“Man is the object of art.”  This proposition applies as readily to the conception of literature, poetry and the plastic art as to the more active manifestations of the dramatic, oratorical or lyric art.  Man being thus the object of art in all of its specialties, the part of the artist is to manifest that which is revealed to him, through his three essential modalities,—­physical, moral and intellectual (in the words of Delsarte, life, soul and spirit, with the divisions and subdivisions that they allow), as has been clearly stated in the chapter upon “The Law of AEsthetics,” and further confirmed in the one upon “The Bases of the Science.”  But though all of these primordial modalities appear in each concept and in all artistic manifestations, the proportion in which each appears is indefinitely variable.  It is a predominance of one or another of these which classifies and specializes.  It is the harmony, more or less perfect, of the components of this triple unity which determines the value of artistic manifestations.  Under this law, then, come all of the arts, inasmuch as each, differing in subjects treated and in means of execution, still has a common mission, namely, the revelation of impressions, the intelligible expression of the thoughts and feelings of man.  To be more clearly understood, I will from this point consider separately the different branches of aesthetics.

Art—­Dramatic, Lyric and Oratorical.

The proclivities necessary to an artist, actor or orator (intelligence being the first consideration and beauty of minor importance) are:  expansion, sensibility or at least impressionability; a ready comprehension of the works to be interpreted, if not the requisite capacity to execute them.  One’s particular vocation (or congenial line of work) is the first condition in either of these departments of art, and into the consideration of this must enter that of physical beauty such as the roles demand; always considering what has been named “the physique” of the situation.  In a word, these three aspects of art correspond to the predominance of that modality which Delsarte calls “life;” this with the complementary share of the other essentials to maintain a symmetry; this for the average “chosen.”  As to the individuality necessary for the creation of a role, general statements cannot apply.  It is one and entire for each.  Should it reproduce itself identically, it would no longer be individual.  The strength of a powerful individuality lies in the revelation of a type sui generis.

Thus Delsarte can never be reproduced.  If by an impossibility an artist having seen him, and being penetrated by his method, could assimilate the sum total of his acquired qualities and his inmost purposes, still he could be but a copy, however perfect, since personality cannot be transmitted.  I could not pursue the demonstration of the application of the laws of the human organism to the generality of the