IMPRESSIONIST PAINTING:
ITS GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Illustration:
A STUDY · MAX LIEBERMANN
]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IMPRESSIONIST PAINTING
ITS GENESIS AND DEVELOPMENT
BY WYNFORD DEWHURST
[Illustration]
LONDON PUBLISHED BY
GEORGE NEWNES LIMITED
SOUTHAMPTON ST. STRAND
MDCCCCIV
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Á
MONSIEUR CLAUDE MONET
EN TÉMOIGNAGE D’ESTIME
ET D’ADMIRATION
WYNFORD DEWHURST
CHELMSCOTE
LEIGHTON BUZZARD
_Mar. 1904_
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PREFACE
IT may perhaps be interesting to the readers of this book to give a
short account of its origin. From the earliest days of my pupilage to
art I had been instinctively drawn towards the paintings of Turner,
Corot, Constable, Bonington, and Watts, with an intense admiration for
their manner in viewing, and methods of recreating, nature upon their
canvases; and in later years I had been fascinated by the works of more
modern artists, such as La Thangue, George Clausen, Edward Stott, and
Robert Meyerheim. In 1891, a student in Paris, I found myself face to
face with a beautiful development of landscape painting, which was quite
new to me. “Impressionism,” together with its numerous progeny of
eccentric offshoots, was at the time causing a great furore in the
schools. Curiously enough I had been charged with copying Monet’s style
long before I had seen his actual work, so that my conversion into an
enthusiastic Impressionist was short, in fact, an instantaneous process.
Since then I have endeavoured, by precept and by example, to preach the
doctrine of Impressionism, particularly in England, where it is so
little known and appreciated. It has always seemed to me astonishing
that an art which has shown such magnificent proofs of virility, which
has long been accepted at its true value on the Continent and in
America, should be comparatively neglected in my own country. A
stimulating propaganda being needed, I invaded for a short time the
domain of the writer on art, a sphere of activity for which I feel
myself none too well equipped. For years, as a hobby, I had collected
all manner of documents bearing upon the subject of Impressionism, and
the mass of material which thus accumulated formed the basis for several
articles which have appeared under my name in the English magazines. To
the Editors of the _Pall Mall Magazine_, the _Artist_, and the _Studio_,
I must tender my best thanks for the leave, so courteously given, to
incorporate the substance of the respective articles in this volume.
Many of the pictures which illustrate these pages are unique, having
been reproduced for the first time, the photographs not being for public
sale. I have to acknowledge my sincere obligations to Miss Mary Cassatt,
Messieurs Durand-Ruel (who have given me much personal assistance),
George Petit, Bernheim jeune, Maxime Maufra, Alexander Harrison, Paul
Chevallier, Lucien Sauphar, Emile Claus, Max Liebermann, and, indeed, to
all the artists illustrated, for permission to use the photographs of
their works. To Miss Mary Cassatt, and Messieurs Claude Monet, Emile
Claus, and Max Liebermann I am also indebted for the loan of valuable
pictures, and also for permission to reproduce them in colours. Without
such aid it would have been impossible to produce satisfactorily any
account of Impressionism. I trust that this volume may be of real
service in the cause of art education, and that it may introduce to an
extended circle of art-lovers the masterpieces of the great artists who
founded and are continuing Impressionist Painting.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTENTS
PAGE
DEDICATION v
PREFACE vii
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS xi
LIST OF PORTRAITS xv
CHAP.
I. THE EVOLUTION OF THE IMPRESSIONISTIC IDEA 1
II. JONGKIND, BOUDIN, AND CÉZANNE 9
III. EDOUARD MANET (1832-1883) 17
IV. THE IMPRESSIONIST GROUP, 1870-1886 31
V. CLAUDE MONET 37
VI. PISSARRO, RENOIR, SISLEY 49
VII. SOME YOUNGER IMPRESSIONISTS: CARRIÈRE, POINTELIN, 57
MAUFRA
VIII. “REALISTS”: RAFFAËLLI, DEGAS, TOULOUSE-LAUTREC 65
IX. THE “WOMEN-PAINTERS”: BERTHE MORISOT, MARY 75
CASSATT, MARIE BRACQUEMOND, EVA GONZALÈS
X. “LA PEINTURE CLAIRE”: CLAUS, LE SIDANER, BESNARD, 79
DIDIER-POUGET
XI. AMERICAN IMPRESSIONISTS: WHISTLER, HARRISON, 89
HASSAM
XII. A GERMAN IMPRESSIONIST, MAX LIEBERMANN 95
XIII. INFLUENCES AND TENDENCIES 101
APPENDIX 107
BIBLIOGRAPHY 113
INDEX 121
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ILLUSTRATIONS
MAX LIEBERMANN
A STUDY (_Frontispiece_)
J. M. W. TURNER
MODERN ITALY
PETWORTH PARK
JOHN CONSTABLE
THE CORN FIELD
A STUDY
THOMAS GIRTIN
VIEW ON THE THAMES
R. P. BONINGTON
HENRI IV. AND THE SPANISH AMBASSADOR
A COAST SCENE
G. F. WATTS
TIME, DEATH, AND JUDGMENT
RIDER ON THE WHITE HORSE
J. B. JONGKIND
VIEW OF HONFLEUR
MOONRISE
EUGÈNE BOUDIN
RETURN OF THE FISHING SMACKS
THE REPAIRING DOCKS AT DUNKIRK
PAUL CÉZANNE
LA ROUTE
EDOUARD MANET
THE BULLFIGHT
THE GARDEN
PORTRAIT OF BERTHE MORISOT
PORTRAIT OF M. P——, THE LION-HUNTER
A GARDEN IN RUEIL
FISHING
GEORGES D’ESPAGNAT
THE WHITE RABBITS
A SUMMER AFTERNOON
FAIR ANGLERS
LEPINE
FISHING NEAR PARIS
CLAUDE MONET
THE PICNIC
A STUDY (_in Colour_)
LA GRENOUILLÈRE
THE BEACH AT ÉTRETAT
POPLARS ON THE BANK OF THE EPTE: AUTUMN
MORNING ON THE SEINE
ARGENTEUIL
A RIVER SCENE
A LADY IN HER GARDEN
INTERIOR—AFTER DINNER
CAMILLE PISSARRO
CHURCH OF ST. JACQUES, DIEPPE
PLACE DU THÉÂTRE FRANÇAIS
THE BOULEVARD MONTMARTRE: A WINTER IMPRESSION
AUGUSTE RENOIR
PASTEL PORTRAIT OF CÉZANNE
AT THE PIANO
ALFRED SISLEY
A SUNNY MORNING IN AUTUMN
OUTSKIRTS OF THE FOREST OF FONTAINEBLEAU
ON THE BANKS OF THE LOING
OUTSKIRTS OF A WOOD
EUGÈNE CARRIÈRE
CHILD AND DOG
THE FAMILY
MOTHERHOOD
AUGUSTE POINTELIN
A GLADE IN THE WOOD
MOUNTAIN AND TREES
MAXIME MAUFRA
A ROCKY COAST
AN ETCHING
ARRIVAL OF THE FISHING BOATS AT CAMARET
SHIPWRECK
J. F. RAFFAËLLI
A GLASS OF GOOD RED WINE
NOTRE DAME
EDGAR DEGAS
DANCING GIRL FASTENING HER SHOE
DANCING GIRL
CAFÉ SCENE ON THE BOULEVARD MONTMARTRE
MARY CASSATT
BABY’S TOILET (_in Colour_)
BERTHE MORISOT
LE LEVER
EMILE CLAUS
THE LAST RAYS (_in Colour_)
THE VILLAGE STREET
RETURNING FROM MARKET
GOLDEN AUTUMN
APPLE GATHERING
A SUNLIT HOUSE
THE QUAY AT VEERE
THE BARRIER
HENRI LE SIDANER
AN ALLEY
THE TABLE
ALBERT BESNARD
A STUDY
THE DEATH BED
DIDIER POUGET
MORNING MISTS IN THE VALLEY OF THE CREUSE
MORNING IN THE VALLEY OF THE CORRÈZE
THE VALLEY OF THE CREUSE
J. A. McN WHISTLER
PORTRAIT OF HIS MOTHER
PORTRAIT OF THOMAS CARLYLE
PRINCESS OF THE PORCELAIN COUNTRY
ALEXANDER HARRISON
IN ARCADY
THE WAVE
SEASCAPE
CHILDE HASSAM
SUNLIGHT ON THE LAKE
CHILDREN
POMONA
MAX LIEBERMANN
A COUNTRY BEER-HOUSE, BAVARIA
THE COBBLERS
ASYLUM FOR OLD MEN, AMSTERDAM
WOMAN WITH GOATS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LIST OF PORTRAITS
EDOUARD MANET
GEORGES D’ESPAGNAT
CLAUDE MONET
CAMILLE PISSARRO
AUGUSTE RENOIR
ALFRED SISLEY
J. F. RAFFAËLLI
AUGUSTE POINTELIN
MAXIME MAUFRA
EMILE CLAUS
ALEXANDER HARRISON
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Illustration:
MODERN ITALY · J. M. W. TURNER
]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER I · THE EVOLUTION OF THE IMPRESSIONISTIC IDEA
“L’IMPRESSIONISME, ELLE EST DIGNE DE NOTRE
ADMIRATIVE ATTENTION, ET NOUS POUVONS
RATIONNELLEMENT CROIRE QUE, AUX YEUX DES GÉNÉRATIONS
FUTURES, ELLE JUSTIFIERA CETTE FIN DE SIÈCLE DANS
L’HISTOIRE GÉNÉRALE DE L’ART”
_GEORGES
LECOMTE_
ALTHOUGH the great revolution of 1793 changed the whole face of France
both politically and socially, it failed to emancipate the twin arts of
painting and literature. In each case one tradition was succeeded by
another, and nearly forty years elapsed before the new spirit completely
broke through the barriers set up by a past generation.
In literature the victory was complete. The reason is easy to discover.
The smart dramatist and the young novelist are always more likely to
catch the fickle taste of the uneducated public than the budding
painter, who depends to a great extent for his appreciation upon the
trained and generally prejudiced eye of a connoisseur. There is another
reason for the success of the Romantic School in literature. The
majority of its leaders lived to extreme old age, and were themselves
able to correct their youthful extravagances. Hugo, Dumas, Gautier (to
mention but three) went down to their graves in honour. They had
outlived the antagonisms of their early days, and no man dared to raise
his voice in protest against poets who had added fresh laurels to the
glory of France.
The world of art was less fortunate. Many of the younger men barely
lived through the first flush of youth. Destroying Death is the worst
enemy to the arts. It is idle to imagine the changes which must have
ensued had Géricault and Bonington reached the Psalmist’s allotted span.
The unnatural union of Classical traditions with the yeast of
Romanticism might not have taken place. Such artists as Delaroche and
Couture would have dropped into the background, and there would have
been less reason for the revolt of Edouard Manet. It is possible that
Claude Monet might have been forestalled. Surely, Impressionism would
have come to us in another shape from different easels. In any event it
was bound to arrive, for a French artist had already struck the note
nearly a century and a half before.
The schools of painting which flourished under the last three Capet
kings lacked many of the essentials of truly great art. But they
possessed qualities, which the Classicalists despised, and the
Romanticists never reached in exactly the same way. They possessed a
strong sense of colour. Watteau, in particular, was the first to catch
the sunlight. The painters of “les fêtes galantes” are artificial,
unreal, dominated by mannerisms. But the cold inanities of David,
Girodet, Gérard, and Gros are no more to be compared with them than the
bituminous melodramatics of the lesser Romantic artists.
Watteau’s successors never entirely lost their master’s sense of light
and colour. In a mild way Chardin attempted realism. Boucher, and,
later, Fragonard were influenced by that Japanese art which was to take
such a prominent place in the movement of a hundred years later. But the
world altered. The stern, hard ideals of Rome and Greece were too severe
for these poor triflers with the Orient. David reigned supreme. The
_Journal de l’Empire_ considered Boucher ridiculous. Unhappy, forgotten
Fragonard, surely one of the most pathetic of figures, died in poverty
whilst the drums of Austerlitz were still reverberating through the air.
Ingres, a pupil of David, taught his students that draughtsmanship was
of more importance than colour. “A thing well drawn,” he said, “is
always well enough painted.” Such teaching was bound to provoke dissent,
and the germs of the coming revolution were to cross from England. Byron
and Scott were the sources of the literary revolution which swept across
Europe. British artists showed the way in the fight against tradition
and form, which resulted in the School of Barbizon, and its great
successor, the School of Impressionism.
Excluding the miniaturists, and such foreign masters as Holbein,
Vandyck, Kneller, and Lely, English art could hardly boast one hundred
consecutive years of history when its landscape artists first exhibited
in the Paris Salon. The French School could not forget Italy and its own
past. Even to this day the entrance to the École des Beaux-Arts is
guarded by two colossal busts of Poujet and Poussin, and the supreme
prize in its gift is the Prix de Rome. But English art has never been
trammelled excessively by its own past, simply because it did not
possess one, and, with insular pride, refused to accept that of the
Continent.
[Illustration:
_Photo by W. A. Mansell & Co._
PETWORTH PARK · J. M. W. TURNER
]
[Illustration:
_Photo by W. A. Mansell & Co._
THE CORN FIELD · J. CONSTABLE
]
Hogarth is a case in point. His education was slight and desultory; he
did not indulge in the Grand Tour; he professed a truly British scorn
for foreigners, uttering “blasphemous expressions against the divinity
even of Raphael, Correggio, and Michelangelo.” He took his subjects from
the life which daily surged under his windows in Leicester Square, and
when he attempted a classical composition he utterly failed, and was
promptly told so by his numerous enemies. His canvases form historical
records of the men and women of the early Georgian era, in much the same
manner as Edouard Manet represents the “noceurs” and “cocottes” who
wrecked the Second Empire and reappeared during the first decade of the
Third Republic.
Hogarth was a colourist, and the early English School was always one of
colour and animation, attempting to follow Nature as closely as
possible. Some of the slighter portrait studies of Sir Joshua Reynolds
have a strong affinity to the work of the French Impressionists. Richard
Wilson was not altogether blind to the beautiful world around him,
although he considered an English landscape always improved by a Grecian
temple. Gainsborough was decidedly no formalist, and whilst the lifeless
group, comprising Barry, West, Fuseli, and Northcote, was endeavouring
to inculcate the classical idea, the English Water-colour School began
to appear, the Norwich School was in the distance, Turner’s wonderful
career had commenced, and Constable, the handsome boy from Suffolk, was
studying atmospheric effects and the play of sunlight from the windows
of his father’s mill at Bergholt. In 1819 Géricault, one of the leaders
of the reaction in France against Classicalism, paid a visit to England.
He does not seem to have been greatly influenced by English work, owing
no doubt to his lamentably early death. But his visit resulted in
Constable and Bonington becoming known in France.
For years English painters exhibited regularly at the Salon. In 1822,
the year when Delacroix hung _Dante’s Bark_, Bonington exhibited the
_View of Lillebonne_ and a _View of Havre_, whilst other Englishmen
exhibiting were Copley Fielding, John Varley, and Robson. In 1824 the
Englishmen were still more prominent. John Constable received the Gold
Medal from Charles X. for the _Hay Wain_ (now in the London National
Gallery), and exhibited in company with Bonington, Copley Fielding,
Harding, Samuel Prout, and Varley. In 1827 Constable exhibited for the
last time, and, curious omen for the future, between the frames of
Constable and Bonington was hung a canvas by a young painter who had
never been accepted by the Salon before. His name was Corot, and he was
quite unknown.
The influence of these Englishmen upon French painting during the
nineteenth century is one of the most striking episodes in the history
of art. They were animated by a new spirit, the spirit of sincerity and
truth. The French landscape group of 1830, which embraced such giants as
Corot, Rousseau, and Daubigny, was the direct result of Constable’s
power. The path was made ready for Manet, who, though not a
“paysagiste,” became the head of the group which included Monet, Sisley,
and Pissarro. Forty years later the younger men sought fresh inspiration
in the works of an Englishman. Indirectly, Impressionism owes its birth
to Constable; and its ultimate glory, the works of Claude Monet, is
profoundly inspired by the genius of Turner.
When the principles which animated these epoch-making English artists
are contrasted with those which ruled the Impressionists, their
resemblance is found to be strong. “There is room enough for a natural
painter,” wrote Constable to a friend after visiting an exhibition which
had bored him. “Come and see sincere works,” wrote Manet in his
catalogue. “Tone is the most seductive and inviting quality a picture
can possess,” said Constable. It cannot be too clearly understood that
the Impressionistic idea is of English birth. Originated by Constable,
Turner, Bonington, and some members of the Norwich School, like most
innovators they found their practice to be in advance of the age.
British artists did not fully grasp the significance of their work, and
failed to profit by their valuable discoveries.
It was not the first brilliant idea which, evolved in England, has had
to cross the Channel for due appreciation, for appreciated it certainly
was not in the country of its origin. As the genius of the dying Turner
flickered out, English art reached its deepest degradation. The official
art of the Great Exhibition of 1851 has become a byword and a reproach.
In English minds it stands for everything that is insincere, unreal,
tawdry, and trivial.
The group of pre-Raphaelites, brilliantly gifted as they undoubtedly
were, worked upon a foundation of retrograde mediævalism. And, as the
years followed each other, English art failed as a whole to recover its
lost vitality. Domestic anecdote, according to the formulæ of Augustus
Egg, Poole, or, slightly higher in the scale, Mulready and Maclise,
formed the product of nearly every studio. The false Greco-Roman
convention of Lord Leighton luckily had no following. Rejuvenescence
came from France in the shape of Impressionism, and English art received
back an idea she had, as it proved, but lent.
[Illustration:
A STUDY · J. CONSTABLE
]
[Illustration:
VIEW OF THE THAMES · THOMAS GIRTIN
]
[Illustration:
_Photo by W. A. Mansell & Co._
HENRI IV. AND THE SPANISH AMBASSADOR · R. P. BONINGTON
]
Those Englishmen who are taunted with following the methods of the
French Impressionists, sneered at for imitating a foreign style, are in
reality but practising their own, for the French artists simply
developed a style which was British in its conception. Many things had
assisted this development, some accidental, some natural. All the
Englishmen had worked to a large extent in the open. Now the atmosphere
of France lends itself admirably to Impressionistic painting “en plein
air.” All landscapists notice that the light is purer, stronger, and
less variable in France than in England.
By thus working in the open both Constable and Turner, together with
their French followers, were able to realise upon canvas a closer
verisimilitude to the varying moods of nature than had been attempted
before. By avoiding artificially darkened studios they were able to
study the problems of light with an actuality impossible under a glass
roof. They were in fact children of the sun, and through its worship
they evolved an entirely new school of picture-making. The Modern
Impressionist, too, is a worshipper of light, and is never happier than
when attempting to fix upon his canvas some beautiful effect of
sunshine, some exquisite gradation of atmosphere. Who better than Turner
can teach the use and practice of value and tone? In triumph he fixed
those fleeting mists upon his immortal canvases, immortal unhappily only
so long as bitumen, mummy, and other pigment abominations will allow.
The technical methods of the French Impressionists and of the early
English group vary but little. The modern method of placing side by side
upon the canvas spots, streaks, or dabs of more or less pure colour,
following certain defined scientific principles, was made habitual use
of by Turner. Both Constable and Turner worked pure white in impasto
throughout their canvases, high light and shadow equally, long before
the advent of the Frenchmen.
An example of this was to be seen in a large painting by Constable hung
in the Royal Academy Winter Exhibition of 1903. _The Opening of Waterloo
Bridge_, exhibited in 1832, was declared by the artist’s enemies to have
been painted with his palette-knife. Almost the whole of the canvas,
especially the foreground, is dragged over by a full charged brush of
pure white, which, catching the uneven surface of the underlying dry
impasto work, produces a simple but successful illusion of brilliant
vibrating light.
This work was not well received by the contemporary press and public. It
was regarded as a bad joke, became celebrated as a snowstorm, compared
with Berlin wool-work (a favourite simile which Mr. Henley has recently
applied to Burne-Jones), and was derided as the product of a disordered
brain. Seventy years have barely sufficed for its full appreciation.
By a curious coincidence Bonington’s _Boulogne Fishmarket_ was hung
almost exactly opposite in the same Winter Exhibition. This canvas must
have had an enormous influence with Manet, its blond harmony and rich
flat values within a distinct general tone being a distinguishing
feature of the great Frenchman’s style.
The Impressionists, therefore, continued the methods of the English
masters. But they added a strange and exotic ingredient. To the art of
Corot and Constable they added the art of Japan, an art which had
profoundly influenced French design one hundred years before. The
opening of the Treaty ports flooded Europe with craft work from the
islands. From Japanese colour-prints, and the gossamer sketches on silk
and rice-paper, the Impressionists learnt the manner of painting scenes
as observed from an altitude, with the curious perspective which
results. They awoke to the multiplied gradation of values and to the use
of pure colour in flat masses. This art was the source of the evolution
to a system of simpler lines.
In colour they ultimately departed from the practice of the English and
Barbizon Schools. The Impressionists purified the palette, discarding
blacks, browns, ochres, and muddy colours generally, together with all
bitumens and siccatives. These they replaced by new and brilliant
combinations, the result of modern chemical research. Cadmium Pale,
Violet de Cobalt, Garance rose doré, enabled them to attain a higher
degree of luminosity than was before possible. Special care was given to
the study and rendering of colour, and also to the reflections to be
found in shadows.
So far as the term implies the position of teacher and pupils, the
Impressionists did not form themselves into a school. On the contrary,
they were independent co-workers, banded together by friendship, moved
by the same sentiments, each one striving to solve the same æsthetic
problem. At the same time it is possible to separate them into distinct
personalities and groups.
[Illustration:
_Photo by W. A. Mansell & Co._
A COAST SCENE · R. P. BONINGTON
]
[Illustration:
_Photo by Fredk. Hollyer_
TIME, DEATH, AND JUDGMENT · G. F. WATTS
]
Edouard Manet occupies a position alone. His work can be separated into
two periods, divided by the year 1870. His earlier work deeply
influenced Claude Monet, who was a prominent member of the group which
gathered round Manet at the Café Guerbois. After 1870 the position was
slightly changed, for, although he retained the nominal leadership of
the group which was now known under the title of Impressionists, Manet
was influenced by the technique of Claude Monet. The question has yet to
be decided whether Manet or Monet was the founder of the new school.
Monsieur Camille Mauclair declares for the latter, stating that Manet’s
pre-eminence was due to the attention he attracted by his excessive
realism, and that Claude Monet was the true initiator. It may be
admitted that Impressionism, as the phrase is now understood, did not
really gather force until 1867. Claude Monet was greatly attracted by
Manet’s work as early as 1863, and upon these new methods he seems to
have based his own, widened though after his visit to London with
Pissarro in 1870.
During his lifetime Manet was the recognised head, and around him was
formed the famous circle of the Café Guerbois, which became known as the
School of Batignolles. This included Monet, Pissarro, Sisley, Cézanne,
Renoir, and Degas. If there is one man greater than the others it is
Claude Monet. Only during comparatively recent years have his
originality and strength been generally recognised. He now occupies the
position held by Manet, although he cannot be said to be Manet’s
successor. Manet painted the figure, seldom attempting landscape, a
_genre_ which is primarily Monet’s. Claude Monet is doubly indebted to
English art. Profoundly moved by Turner, whose works he studied at first
hand in England, he also traces an artistic descent through Jongkind and
Boudin from Corot, who caught the methods of Constable and Bonington.
Jongkind and Boudin are two little masters not to be forgotten. Not
altogether Impressionists themselves, they were in close affinity to the
school upon which they had much influence. Men of uncommon character and
earnestness of purpose, their art was sincere. In themselves they were
interesting, for, richly endowed with natural talents, they were for the
most part poor beyond belief in material wealth. Inspired by a genuine
love for Nature in all her aspects they never reached the high technique
of their English predecessors, and were far surpassed by Claude Monet
and his group. Forerunners in the evolution of the school of “plein air”
painting, a reference is necessary to them in order to follow the
development of the school as a whole.
For the first time in the history of art women have taken an active part
in founding a new school. Madame Berthe Morisot, Miss Mary Cassatt, and
Madame Eva Gonzalès must be included amongst the early Impressionists.
Various movements based upon the Impressionistic idea have taken place
in France and on the Continent generally. There are the _Pointillistes_
for instance, and the Neo-Impressionists. Amongst foreign artists
Whistler must be mentioned; a student at Gleyre’s he attended at the
Café Guerbois, and embraced many of Manet’s ideas.
The history of the early battles over Impressionism centres for the most
part round one personality. In following the story of the failures and
successes of Edouard Manet we follow the gradual rise of the entire
school, for no man fought more bravely in defence of its principles.
[Illustration]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Illustration:
_Photo by Fredk. Hollyer_
RIDER ON THE WHITE HORSE · G. F. WATTS
]
[Illustration:
VIEW OF HONFLEUR · J. B. JONGKIND
]