naturalistic truth, which is always very popular, to the gradual exclusion of the backbone of abstract line and form significance that dominated the earlier work.  And when these primitive conditions are lost touch with, a decadence sets in.  At least, this is roughly the theory to which a study of the two great art developments of the past, in Greece and Italy, would seem to point.  And this theory is the excuse for all the attempts at primitivism of which we have lately seen so much.

Art having lost touch with its primitive base owing to the over-doses of naturalism it has had, we must, these new apostles say, find a new primitive base on which to build the new structure of art.  The theory has its attractions, but there is this difference between the primitive archaic Greek or early Italian and the modern primitive; the early men reverently clothed the abstract idea they started with in the most natural and beautiful form within their knowledge, ever seeking to discover new truths and graces from nature to enrich their work; while the modern artist, with the art treasures of all periods of the world before him, can never be in the position of these simple-minded men.  It is therefore unlikely that the future development of art will be on lines similar to that of the past.  The same conditions of simple ignorance are never likely to occur again.  Means of communication and prolific reproduction make it very unlikely that the art of the world will again be lost for a season, as was Greek art in the Middle Ages.  Interesting intellectually as is the theory that the impressionist point of view (the accepting of the flat retina picture as a pattern of colour sensations) offers a new field from which to select material for a new basis of artistic expression, so far the evidence of results has not shown anything likely seriously to threaten the established principles of traditional design.  And anything more different in spirit from the genuine primitive than the irreverent anarchy and flouting of all refinement in the work of some of these new primitives, it would be difficult to imagine.  But much of the work of the movement has undoubted artistic vitality, and in its insistence on design and selection should do much to kill “realism” and the “copying nature” theory of a few years back.

Although it is perfectly true that the feelings and ideas that impel the artist may sooner or later find their own expression, there are a great many principles connected with the arranging of lines, tones, and colours in his picture that it is difficult to transgress without calamity.  At any rate the knowledge of some of them will aid the artist in gaining experience, and possibly save him some needless fumbling.

But don’t for one moment think that anything in the nature of rules is going to take the place of the initial artistic impulse which must come from within.  This is not a matter for teaching, art training being only concerned with perfecting the means of its expression.