CEITICISM AND THE MAN 87 



Impressionism, therefore, is at the bottom of all 

 criticism, in whatever field. The impression which 

 the work makes upon your intelligence, your taste, 

 your judgment, is all that you can finally give. 



Criticism in France, where the art has been more 

 assiduously cultivated than in any other country, 

 seems divided between judicial critics like Brune- 

 tifere and impressionist critics like Lemaltre. The 

 latter states in terms of his own likes and dislikes 

 what the other aims to state in terms of the imper- 

 sonal reason. But their conclusions are likely to 

 dififer only as their temperaments and innate affini- 

 ties differ. Brunetifere has the more dogmatic mind 

 and the more violent antipathies. He could call 

 Sainte-Beuve a rat, — a verdict that savors more of 

 political and religious intolerance than of the impar- 

 tial reason. 



Are we not coming more and more to demand 

 that in all literary and artistic productions, the pro- 

 ducer be present in his work, not merely as mind, 

 as pure intelligence, but also as a distinct personal- 

 ity, giving a flavor of his own to the principles he 

 ntters ? Every vital creative work is the revelation 

 of a man as well as of a mind, and this is true in 

 criticism no less than in other forms of literature. 



Suppose Brunetiere's criticism lacked that which 

 makes it Brunetiere's, or Arnold's lacked that which 

 makes it Arnold's, should we long care for it ? Elim- 

 inate from the works of these men all that is indi- 

 vidual, all that in each makes the impression of a 

 new literary force, the accent of personality, and 



