Impressionism was the natural, the inevitable reaction from the romantic and story-telling art of the forties, fifties, and sixties--a return to _nature_ from the _studio_, to works of the _observation_ from works of the _imagination_. Impressionism developed along three diverging lines: A. _Superficial_ Impressionism--Monet. B. _Realistic_ Impressionism--Manet. C. _Substantial_ Impressionism--Cézanne. * * * * * A. _Superficial_--the painting of light effects, the impressionism of Monet, culminated in the extreme refinements of the pointillists, the Neo-Impressionists, Seurat and Signac. In superficial Impressionism the last word seems to have been said for the time being. Any number of delightful pictures--light effects--are being painted, and will continue to be painted, but the early enthusiasm has largely subsided. Superficial Impressionism leads naturally to the painting of pure color effects--_color music_, _orphism_, _compositional_ painting. After the last word in the _observation_ of light effects _Post_-Impressionistic attempts to _create_ pure color effects, irrespective of natural--that is a logical reaction. B. _Realistic_ Impressionism penetrates a little deeper. While Monet and his followers, Signac and Seurat, dealt more and more with the play of light on the _surface_ of things, Manet and his followers painted closer to the _heart_ of things. While Monet was content to paint a hay stack twenty times in as many different lights, Manet preferred a touch of _life_ and _character_ in his pictures. While he was first and last a painter, he was not so absorbed in securing purely technical effects as to be wholly blind to the _human_ element, hence his wonderful portraits, his bullfights, his glimpses of city life--pictures _big_ in more senses than one. Still he and his followers were primarily interested in the _aspect_ of things, the _characteristics_ as distinguished from the fundamental _character_ of things. He penetrated far deeper than Monet, so much deeper the two had little in common, but he did not get so close to the heart that he forgot the skin; he was always a painter of _appearances_, but in a _big_ as distinguished from a _superficial_ way. The realistic Impressionism of Manet has by no means run its course. Some of the finest painting in the world has been done and is being done along this line. It is the line of Franz Hals and Velasquez; it is the line of men so different as Whistler and Sargent in their best portraits. The natural reaction from perfection in this line is higher accentuation of characteristics--in the extreme _caricature_.