty lying below the surface.

I was extremely happy when I came across a passage of F.
B. Housser, in his book, "ACanadian Art Movement", which I
will quote, for it forsees a spiritual awakening on this continent
of which we have great need:

"Poor men, in their adversity, create wealth for
themselves, and likewise men, conscious of spiritual
poverty, search out and accumulate spiritual wealth.
The spiritual famine which follows the triumphant ad-
vance of material progress will eventually cause us to
replant our fields so that we may harvest food for our
souls as well as for our bodies."

This expresses in other terms why the Modern Art Move-
ment, or the New Primitives, have come into existence. We are
no longer content with the static in Art, we consider that that
has been superbly expressed in the past and that we can only
repeat what has already been achieved. For, as Oscar Wilde
says, "All repetition is anti-spiritual."

There is, however, a field, a new field, which the Old Masters
never thought of and this is the field we are entering to-day.
For, as I have said, we have reached a most interesting period in
the development of Art—a new cleavage with the past—that is,
the Tree of Art is sending forth a large new branch. The first
important division where the Tree separated in Western Art was
when the Italian Primitives decided that the human element was
an important factor in life and must, therefore, be interpreted
through Art. For Art, to remain flowing and vital, must enlarge
its scope.

Who to-day, looking back, would deny the beauty those
Primitives created, or deny the joy which their point of view
has given us? Who, to-day, would do away with that point of
view, or eliminate it from Art? Or, who would want to elimi-
nate Byzantine Art, though little known on this continent? But
those of us who know it, love and respect it as much as we love
and respect all expressions of great beauty.

And here I want to draw attention to the importance of
realizing the right of individuals to create their point of view in
Art. I was shocked to find that at Harvard they are still teach-
ing, in the year 1927, that Greek Art is superior to Egyptian
Art, instead of teaching that it represents a totally different
approach towards life. The Greeks admired, above everything,
the perfected human body w,hereas the Egyptians were much
more concerned with achievement. A Pharaoh, as you know,
was represented 3 to 5 times the size of his slave, and so forth.

5

Not man's physical body, but man's achievement interested the Egyptians. Their schools of philosophy also differed from those of the Greeks as totally as their approach towards Art. All prejudices are very dangerous, for they retard development. It does not matter which form it takes—that of Harvard of overvaluation, or that which I found here of the fear of life as expressed through the human figure.

Few of us realize that we on this continent have no national expression in Art. Especially in the United States, there is an inheritance of Art from all the nations of Europe; therefore, there is not, to the average American, that inner response to Art which you find in an Italian towards Italian Art, or in a Frenchman towards French Art, etc. We, in the United States, have developed a school of landscape painting which is essentially an expression of American atmosphere, but there is a literalness about it, instead of interpretation, which mars its beauty and takes it out of the realm of supreme Art. There is not enough spirituality expressed in it.

You have here in Canada a Group of Seven, who are trying to create Canadian Art, to express their own country, for it is very true what Lawren Harris stated when he wrote me that:

> "To appreciate the Art of other countries, a people must create their own artistic idioms before they can become articulate as a people and commence to live in profound reality. This self-achievement of a people permits them to then comprehend and understand the works of others."

It is, therefore, very important that a public should exist that is qualified to understand creative Art, for the creative artist is the custodian of the future fame of his own country. According to its Art is the life of a nation, and the nations that have vanished from the globe are the nations without an Art. Therefore, it is important to have Art in the home, for unless we have Art in the home we cannot learn its language, as I have already stated, for Art is the silent language of the eye. If you shut out Art from the home, you are killing one of the most vital arteries of the life of a nation. For the life of a nation relies on the vitality of the Art within that nation.

Before I speak to you about the pictures I am showing you through the lantern slides, I want to draw your attention again to the fact that this collection, assembled for the Brooklyn Museum, represented twenty-three countries. Few people have grasped the significance of this. At the Philadelphia Sesquicentennial, the Department of Fine Arts represented only ten, though they exhibited approximately 5000 paintings. At the Grand Central the Multi-National represents only six.

Many feel that Modern Art is disappearing, but when we recall that, after the death of Giotto, Art again fell into decay for a short time and that approximately seventy years passed before Orcagna made himself felt, we need not be worried, even

6

if history repeats itself. Time is an important element in all development—it cannot be hastened, a fact we seem to forget—and, therefore, we need not trouble ourselves as to what the non-believers say—the people who do not see our vision. And because we feel it is a distinct cleavage with the past, I agree with Professor Henri Barzun when he states that in his judgment 75 years will pass before the critics will find the correct words to apply to the New Vision in The Arts. That we will not disappear we feel certain of, because, after being almost twenty years old, we have grown in strength and vigor, and, during the period of the Great War—that terrible period of international isolation—the vision of Modern Art continued to grow and did not diminish, showing that it was something independent of outside conditions, as well as independent of any individual. It is bigger than either—life is too big to be imprisoned in one cup—and these forces which are entering and changing all forms of life—in art, music, literature, science, religion and government—are, we feel, the heralds proclaiming the approach of our New Era.

## LANTERN SLIDES

Before showing you the first picture I just want to draw your attention to an attitude of mind which the Société Anonyme has taken, which many people do not understand, and that is that we do not only show Abstract Art with a purely modern point of view, but also the work of strong Individualists with a distinct message of their own, for these painters seldom find a gallery in which to show their work. Here, among the extreme Modernists, these extreme Individualists find a place, for they are the bridge for the average person to cross on to a better understanding of the abstract point of view.

### 1. "ENFANT AVE CHEIN"

This first picture is by a gifted young French painter of 26, Suzanne Phocas, whose Persian ancestry shows itself in her color and contour. It will be interesting to study the Persian miniatures in relation to this picture, which are at the Toronto Museum.

### 2. "BUSINESS" by Gutfreund

To my utter amazement I find that many people object to humor in painting or sculpture. Why this seriousness I cannot imagine, for there is nothing finer than spiritual humor and gaiety as expressed in the Fine Arts, and the humor expressed in this piece of sculpture is excellent.

### 3. "JAZZ BAND" by Hugo Scheiber

This is an excellent example of the elimination of unessentials in concrete form and is therefore an excellent bridge to the abstract. Few realize the difference between the deliberate elimination of unessentials and the elimination which a child's work shows because of lack of knowledge. This discrimination

7

is one of the most important first steps in the understanding of
our expression in Art.

### 4. "MUSIC" by Braque

You will recall that Cubism came into existence in France
and was led by a group headed by Picasso, the Spaniard, and
Braque, the Frenchman. This group wished to synthesize con-
crete forms and to deliberately discard the elegant lines of their
day, so that, through the lines they chose, they might build
deeper.

In Germany this same movement sprang into existence at
the same time and was led by Kandinsky, the Russian, with
Franz Marc, the German. But where the French-Spanish group
was governed by one thought, the German-Russian group was
governed by two—for Marc emphasized the psychology of color,
especially as related to the animal kingdom, and Kandinsky em-
phasized music in color. In other words, we should create in
terms of Art subjects of the mind and ear which heretofore had
not been rendered in that medium.

### 5. "REHE" by Franz Marc

Prior to the time of Marc, animals were painted realistically
from the human standpoint alone. Marc, through his devotion
to animals, knew the animal kingdom and gave us a glimpse of
its psychology as no painter has ever done before or since. As
far as I know, Delacroix was the first to try consciously the
psychological value of color in his painting and we know that
Goethe and his confreres studied the psychic influence of color
on people—the subject that doctors are only now beginning
to take up, almost a hundred years later.

### 6. "DER BLAUE KREIS" by Kandinsky

Kandinsky took the thought pointed out by Goethe, that
painting counted the relationship to music her main foundation.
It is interesting to note that, whereas Kandinsky devotes his
energy to creating music in color for the eye—for to him color
should eventually speak to the eye as music does to the ear—he
never uses musical instruments to gain this effects, whereas the
French and Spanish in the beginning constantly used forms of
musical instruments, though they did not create musical sounds.
The association of ideas had evidently nothing to do with this
sensation.

It is well to remember that Kandinsky has just celebrated
his 60th birthday. I have never met a more profound philosopher
and even the loss of his fortune at the age of 55, with the re-
sponsibility of his family upon him, did not disturb his serenity
or lessen the energy with which he started out to replace what
had been swept away.

### 7. "THE BROOKLYN BRIDGE" by Stella

The Radiation of Line. Until Modern Art came into exist-
ence, vibration through lines and color was, as far as I know,

8

never used. Heretofore, these lines were only used in connection
with perspective, but not to introduce vibration. But, both in
the picture of Stella's bridge and the picture which I will show
you afterwards, they leave the realm of perspective and enter a
totally new realm. It is this contribution which makes them
important.

(Tell of Roebling's feelings about this Bridge)

### 8. "THE TEMPTATION OF ST. ANTHONY" by John Covert

In this picture shown here philosophical thought is intro-
duced and the more one studies it, the more one realizes the re-
lation between the title and its exprssion, which at first may
even appear ridiculous to those who never use their mind in con-
nection with seeing Art or looking at Art, but rather relax in
their idea of beauty in Art as a lizard will relax in the sun. In
this picture of the Temptation of St. Anthony, painted in 1916,
we receive the vibration in connection with the temptation of a
soul.

### 9. "COMPOSITION OF FLOWERS" by Huszar

This picture introduces the first steps towards what is term-
ed "Clarification", taken up by a group led by Mondrian from
Holland.

### 10. "CLARIFICATION" by Mondrian

This group is of vital importance and is the one led by
Mondrian from Holland, who has reached a height of clarification
which in the world of sculpture might be likened to Brancusi.
Both have discarded everything but the very essence and through
this have reached a simplification and essence of thought—a
rarefied atmosphere, where few can follow. Mondrian is the more
difficult for he has taken the essence of thought whereas Bran-
cusi has taken more of the essence of the spirit of things, like the
bird, or fish, or child. Most people do not understand simplifica-
tion and the elimination of the unessentials. They believe when
they see such an example that any child can do it. They cannot
distinguish between a childish interpretation, where elimination
is accidental, and the simplification of the profound thought of
a master. They do not perceive the esoteric quality that under-
lies the expression of a profound thought which has reached its
highest perfection of simplification through the elimination of
all the unessentials. Christ's words, "Thou shall love the Lord,
thy God, with all thy heart, and thy neighbors as thyself", are
so simple that few can follow. If we lived accordingly, no laws
would be needed. Instead we have built up a most elaborate
national and international system which in no way reddy pro-
tects us, because in the maze of the unessentials we have lost
the essentials.

### 11. "TORSO" by Pevsner

Among the most interesting in the form of sculpture is the
problem which Pevsner and his brother Gabo have introduced

9

by stating that depth, not circumference, was one of the most
important problems, thereby introducing into the realms of
sculpture a new and vivifying thought.

12. "WATER FOWL" by Brancusi

In contrast to the problems of depth in sculpture is Bran-
cusi's essence through simplification, closely related in spirit to
Mondrian.

13. "SCULPTURAL OBJECT IN 3 DIMENSIONS"

by Kakabadzé

In contrast to Brancusi, but belonging to those sculptors
who are taking up the problems of circumference in place of
depth, which challenge Pevsner and Gabo have sent out into the
world, is Kakabadzé, that trained scientist who for many years
was professor of Natural Science in Moscow and who is unceas-
ingly searching for new forms and new sensations of the eye,
which have brought about some beautiful results.

14. "THE SEATED FIGURE" by Duchamp-Villon

In contrast to Kakabadzé's abstractions, the Seated Figure
of Duchamp-Villon seems almost realistic and quite easy to un-
derstand, though, if it had been seen only in relation to a Rodin,
there might have been the same difficulty as there is now for
the average mind to take in the difference between this and the
preceding one.

15. "INTERIEURS METAPHYSIQUES" by De Chirico

Another new thought which has entered the realm of paint-
ing is the Metaphysical Thought on the unreality of appearances.
In his picture called "Intérieurs Métaphysiques", De Chirico
emphasizes the unreality of a painted landscape realistically
represented, by painting it on an easel within a picture in juxta-
position with abstract forms, which he introduces in such a
manner as to force to the front the metaphysical speculation on
the unreality of appearances.

16. "REPRODUCTION OF THE FAMILY GROUP"

by Molzahn

Molzahn, the German, takes this same problem from a total-
ly different angle, as naturally a German would, from that of an
Italian. His picture, entitled "The Family Group", brings out
the different planes on which the parent and the children live,
as well as the different angle towards life and each other, and
was very disturbing to many people. But, when you talk to
these objectors, you find that they would never of their own
accord pick up a book on metaphysics. Naturally, therefore,
they would not want to be near a picture that forces them to
think on this subject and which they could not control as a book
can be controlled

10

17. "ABSTRACTION" by Léger

In contrast to these metaphysical thoughts are the philoso-
phic thoughts on the mechanism of life which are occupying
Léger and his group. Léger is very conscious of the mechanical
pressure that exists in our generation, but he wishes to go to
the root of the matter and, instead of expressing the surface,
he introduces the mechanical skeleton. In regard to one of his
pictures, shown here this winter, entitled "Abstraction 1925",
Elizabeth Cary, in her article in the Sunday Times of November
21st, states:

"No compromise with the demon sentiment has been introduced. The composition is clearer and more precise than the earlier ones, but one can trace quite as easily as in a representative picture the increased seren-ity and breadth of the emotion in control of the disci-plined mind. No longer upon the way, but arrived."

18. Another group which is of extreme interest, because nothing shows more clearly the change that has taken place in the last 40 years, is the group out of Russia, called the Con-structivists—those young revolutionists of the New Russia. Where the young revolutionists of the old Russia in the 80's and 90's were Nihilists, these young men confound us with this statement:

"The new function of Art is not to beautify, but to
transform and organize life. Chaos is bondage—Pre-
cision, Order, Organization, release life and bring the
return of freedom."

What a contrast to the revolutionists of the old regime.

19. And now we are coming to an entirely different group of people who have taken up a most interesting problem called in German "Raum Konstruktion," and which I have translated as "Division of Color Space." Among the paintings shown this winter were two perspective drawings in color for a dining-room by Vantongerloo. This represented a dining-room decorated in red, gray and white—large flat surfaces. This variation of color permits of an enlargement of conception to enter the room—in other words, different pictures look better on different back-grounds and, treating a room as these rooms are treated, per-mits of a unity of diversified interests.

20. This division of color space Peri creates on the wall through his easel pictures and their irregular shapes. This variation of division of space brings us to a new form of decora-tion for a room or a building and differs from the former mural decoration in that a mural decoration must be part of a wall, whereas Raum Konstruktion or the Division of Color Space breaks up a wall and introduces a new vibration, thereby intro-ducing a new element.

11

20. VORDUNBERGE

The difficulty that assails the average American is that he
finds it hard to differentiate between decorative Art and picture
painting, as expressed in modern abstract forms. To many,
Abstract Modern Art is simply decorative art—but this is not
the case. For a decoration, to be good, must be flat. A picture,
to be good, must have depth. This new Division of Color Space
breaks up the wall and introduces a vibration which has hitherto
not been taken into consideration—hence it is a complete new
problem. There are many painters who are taking up this prob-
lem—Gleizes, who formerly was connected with the Cubists;
Baumeister, the German, who is valued so highly in France;
Peri, the Hungarian, and Vantongerloo, the Belgian, whom I have
already mentioned, as well as many others.

In closing, I just want to state that for some reason I have
found that many people do not feel that humor should enter the
realm of Art, except as it might be expressed in caricature or
in illustration. Why this seriousness I cannot imagine, for there
is nothing finer than spiritual gaiety as expressed in the Fine
Arts. You find it in the early Italian Primitives and you find it
again in the New Primitives. Many people, in seeing this ex-
pression, laugh and think they should not, but nothing is more
pathetic than when gaiety is not contagious. We welcome and
rejoice when our pictures, in spite of the persons, react to the
gaiety that lies before them.

To any artist who has been steeped in the legend that Art
came to a close with the Renaissance, all these new living IDEAS
are tremendously stimulating and invigorating. To live at a
period when such richness of new vitality has entered the life of
the art world rouses the best efforts in each and all, whether
they consciously see the new vision or not.