PART V: THE FIGHT AGAINST CIVILIZATION 1895-1903

I

With Gauguin's last return to Tahiti there opened for him the final and

most important phase of his life, the last stand of the savage against

encroaching civilization. The letters that he sent to de Monfreid during

this period are painful reading. They breathe the weary cry of a man who

knows that Fate's dice are loaded against him, the complaint of a

warrior who realizes that fighting is useless, but who has no choice but

to fight on. For Gauguin was now exhausted by the struggle that he had

carried on so long with the world out-side and within himself. The wound

in his leg, given him by the sailors, had never properly healed; under

the climate of Tahiti, it reopened. Owing to the rash exposure of his

skin to the effects of tropical light, both legs were attacked by

eczema. Night after night was spent in sleepless pain. To add to his

troubles, his eyesight began to fail; nature was taking her revenge on

him, was wreaking upon his body retribution for the sins of which the

white race had been guilty in their dealings with the natives. It seemed

to him that the gods he worshiped had become his enemies.

Before leaving France, a number of friends had agreed to buy his

pictures, and assure him a steady income. These now withdrew their

support. He had leased a plot of ground in order to build the house of

sculptured wood which he dreamed of; the construction of the house

carried away his remaining capital. He was everywhere fleeced, not only

by the French colonists, but also by the natives, who were growing more

and more corrupt every day, thanks to the happy influence of

civilization. Even after his house was built, he was not allowed to

keep it in peace. The owner of the ground died, leaving his affairs in a

tangle; Gauguin was forced to obtain another plot and to reconstruct the

house, or see it destroyed. This last he refused to do, so he was

forced, finally, to borrow money, a thing he had never done in his life

before.

Towards the end of 1897, his situation grew even worse. His eyes, now

permanently inflamed, were so painful that he could not even touch a

brush. The tragic portrait of himself in profile, which he sent about

this time to de Monfreid, clearly reveals the condition of his eyesight.

De Monfreid had sent him colors, but these were useless--he could not

even exchange them for bread. And to add to all he was in debt, more and

more heavily, month after month. De Monfreid wrote him encouragingly,

tried to sell his pictures, spoke of articles, of a press campaign on

his behalf. The answer was--"I only desire silence, silence and again

silence. Let me die in peace, forgotten, or if I ought to live, let me

live in peace, forgotten.... What matter if I am the pupil of Bernard or

Sérusier? If I have painted daubs, why set out to gild them, to deceive

people as to their quality?"

Early in 1898 his resolution was taken. Weary, exhausted, at the end of

his tether, he decided to meet death half-way. He finished a large

picture, a sort of strange allegory of despair, entitled _D'où venons

nous? Que sommes nous? Où allons nous?_ and then took arsenic. The dose

was too strong and only brought about terrible nausea, which recurred

for some months afterwards whenever he attempted to take food. Meanwhile

his creditors menaced him with the destruction of the house that had

taken him so much trouble to build.

In order to obtain food, he shortly afterwards returned to Papeete and,

at the age of fifty, took up a position as a shipping clerk at the Board

of Public Works, with a salary of six francs a day. To such straits was

he reduced, and yet he continued the fight. Can one help admiring his

tenacity?

Meanwhile, the devoted de Monfreid had been busy. He had enlisted the

interest of Degas, of Vollard and others, and had succeeded in selling

some of the artist's pictures. Gauguin might now have counted upon a

steady income, had he chosen to forget past injuries. But with him,

there was to be no compromise. Because Bernard, Sérusier, Maurice Denis

had made his theories popular and had even claimed to have some

influence on his development, he refused either to be ranked with them

or to exhibit in their company. Of course he merely made himself more

unpopular in Paris by such conduct. But Gauguin's personality was of a

kind unable to endure the society of second-rate people. He admired

genius where he found it, in a few solitaries such as Degas, Poe,

Balzac, and Mallarmé. For ordinary society, he preferred either natives

or children. Nevertheless his pictures were sold and, by de Monfreid's

efforts, he found himself out of debt in 1899 and able to return to his

house, now in a deplorable state of neglect and decay. Things seemed to

improve a little, though he was now permanently crippled by the disease

of his legs. He set himself once more to paint and to plant the flower

seeds which de Monfreid had sent, at his request, from France. Ill,

ruined in health and physique, a victim to drugs, he went onward to his

goal.

[Illustration: Matamua (Olden Days).]

II

It is difficult to judge fairly the next stage in Gauguin's career,

unless we remember that he had suffered so much from his physical

ailments, from the complete solitude in which he found himself and from

the terrible crisis of the previous year, that he was afflicted for the

time being with something closely resembling persecutional mania. He had

been driven to war on civilization and he believed that some unknown

power was now pursuing him with its hatred. In his next stage, we find

him turning even against the natives.

On his return to Tahiti he had taken a young native girl aged

thirteen-and-a-half for wife, companion and model. She had served him

devotedly, had procured him food when he was unable to walk, had nursed

him in his illness. After his return to the house from Papeete, she had

resumed with him the old life and had given birth to a child. Now, for

some reason or no reason, Gauguin suddenly took it into his head that

she had robbed him, and drove her out. The poor soul, however, returned

and, as the painter was by this time a helpless cripple, he attempted to

call in the law to enforce her removal, claiming that her return was a

violation of his domicile. Of course, the law did nothing.

This only further enraged Gauguin. He decided to attack the entire

colonial administration. Since his return, he had been everywhere

treated by the Europeans at Tahiti as a madman or fool. Now he would get

his revenge.

With the aid of a copying apparatus he set up and printed several

numbers of a paper called, first _Les Guèpes_, and later _Le Sourire_.

The contents of these papers have been printed and are the poorest stuff

that Gauguin ever wrote. But these crude gibes at the governor and at

the colonial administrations generally, together with the equally crude

caricatures that Gauguin drew of prominent people in the colony, seem to

have produced a stir. People began to fear him at last; it was, for a

moment, a triumph.

But Tahiti had by this time grown too civilized to hold him. A railway

had been built into the interior; the Protestant missionaries grew every

day more powerful; disease and drink were rapidly carrying off the

natives. Gauguin for a time thought of turning doctor and even wrote to

de Monfreid for medicines. But shortly he found his own need of medicine

as great as that of any of the wretched natives. An epidemic of

influenza struck the island and the painter was obliged to take to the

hospital, where he had to pay twelve francs a day. To add to his griefs,

the supply of food in the island became scarce and prices ran up to an

impossible figure.

Hearing that life in the Marquesas Islands was cheaper, that the natives

there were physically more unspoilt, also that Europeans were few and

far between, he decided to quit Tahiti and install himself in the

island of Hiva-Hoa or Dominica. He hoped to find there elements of a

purer savagery and to paint with fresh strength. This hope was destined

to be realized only in part.

Gauguin's art is almost entirely associated with three spots,

Martinique, Brittany and Tahiti. He might have done better work at other

places, had he had the time, the opportunity or the strength. In the

case of his removal to the Marquesas it was the strength that was

lacking.

Traces of the exhaustion of his endurance and of the affection of his

eyes are to be found even in his latest Tahitian pictures. Owing to his

habit of dating his pictures, we can follow the failure of his power.

The first things that he painted after his return are, on the whole,

superior to the productions of 1891-93. The _Te Arii Vahine_ or

Reclining Woman, of 1896 is finer in design even than the _L'Esprit

Veille_ of 1892-3. The _Youth Between Two Girls, La Case_ (1897), the

beautiful _Navé Navé Mahana_ (Delightful Days) of 1896, with its feeling

of a terrestrial paradise--these are masterpieces of their kind. But the

portrait of himself (1897) already shows signs of inability to finish

and remains a sketch, albeit a powerful one. And with many of the

succeeding works there came a greater impatience, a greater

carelessness, a more hectic and feverish lack of control. The more

savage Gauguin's work grew, the less became his strength to produce it.

One is reminded of a similar case to his, that of the Irish dramatist,

Synge.

The Gauguin who sought solitude of far-off Hiva-Hoa was not the Gauguin

of ten years before. He was an extinct volcano, a burned-out crater. And

he was destined to find only death in this last solitude. Nevertheless,

before death came, his art attained its final summit of expression.

Pictures like the _Jeune Fille à l'Eventail_ (1902) or the magnificent

_Contes Barbares_ (also 1902) in which the Marquesas type appears, are

the last word of Gauguin's gospel of beauty, the revelation of a new

heaven and earth. The flame burned clear in him just before the

close--then the shattered body yielded and all was darkness.

III

The Marquesas Islands are small and, in contrast to the coral and

basaltic formation of Tahiti, of volcanic origin. They lie about a

thousand miles nearer to the equator and this makes their climate more

humid and less supportable to white men. Owing to this fact, and to the

fact that they are out of the track of steamers between San Francisco

and Sydney, they have preserved more of their unspoilt character.

The natives are said to be the finest in appearance of any Polynesian

peoples. In distinction to the Tahitians, who are either red or olive

brown, their skin is largely of a clear golden color. In this they

resemble the Maories of New Zealand, as in the practice of

face-tattooing common among the males. They were formerly great

fighters and ferocious cannibals, as Herman Melville's "Omoo" tells us.

The first white settlers amongst them were French Roman Catholic

missionaries who, by buying up most of the valuable land, by

discouraging the drink traffic and by preventing other familiar colonial

abuses, have succeeded in preserving the native stock fairly well. The

Marquesas have never become the sink of vice and corruption which is

Tahiti.

It was on the chief island of this group that Gauguin installed himself.

His capital enabled him to buy a plot of ground and to start

constructing another house. This, like his house in Tahiti, was

ornamented with bas-reliefs in wood and large decorative paintings. In

the garden, stood a rude clay statue--a sort of combination of a Buddha

and a Maori idol--under a canopy. Gauguin called this statue Te

Atua--the God, and was reported to say his prayers to it every day. On

the base of the statue were engraved these words, taken from Morice's

verses in "Noa Noa":

"The Gods are dead and Tahiti dies of their death,

The sun, which once lit the isles with flame, now sleeps,

A sorrowful sleep, with brief dream wakenings:

Now the shadow of regret pierces the eyes of Eve,

Who pensively smiles, gazing upon her breast,

Sterile gold, sealed by some divine design."

Altogether in the Marquesas, Gauguin found a great charm and repose. He

seems to have rapidly established a great friendship with the natives

and to have looked upon himself as being a sort of king. But his health

was so bad that he was unable to leave the house and but for one Chinese

boy, he lived alone. He even dreamed of abandoning the Marquesas (not

because he was weary of the place, but because he knew his strength was

small) and seeking a more favorable climate in Spain, where he thought

he might be able to paint.

Except for the constant trouble with his health, his only difficulty was

with the missionaries. With the exception of a few settlers, they were

the only whites on the islands. Gauguin had advanced in savagery to

such a point as to be unable to bear the presence of white people. He

refused to see that the Catholic Missionaries had at least attempted to

save the natives from the worse fate that had befallen them under the

Protestant Missionaries in Tahiti. The insistence of the Catholics upon

monogamy, upon European dress, upon mission schools and religious

observances infuriated him. He made a statue of a nude woman and set it

up in his garden. The Bishop protested. Gauguin promptly made a

caricature in clay of the bishop, with horns on his head like the Devil,

and set it up facing the statue. Something of the old Gothic love of the

grotesque, something, too, of the typically Parisian desire to "_épater

de bourgeois_" remained in him to the last.

But this was not all. Gauguin was not the sort of man to end his days in

peace. Although de Monfreid had worked devotedly, his position in France

was still insecure; Vollard might at any moment refuse to take more

pictures to sell. The wound he had received by his failure to impress

Paris in 1893 still smarted. He determined to write two articles

containing his opinions on art, technique, painting, life and morality,

in order to confound the Parisian critics. These articles, entitled

"Anecdotes of an Apprentice" and "Before and After," are little more

than a series of feverishly jotted notes. Later, with other notes of a

similar nature, they were embodied in a large album entitled "Avant et

Après," which remains the fullest body of information about Gauguin's

life and art we possess. The _Mercure de France_ judged, perhaps

rightly, that their tone was too personally violent and refused to print

them.

The other old score that he had to wipe out was with the French colonial

administration. In Tahiti, he had fought the governor, the law courts,

and the gendarmes. Here it was the customs officials who roused his

wrath. Two American ships had recently visited the island and a certain

amount of goods had been sold to the natives, through the connivance of

the gendarmes, without paying tax. Gauguin immediately wrote a letter on

the subject to the Administration, stating the facts as he understood

them and protesting, on behalf of the natives, against the bribery and

corruption of the Customs in this instance. The only reply made was a

notice from the law courts that the Administration intended to take

steps against him for the dissemination of an untrue statement. Gauguin

appeared in court, where he was promptly condemned to prison for three

months and to a fine of a thousand francs.

It was ruin, but Gauguin determined to appeal. The tribunal was

irregularly constituted and his facts had been proven to be in part, at

least, true. He was sure of winning his case, but an appeal necessitated

a return to Tahiti and the costs of an attorney, and his capital was

again running low. He wrote to de Montfreid, begging him to find a buyer

for three pictures, at the price of fifteen hundred francs; he sent off

ten more pictures to Vollard. Then he prepared to make his appeal.

Death surprised him suddenly and Paul Gauguin's appeal will never be

heard in this world.

A letter from the only white man, the Protestant minister Vernier, who

knew him, leaves no doubt on the subject of the cause of Gauguin's

death. It was not the eczema of the legs, nor leprosy, as some have

hinted, nor another dose of arsenic, nor syphilis, that ended his life;

it was a simple syncope of the heart. His energy, with which he had kept

up for so many years the struggle with the world and out of which he had

drawn so many beautiful pictures, was worn out. The machine slackened

and stopped.

Paul Gauguin died on the 6th of May, 1903.

A few days before his death he had written his last letter to Charles

Morice, the words of which stir one like a trumpet.

"I am on the ground but I am not beaten. The Indian, who smiles while he

is being tortured, is not conquered. You are mistaken if you meant that

I am wrong in calling myself a savage. I _am_ a savage, and the

civilized feel this, for there is nothing in my work which could produce

bewilderment save this savage strain in me, for which I am not myself

responsible. It is therefore inimitable. Every human work is a

revelation of the individual. Hence there are two kinds of beauty; one

comes from instinct, the other from labor. The union of the two, with

the modifications resulting therefrom, produces great and very

complicated richness. Art-criticism has yet to discover the fact....

Raphael's great science does not for a moment prevent me from

discovering the instinct of the beautiful as the essential quality in

him. Raphael was born with beauty. All the rest in him is modification.

"Physics, chemistry, and above all the study of Nature, have produced an

epoch of confusion in art, and it may be truly said that artists robbed

of all their savagery have wandered into all kinds of paths in search of

the productive element they no longer possess. They now act only in

disorderly groups and are terrified if they find themselves alone.

Solitude is not to be recommended to every one, for a man must have

strength to bear it and to act alone. All I have learnt from others has

been an impediment to me. It is true I know little, but what I do know

is my own."

Yet civilization, after all, had the last word. The very bishop, whom

Gauguin in life had hated and caricatured, intervened when he lay cold

and lifeless and the body of the painter was interred with full Catholic

rites in the cemetery of the Church at Atuana. And, by a concluding

stroke of irony, the grave was left unmarked. Thus one of the greatest

painters of the later nineteenth century, and one of the bravest men the

world has ever seen, mingled his dust with that of the humblest

natives, in the same way as Blake, one of the greatest painters of the

early nineteenth century, had been buried before him in an unmarked

grave among the paupers, at Bunhill Fields.

IV

The immense industrial development which occurred during the nineteenth

century took place so rapidly and universally, that no one was able to

estimate its significance or dispassionately to weigh its effects. At

the outset of the century the vital idea that pervaded Europe and

America was the spiritual idea of liberty and the rights of man, born in

the fires of the French Revolution. After 1848 this idea gradually

vanished, and another took its place; the purely material idea of

progress. The perfected application of steam and the consequent

development of machinery; the immense tapping of the world's resources

of coal, metals, agricultural products; the equally immense, universal

exploitation of human effort necessary to develop these resources to

their maximum; the creation of an international finance, resting upon

vast hoards of wealth in the hands of a limited few, whose world-wide

interests were linked together by railways, steamship lines, telegraphs,

telephones; the ordered regimenting of mankind into a small capitalist

class, invisibly controlling the old, decayed aristocracy, the official

church, the machinery of the law; a larger middle class, dependent upon

and subservient to the capitalists; and an immense laboring class,

exploited in the interests of the two preceding classes: all these were

virtually the creation of a single century.

Against this overwhelming flood of change, a few exceptionally gifted

men vaguely protested, affirming the greater value of human life over

mechanical invention; maintaining the antique dignity of man. Their

protest was incoherent, individualistic. These men were like broken and

scattered fragments of dykes, still unsubmerged and striving to hold

back the waters of a flood. Among them must be ranked the artist whose

life-story I have written.

All that is vital and valuable in French painting of the nineteenth

century, since Ingres, springs directly from the enthusiasm and

spiritual energy of the French Revolution. The somber fury of Delacroix,

the colossal caricature of Daumier; the peasant art of Millet; the sane

realism of Courbet; the mordant irony of Degas and Forain; even the

feeling for nature and the open air which the Impressionists gave us,

all represent phases of humanity's vague and enormous hunger for

personal freedom, for human liberty and development. When Gauguin

arrived on the scene, the reaction was already taking place. The

official, academic painters were merely ringing the changes upon a stock

of outworn formulas. On the other hand, the Impressionists were striving

to render nature scientifically, unemotionally. Nature was becoming to

them no longer the mother and nurse of man but a collection of chemical

formulas for soil, air, sunlight. Only Puvis de Chavannes remained,

aloof and misunderstood, painting great decorations that seemed but the

remembrance of some golden age of the past, and easel pictures of a

profound, hopeless pessimism.

Gauguin began to paint, and the protest against science, against

materialism, against unemotional vision began. At the outset he

attempted to follow the scientific formulas of the Impressionists. But,

by the purest instinct he discovered, as Cézanne had already discovered,

that the sensation of light could not be painted, could only be rendered

in color. And he also discovered (this time the discovery came from

Puvis de Chavannes) that the sensation of form could not be painted

either--that out of the variety of shifting forms offered to us by

nature, the artist must select those most significant to him and that

even these must be transposed, altered, accentuated or suppressed to

suit the harmony of the composition. Thus unconsciously, almost without

volition on his part, he was led to understand that the Primitives

everywhere were the truly great artists, since they expressed great

human emotions about man and nature, without troubling whether their

vision was or was not exact. And so he fought, bitterly, savagely, for

the actual restoration of primitive art and life; for the cause of

natural humanity against the cause of mechanical, dehumanized

efficiency.

Unless we realize this fact, we have not grasped the key, either to his

art or to his life. Gauguin himself admitted that his painting was only

a fragmentary indication, an unrealized promise of an unaccomplished

world. And he may have had knowledge also of the fundamental discord and

disorder of his own life, but have despaired of ever attaining to

harmony with himself. At least the caricature of himself in _Contes

Barbares_ is here to remind us that he was not altogether the spoiled

child that some imagine him to be. Having both the world and himself to

struggle against, he at least determined that his pictorial work should

represent the best part of his personality, even if his life proved

only to be, as he said in his last letter to de Montfreid, "a downfall

followed by an attempt to rise, followed by another downfall." And so in

his pictures we realize the truth of the remark made by Van Gogh after

the disaster that parted them: "Gauguin made one feel that a good

picture should be the equivalent of a good action."

And indeed it is so. Every artist carries upon his shoulders a profound

moral responsibility. This responsibility is not, as supposed, the duty

of teaching us to conform to the modern official distortion of Christian

ethics, by which we are ruled. It is not the duty of upholding a system

of negations, of prohibitions, of compromises, striking at the very

roots of life. It is a far nobler, far more difficult task. The duty of

the artist is to affirm the dignity of life, the value of humanity,

despite the morbid prejudices of Puritanism, the timid conventionality

of the mob, despite even his own knowledge of the insoluble riddle of

suffering, decay and death. This duty Gauguin in his art strove to

accomplish. He affirmed his faith in man and in the scene of man's

labor, the earth. Cézanne, perhaps a more accomplished painter, endowed

perhaps with a deeper respect for nature and for the style of the great

painters of the past, shrank from making Gauguin's affirmation. He

accepted in his own life a compromise; in his art he ruthlessly

eliminated the role of the creative and interpretive imagination. And

then, towards the end of his life, Cézanne complained that Gauguin had

vulgarized him.

"Gauguin has not understood me; never will I accept the lack of

gradation and of tone; it's nonsense."

It would have been better for Cézanne to have said that he could not,

dared not understand Gauguin.

Nor is this all that Gauguin accomplished. He restored painting to its

proper place in the ordered hierarchy of the arts. He showed us that its

place is between architecture and music, and that sculpture is its twin

sister. He was the first man to suspect that the progress of the

scientific spirit among the Greeks had produced the same effects in

disassociating and destroying the arts, as has the progress of the

scientific spirit in the present day. He believed, and constantly

affirmed, that painting was entering upon a new musical phase and he

built up his pictures on a definite scale of color harmonies, as well as

upon the chosen architectural proportions of form, which, whether given

by perspective or not, seemed to him necessary. Thus he reconciled the

Venetians and the Primitives, and showed that the goal of both form and

color is decoration.

William Blake might perhaps have admired this rude artisan, who painted

his dream of a golden age in his own way, who steadfastly strove to

grasp the essential truth in every tradition: Egyptian, Cambodian,

Persian, Chinese, Gothic, Greek and Renaissance. But Gauguin could

never, had he known of Blake, have pardoned in him the ultimate ascetic

negation, the contemptuous denial of earthliness, of "the delusions of

the goddess Nature." In Gauguin, the spirit never conquered the flesh,

and he remained to the end, a man. Blake was possibly the greater

visionary: Gauguin is certainly the better stone on which to build.

V

After Gauguin's death, his art rapidly became almost forgotten in

France. He remarked himself towards the end of his life that there were

not fifty of his pictures in that country. Even the few there are, hang

in scattered private collections, each containing one or at most three

or four. The great bulk of his work is in Germany, Scandinavia and

Russia. It proved impossible even in 1911 to raise sufficient money to

buy _L'Esprit Veille_ for the Louvre.

It is greatly to be regretted that no museum or collection has been able

to assemble a considerable quantity of his work. Gauguin was, above all

things, a decorator, and half a dozen of his pictures make a greater

effect than one. One does not judge Puvis de Chavannes, another

decorator, solely by his easel pictures, but by the great decorative

schemes in Paris, at Amiens and in Boston. This remark applies equally

to other decorators, such as Raphael, Michelangelo, Tintoretto and

Veronese. A room hung with twenty Gauguins would produce an immense

effect of monumental power. That such a room exists in Moscow can be

small consolation to Western Europeans at present.

His pupils and followers either plodded along unimaginatively, like

Sérusier, or drifted off into academicism, like Bernard, or watered down

their technique into the tasteless picture-book and stage-costume

decoration of Maurice Denis. None of them seized Gauguin's secret of

remaining simple, direct and savage. Aristide Maillol is an honorable

exception. A sculptor and tapestry designer, he was able to work upon

the indications that Gauguin had left for the guidance of these branches

and to show us, in part at least, how they might be realized.

The main stream of French art simply ignored Gauguin. Instead of making

with him a bold leap backwards to the origins of all tradition, it went

forward to even more scientific and unemotional essays in painting. The

Neo-Impressionists with their spots of complementary colors were

followed by disciples of Cézanne, who sought to reduce all forms to

certain geometrical primaries, basing their doctrine on certain words

which the master of Aix had let fall concerning the simplification of

form. Out of these emerged Matisse, whose art became, through a more and

more ruthless elimination of modeling, through a more and more arbitrary

placing of colors, an abstraction, an utterly unemotional series of

hieroglyphs. Then Picasso came upon the scene, eliminated color

altogether and began to paint the abstract geometry of form. The Cubists

followed Picasso. The Futurists in their turn started another kind of

abstract painting, the painting of mechanical energy, the dynamism

latent in form.

The Expressionists, meanwhile, held to Van Gogh's and Gauguin's idea

that the picture must represent some emotion, but they denied Gauguin's

corollary that some form derived from nature was necessary to transpose

this emotion into its pictorial equivalent. Consequently they eliminated

form and strove to paint abstract emotion. Finally, the Vorticists

combined Futurism and Expressionism into a single whole and painted the

abstraction of an abstraction--the emotion of dynamic energy, thus

declaring painting to be an absolute-thing-in-itself, an art utterly

innocent of any illustrative purpose whatsoever.

The motives of all these confused art movements, perplexing and

apparently in-congruous, were identical. They were all actuated by a

mania for scientific discovery, a desire to analyze phenomena until the

reality behind phenomena could be found. The physicists, chemists,

philosophers had proven that the world of appearances was not the real

world--that everything that existed was merely a question of ions and

electrons, of radiant or non-radiant energy, or perhaps of elasticity

and inelasticity. These young art revolutionaries, who gave themselves

so many queer labels, were not, as many supposed, either insincere or

insane. They were merely smitten with the desire to make painting--and

not only painting, but even other arts as well--a branch of abstract

science. The world of phenomena had been proved to be an illusion,

making some abstract concept. Therefore they strove to paint, not what

seemed to them unreal, but their absolute conceptions. This new

metaphysic, this new attempt at absolute realism, this final development

of scholastic art-dogma, as narrow and soul-destroying in its way as the

rules for painting religious ikons, evolved and practiced for centuries

by the Byzantine monks of Mount Athos, was rapidly conquering the whole

field of aft when the past war broke out. Nor has the war altogether

suppressed its manifestations.

The enormous destruction of human life, of nature, of art, in the past

war has been altogether out of proportion to the military results

achieved by either side. However true it may be to hold the Germans as

primarily responsible for this destruction, in the first instance, yet

it remains true that none of the contending forces can escape

responsibility for the later developments of the struggle. Apart from

Germany's undeniable guilt in starting the war, civilization as a whole

must answer for the horror of its method. A piece of heavy artillery is

equally destructive, whether it be cast at Essen or at Le Creusot; a

Caproni aeroplane can carry as many bombs as a Gotha; the submarine was

first employed in war by the Americans; the machine gun is an English

invention. For all these devices of destruction we of the twentieth

century, with our belief in purely material progress, stand guilty

to-day; and the blood of our guilt has reddened earth already for over

four years and may continue to do so for many generations to come.

The past war before it came to an end had long ceased to be a contest

between national ideals and had become a struggle between man and an

inhuman, scientific, organized machine. And the machine was victorious.

Just as the scientific spirit, conquering art before the war, led to the

extravagances of Cubism and Vorticism so, since the war, it has attacked

life itself; and made of national existence, no longer a problem of

human bravery, resource and intelligence, but merely a problem of

relative man-power and munitions. We have learned to speak of

"man-power" as our books on physics speak of "horse-power." The task we,

in the war, set ourselves was a grisly paradox; we proposed to save

civilization, to undo a great wrong, by destroying the very basis of

human life on which all civilization stands.

It is therefore with a sense of liberation that we now turn back to a

few artists who, in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, foresaw

that material progress would end in annihilating humanity, that nature

and humanity, hand in hand, are more sacred than all the shells that

could ever be produced, the guns that could ever be mounted or the laws

that could ever be written. With a sense of spiritual release we revert

to those who dreamed of the great return to nature--to Rousseau,

Whitman, Gauguin, as well as to others who, although perhaps lesser men

than they, followed in their path--David Thoreau, Richard Jefferies.

They were the prophets of the new gospel that must some day prevail--the

gospel that will set humanity above material progress and nature above

æsthetic negation. Their vision was of something not in themselves but

of something higher and nobler, as Gauguin knew when he deliberately

caricatured himself in _Contes Barbares_. As he knew also, the vision

was of something stated only fragmentarily, inscribed as a promise, a

foretaste, an indication of what might be. In Rousseau's prose, in

Whitman's poetry and in Gauguin's painting we see the only gleam of hope

for self-tortured humanity, and the promise of a land where nature and

man are one and where reigns a peace that passes all understanding.

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF WORKS CONSULTED

WORKS OF BIOGRAPHY:

1. Paul Gauguin par Jean de Rotonchamp, Imprimé à Weimar par les Soins

du Comte de Kessler et se Trouve à Paris, chez Edouard Druet, Rue de

Faubourg Saint Honoré, No. 114. 1906. Edition limited to 250 copies.

2. Gauguin, by Charles Morice. Floury, Paris, 1919. This and the

preceding work are the standard sources of Gauguin's life.

3. Lettres de Paul Gauguin à Charles Daniel de Monfreid. Paris, Cres,

1919.

4. White Shadows in the South Seas, by Frederick O'Brien. New York, The

Century Co., 1920. A travel book, with a few new sidelights on Gauguin's

final period.

5. Avant et Après. Paul Gauguin aux Marquises. 1903. 100 copies only

published in photo-reproduction from the original manuscript. A

translation into German has also appeared. Kurt Wolf Verlag, Berlin,

1920.

WORKS OF ART CRITICISM IN ENGLISH:

1. Modern Painting, by Willard Huntingdon Wright. New York, The John

Lane Company.

Paul Gauguin, his life and art · 第 5 / 5 章