* * * * * The younger were naturally much more tolerant. They were more--they were both _curious_ and _receptive_. Many of them searched with eager eye for valuable hints, for ways and means to perfect their own art. It was a great pleasure to watch and talk with these young men, the _rising_ generation. Many of them, to their own surprise, found they had been working along modern lines without fully realizing it. They had not cut loose from Impressionism, but they were doing things _constructively_ rather than _superficially_; they were painting like Cézanne rather than Monet. * * * * * If the attempt were made to name these younger men, the result would be injustice to many whose works are unknown to the writer, and the argument would be confused. To speak, therefore, of one of the paintings reproduced, take the “Still Life,” by Kroll. In the decorative arrangement of the draperies and in the manner in which the fruit and stone jug are painted, the feeling is quite _Post_-Impressionistic; while the glimpse of the street out the window is purely _Impressionistic_. That is to say, all within the window is painted solidly and constructively, quite under the influence of Cézanne; all that is without is painted fleetingly and superficially, more under the influence of Monet. It was done intentionally, to secure a certain effect of contrast; but the result is neither _French_-Impressionism nor _Post_-Impressionism, but _American_-Impressionism--a certain _eclecticism_. The glimpse of the street is delightful, but the arbitrarily arranged interior is more than delightful; it possesses strength of line, fine color, and solid masses, _done constructively_. Still, one has only to compare this picture with the “Still Life,” by Herbin, and the “Forest at Martigues,” by Derain, to see how close to nature it is, how _Impressionistic_ it is as distinguished from the _Post_-Impressionistic, or creative, spirit. Kroll painted what he felt, _controlled_ by what he saw. Derain painted what he felt, _influenced only slightly_ by what he had seen. * * * * * The foregoing illustrates the position of the more vigorous of the younger American painters; they are so strong, so virile, so muscular--let us say--that instinctively they lean toward the painting of things in a big, broad _constructive_ manner; the refinements of _superficial_ impressionism do not interest them. At the same time they have not reached the point where they are willing to let go of nature entirely and do purely _creative_ things. Perhaps this is just as well.