Last Quartile.—­Dim, certainly not comparable to the actual scene.  I have to think separately of the several things on the table to bring them clearly before the mind’s eye, and when I think of some things the others fade away in confusion.

Last Octile.—­Dim and not comparable in brightness to the real scene.  Badly defined, with blotches of light; very incomplete; very little of one object is seen at one time.

Last Suboctile.—­I am very rarely able to recall any object whatever with any sort of distinctness.  Very occasionally an object or image will recall itself, but even then it is more like a generalised image than an individual one.  I seem to be almost destitute of visualising power as under control.

Lowest.—­My powers are zero.  To my consciousness there is almost no association of memory with objective visual impressions.  I recollect the table, but do not see it.

I next proceed to colour, as specified in the third of my questions, and annex a selection from the returns classified on the same principle as in the preceding paragraph.

COLOUR REPRESENTATION.

Highest.—­Perfectly distinct, bright, and natural.

First Suboctile.—­White cloth, blue china, argand coffee-pot, buff stand with sienna drawing, toast—­all clear.

First Octile.—­All details seen perfectly.

First Quartile.—­Colours distinct and natural till I begin to puzzle over them.

Middlemost.—­Fairly distinct, though not certain that they are accurately recalled.

Last Quartile.—­Natural, but very indistinct.

Last Octile.—­Faint; can only recall colours by a special effort for each.

Last Suboctile.—­Power is nil.

Lowest.—­Power is nil.

It may seem surprising that one out of every sixteen persons who are accustomed to use accurate expressions should speak of their mental imagery as perfectly clear and bright; but it is so, and many details are added in various returns emphasising the assertion.  One of the commonest of these is to the effect, “If I could draw, I am sure I could draw perfectly from my mental image.”  That some artists, such as Blake, have really done so is beyond dispute, but I have little doubt that there is an unconscious exaggeration in these returns.  My reason for saying so is that I have also returns from artists, who say as follows:  “My imagery is so clear, that if I had been unable to draw I should have unhesitatingly said that I could draw from it.”  A foremost painter of the present day has used that expression.  He finds deficiencies and gaps when he tries to draw from his mental vision.  There is perhaps some analogy between these images and those of “faces in the fire.”  One may often fancy an exceedingly well-marked face or other object in the burning coals, but probably everybody will find, as I have done, that it is impossible to draw it, for as soon as its outlines are seriously studied, the fancy flies away.