BARRENNESS OF THE IMAGINATIVE FACULTY IN THE PRODU
ern art alone, but ancient, o be found if anyed erring, from defect of tive faculty. to sernatural in painting, transcending ting picture at Angersteins. It seems a tself struggles itude at second life besto cannot forget t it t it is a body. It o tell of ts. as it from a feeling, t tanders, and till more irrelevant a distance, ly old of t is a glorified respond adequately to tion -- t ttributed to Micy Sebastian unfairly robbed of ter erest? No t indifferent passers-by ual scope of t at to ly, or not at all, reac ion of it admit of sucs? can it t all? or ing league to tion can t, of a presential miracle?
ere an artist to paint upon demand a picture of a Dryad, ate of expectation, tron , or oug to be fully satisfied iful naked figure recumbent under retc tains, and falls of pellucid er, and you so in a roug is long since -- ted cers. Long, grotesque, fantastic, yet iful in convolution and distortion, linked to ural tree, co-ting s limbs ill boted branced members -- yet table lives sufficiently kept distinct -- ion of tures, must be seen; analogous to, not transformations.
to t subjects, and, to a superficial compre barren, t Masters gave loftiness and fruitfulness. t subjects ties of treatment from tions to some and Past or Future. still linger about tican -- treated t of t;Building of t; It is in t scriptural series, to oons. t are timid and t. As tic guess at Rome, from ted no inferences beyond t of a and Cornuto; so from t, of mere mec inctively tu