understood the pathos of the peasant’s lot better
than Pissaro ; he has understood it far better
than Millet (who has never seemed to me much
more than an eighteenth century painter),
Romney, or Greuze. His subjects differ from
theirs, but the painting is much the same, and
the mind is the same—given over to tedious
sentimentalities.
Reference has already been made to a dis-
cussion which arose when Pissaro died. The
question was asked in the newspapers, Who
had invented impressionism, who had painted
the first impressionist picture ? It was stated
that Monet had been to England and had
been influenced by Turner. The impression-
ists admired Turner, of course, platonically, as
they admired the old masters, Salvator Rosa
and Hobbema, but any more personal admira-
tion were impossible. No very special dis-
cernment is required to understand that
Turner and Constable, painters whose desire
was a world of shadow, could have any closer
interest for men whose aim was to exhibit a
world of light. It may be doubted if it will
ever be possible to discover who painted the
first impressionist picture, or what suggested
the abandonment of chiaroscuro. It certainly
was not Constable or Turner ; more than that
it is impossible to say here. To trace a school
of art to its source, to speculate how a new
aestheticism arises, and how it develops from a
seed to a blown flower, would be an interest-
ing speculation indeed ; but the question
d 41