became fascinated by the breadth and superb freedom of Manet’s works, and signed a series of portraits and sketches, some of which are not far below so great a master’s.  They are works which will surprise the critics, when our contemporary painting will be examined with calm impartiality.  After these works, M. Anquetin gave way to his impetuous nature which led him to decorative painting, and he became influenced by Rubens, Jordaens, and the Fontainebleau School.  He painted theatre curtains and mythological scenes, in which he gave free rein to his sensual imagination.  In spite of some admirable qualities, it seems as though the artist had strayed from his true path in painting these brilliant, but somewhat declamatory works, and he has since returned to a more modern and more direct painting.  In all his changed conditions Anquetin has shown a considerable talent, pleasing in its fine vigour, impetuosity, brilliancy and sincerity.  His inequality is perhaps the cause of his relative want of success; it has put the public off, but nevertheless in certain of this brave and serious painter’s canvases can be seen the happy influence of Manet.

It seems to us only right to sum up our impartial opinion of Neo-Impressionism by saying that it has lacked cohesion, that Pointillism in particular has led painting into an aimless path.  It has been wrong to see in Impressionism too exclusive a pretext for technical researches, and a happy reaction has set in, which leads us back to-day, after diverse tentative efforts (amongst others some unfortunate attempts at symbolist painting), to the fine, recent school of the “Intimists” and to the novel conception which a great and glorious painter, Besnard, imposes upon the Salons, where the elect draw inspiration from him.  We can here only indicate with a few words the considerable part played by Besnard:  his clever work has proved that the scientific colour principles of Impressionism may be applied, not to realism, but to the highest thoughts, to ideologic painting most nobly inspired by the modern intellectual preoccupations.  He is the transition between Impressionism and the art of to-morrow.  Of pure French lineage by his portraits and his nudes, which descend directly from Largilliere and Ingres, he might have restricted himself to being placed among the most learned Impressionists.  His studies of reflections and of complementary colours speak for this.  But he has passed this phase and has, with his decorations, returned to the psychical domain of his strangely beautiful art.  The “Intimists,” C. Cottet, Simon, Blanche, Menard, Bussy, Lobre, Le Sidaner, Wery, Prinet, and Ernest Laurent, have proved that they have profited by Impressionism, but have proceeded in quite a different direction in trying to translate their real perceptions.  Some isolated artists, like the decorative painter Henri Martin, who has enormous talent, have applied the Impressionist technique to the expression of grand allegories, rather in the manner of Puvis de Chavannes.  The effort at getting away from mere cleverness and escaping a too exclusive preoccupation with technique, and at the same time acquiring serious knowledge, betrays itself in the whole position of the young French School; and this will furnish us with a perfectly natural conclusion, of which the following are the principal points:—­