rational any more than it is definable and intelligible, as the utterances of science and intellect undoubtedly are. The reader may possibly prefer to distinguish these two elements as "rational intellect" and "emotional intellect", to which choice I cannot demur: he will, however, understand the import of the terms as I have used them. He will, further, understand that the main object of this Essay is not to discuss nor to advance the Fine Arts (professionally), but to point out how the emotional element, which underlies them, and other results, is disregarded and undeveloped at this time so far as (despite a pretence at filling it up) to constitute an Educational Hiatus. CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTORY. (Extracted from a Letter on the Subject.) IF I have been long considering my answer it is because your questions about art have led on to much thinking, and this, perhaps, less concerning the immediate matter than that associated subject-matter which your way of putting the question brings forward with a novel and peculiar importance. For you ask, first, How comes it, whilst the Greek and Latin languages, and more especially the art of Greek, Latin and, sometimes, English versification are moderately well learnt at school, that the art of expressing things visible through the natural language, that of form, is so far neglected that not one man in a hundred, who can draw to any purpose, is indebted to school-teaching for his ability to do this? And you go on to justify this statement (which I have no mind to dispute) by remarking how frequently we hear those who lament their deficiency in drawing observe, "that they verily ought to know something of the thing they had prizes for excelling in; but whether it was that the master did all that portion of B |