This approximation of men apparently of opposite pursuits is so natural, that when Gesner, in his inspiring letter on landscape-painting,[A] recommends to the young painter a constant study of poetry and literature, the impatient artist is made to exclaim, “Must we combine with so many other studies those which belong to literary men?  Must we read as well as paint?” “It is useless to reply to this question; for some important truths must be instinctively felt, perhaps the fundamental ones in the arts.”  A truly imaginative artist, whose enthusiasm was never absent when he meditated on the art he loved, BARRY, thus vehemently broke forth:  “Go home from the academy, light up your lamps, and exercise yourselves in the creative part of your art, with Homer, with Livy, and all the great characters, ancient and modern, for your companions and counsellors.”  This genial intercourse of literature with art may be proved by painters who have suggested subjects to poets, and poets who have selected them for painters.  GOLDSMITH suggested the subject of the tragic and pathetic picture of Ugolino to the pencil of REYNOLDS.

All the classes of men in society have their peculiar sorrows and enjoyments, as they have their peculiar habits and characteristics.  In the history of men of genius we may often open the secret story of their minds, for they have above others the privilege of communicating their own feelings; and every life of a man of genius, composed by himself, presents us with the experimental philosophy of the mind.  By living with their brothers, and contemplating their masters, they will judge from consciousness less erroneously than from discussion; and in forming comparative views and parallel situations, they will discover certain habits and feelings, and find these reflected in themselves.

SYDENHAM has beautifully said, “Whoever describes a violet exactly as to its colour, taste, smell, form, and other properties, will find the description agree in most particulars with all the violets in the universe.”

[Footnote A:  Few writers were so competent to instruct in art as Gesner, who was not only an author and a poet, but an artist who decorated his poems by designs as graceful as their subject.—­ED.]

CHAPTER IV.

Of natural genius.—­Minds constitutionally different cannot have an equal aptitude.—­Genius not the result of habit and education.—­Originates in peculiar qualities of the mind.—­The predisposition of genius.—­A substitution for the white paper of Locke.[A]

[Footnote A:  In the second edition of this work in 1818, I touched on some points of this inquiry in the second chapter:  I almost despaired to find any philosopher sympathise with the subject, so invulnerable, they imagine, are the entrenchments of their theories.  I was agreeably surprised to find these ideas taken up in the Edinburgh Review for August, 1820, in an entertaining article on Reynolds.  I have, no doubt, profited by the perusal, though this chapter was prepared before I met with that spirited vindication of “an inherent difference in the organs or faculties to receive impressions of any kind.”]