PROBLEMS OF STUDY OF MODERN PAINTING 657 



behind barricades, many of the painters felt the need of taking part 

 in these struggles. Searching in the slums and tenements, they made 

 their brush a weapon with which they entered the lists for the rights 

 of the disinherited. " The lot of the poor is pitiful," such is the refrain 

 that runs through their paintings. The fame of having been warm- 

 hearted friends of mankind cannot be denied these artists. They 

 proved that art cannot be joyful when life is serious, and they 

 fought for noble aims with worthy intentions. Unfortunately, how- 

 ever, their paintings can no longer afford us a pure, aesthetic pleasure, 

 because the intention is better than the execution. Occupied only 

 with the thoughts they wished to express, all these tribunes of the 

 people neglected beyond measure the purely technical side of their 

 art. 



With these tendencies we approach a difficult question, but one 

 of great importance for the future development of modern painting, 

 ['or what is true of these apostles of humanity is more or less true of all 

 who wielded the brush in the first half of the nineteenth century. 

 They were less painters than disguised literati. The value of their 

 paintings consisted more in what they studied than the manner in 

 which they rendered it. It is easy to explain the literary spirit 

 which at that time dominated painting. With the close of the eight- 

 eenth century, the bourgeoisie became the principal purchaser and 

 the most important patron of art. In these circles purely aesthetic 

 needs did not yet exist. They could only understand art in so far as 

 it served culture, and therefore demanded of pictures the represent- 

 ation, in epic breadth, of interesting things which could be read from 

 them. It was not thus in former centuries. During the rococo 

 period men surrounded themselves with works of art only in order to 

 enjoy their beauty. They knew that a picture could play upon the 

 filaments of the soul through the noble language of line and the 

 ] tower of color to awaken feelings akin to those caused by music. But 

 in the nineteenth century this purely sensuous joy in the beautiful 

 had to be awakened again. It had to be brought home to the general 

 consciousness that painting was not an appendix of literary culture, 

 but an independent art which ruled a mighty realm, that of beautiful 

 form and beautiful color. 



The painters of the succeeding generations felt the need of treading 

 this path. They desired to show by their works that it was not the 

 function of the artist to relate, amuse, or teach, but only to paint in 

 the best manner possible. But how and where should they begin? 

 Under the tutelage of the literary, the purely artistic taste had 

 greatly suffered. The prerequisite of artistic production, therefore, 

 was to refine this taste; and this could be best accomplished by 

 seeking advice from the classic painters of the past. With the middle 

 of the century, modern painting, accordingly, entered upon the second 



