Our views agree fundamentally with those of Fechner[5] who recognizes the “direct” appeal of the work of art on the one side and the associated elements that give a specific tone to the esthetic effects on the other. [5] G. T. Fechner, Vorschule der Aesthetik. Wundt[6] restricts the discussion of art to those forms in which the artistic work expresses some thought or emotion. He says, “For the psychological study art stands in a position intermediate between language and myth.... Thus the creative artistic work appears to us as a peculiar development of the expressive movements of the body. Gesture and language pass in a fleeting moment. In art they are sometimes given a higher significance; sometimes the fleeting movement is given a permanent form.... All these relations are manifested principally in the relatively early, although not in the very earliest stages of artistic work in which the momentary needs of expression of thought dominate art as well as language.” [6] Wilhelm Wundt, Völkerpsychologie, Vol. 3, Die Kunst; third edition, Leipzig, 1919, p. 5. Max Verworn[7] says: “Art is the faculty to express conscious processes by means created by the artist himself in such a manner that they may be perceived by our sense organs. In this general sense language, song, music and dance are art, just as well as painting, sculpture and ornamentation. The graphic and plastic arts in the narrow sense of the term result from the ability of making conscious processes visible in permanent materials.” [7] Die Anfänge der Kunst, Jena, 1920, p. 8. “Kunst im allgemeinsten Sinne ist, wie das Wort schon sagt, ein ‘Können’.” Richard Thurnwald[8] accepts the view-point of Wundt when he says, “Art, however inadequate its means may be, is a means of expression that belongs to mankind. The means employed are distinct from those used in gesture, language and writing. Even when the artist is intent only upon the repetition of what he has in mind he does so with at least the subconscious purpose of communicating his ideas, of influencing others.” [8] Richard Thurnwald, Handbuch der vergleichenden Psychologie, herausgegeben von Gustav Kafka, Vol. I, p. 211. The same onesidedness may be recognized in Yrjö Hirn’s[9] opinion, who says: “In order to understand the art impulse as a tendency to esthetic production we must bring it into connection with some function from the nature of which the specifically artistic qualities may be derived. Such a function is to be found, we believe, in the activities of emotional expression.” [9] Yrjö Hirn, The Origins of Art, London, 1900, p. 29. It will be seen that all these authors confine their definition of art to those forms which are expressions of emotional states or of ideas, while they do not include in art the pleasure conveyed by purely formal elements that are not primarily expressive.