The name "Impressionists" dates from an exhibition in Paris which was given at Nadar's in 1871. The catalogue contained a great deal about impressions--for instance, "Impression de mon pot au feu," "Impression d'un chat qui se promene." In his criticism Claretie summed up the impressions, and spoke of the Salon des Impressionistes. But the real origin of impressionism must be sought earlier than 1871, for in 1865 Manet exhibited his Olympia in the Salon des Refusés. This picture did not represent what was understood as impressionism ten years later, but it led the way towards the establishment of the innovation, in that it pretended that healthy ideas and noble designs were secondary considerations in art. Certainly Manet could not descend lower than this wretched picture, and in this sense his subsequent work was a distinct advance. [a] Royal Academy Lectures. [b] Article on "Impressionism," _Encyclopædia Britannica_, 11th Edition. [c] _L'Impressionism, son histoire, son esthétique, ses maîtres._ [d] _Le Journal des Arts_, 1909. [e] Article on "Impressionism," _Encyclopædia Britannica_, 11th edition. [f] _Handbook of Modern French Painting._ [g] _Fifty Years of Modern Painting._ [h] _History of Modern Painting_, vol. iii. NOTE 13. PAGE 35 The reason given by impressionists for the juxtaposition of pure colours is that the natural blend produced is more brilliant than the tone from the mixed colours applied, but it is pointed out by Moreau-Vauthier that the contrary is the case. He says[a]: We find in practice that the parent colours do not, with material colours, produce the theoretical binaries. We get dark, dull greens, oranges, and violets, that clash with the parent colours. To make them harmonize we should be obliged to dim these material colours, to transform them, and consequently to lose them partly. [a] _The Technique of Painting_, 1912. NOTE 14. PAGE 37 Cézanne and Van Gogh are not usually put forward as representative impressionists, but it is impossible to differentiate logically between the various "isms" of which impressionism is the mother, and to attempt a serious argument upon them would be apt to reflect upon the common sense of the reader. The sincere impressionist certainly produces a thing of beauty, however ephemeral and lacking in high character the beauty may be, but most of the productions of the other "isms" only serve the purpose of degrading the artist and the art. NOTE 15. PAGE 40