Representation in painting corresponds to thought in poetry. The same battles over the Intellect-Emotion _imbroglio_ rage in both fields. The views recently so fashionable that representation has no place in art and that treatment not subject is what matters in poetry spring ultimately from the same mistakes as to the relation of thinking to feeling, from an inadequate psychology which would set up one as inimical to the other. Reinforced as they are by the illusion, supported by language, that Beauty is a quality of things, not a character of our response to them, and thus that all beautiful things as sharing this Beauty must be alike, the confusion which such views promote is a main cause of the difficulty which is felt so widely in appreciating both the arts and poetry. They give an air of an esoteric mystery to what is, if it can be done at all, the simplest and most natural of proceedings. The fundamental features of the experiences of reading poetry and of appreciating pictures, the features upon which their value depends, are alike. The means by which they are brought about are unlike, but closely analogous critical and technical problems arise, as we have seen, for each. The misapprehensions to which thought is liable recur in all the fields in which it is exercised, and the fact that it is sometimes more easy to detect a mistake in one field than in another is a strong argument for comparing such closely allied subjects. [51] This character of blue is the basis of the doctrine of Reynolds, that blue is unsuitable in foregrounds, which led Gainsborough, according to the well-known story, to paint The Blue Boy. [52] This account of harmony also applies to music. Few modern authorities are content to regard harmony as an affair merely of the physical relationships of notes. [53] _D’Eugène Delacroix au Néo-Impressionisme_, p. 39. CHAPTER XIX Sculpture and the Construction of Form Thus men forgot That All Deities reside in the Human breast. _The Marriage of Heaven and Hell_.