I found my friend in large furnished apartments on the ground floor in the Rue Duphot.  The walls were stretched with blue silk, there were large mirrors and great gilt cornices.  Passing into the bedroom I found the young god wallowing in the finest of fine linen ­in a great Louis XV. bed, and there were cupids above him.  “Holloa! what, you back again, George Moore? we thought we weren’t going to see you again.”

“It’s nearly one o’clock; get up.  What’s the news?”

“To-day is the opening of the exhibition of the Impressionists.  We’ll have a bit of breakfast round the corner, at Durant’s, and we’ll go on there.  I hear that Bedlam is nothing to it; there is a canvas there twenty feet square and in three tints:  pale yellow for the sunlight, brown for the shadows, and all the rest is sky-blue.  There is, I am told, a lady walking in the foreground with a ring-tailed monkey, and the tail is said to be three yards long.”

We went to jeer a group of enthusiasts that willingly forfeit all delights of the world in the hope of realising a new æstheticism; we went insolent with patent leather shoes and bright kid gloves and armed with all the jargon of the school. “Cette jambe ne porte pas”; “la nature ne se fait pas comme ça”; “on dessine par les masses; combien de têtes?” “Sept et demi.”  “Si j’avais un morceau de craie je mettrais celle-là dans un; bocal c’est un fÅ“tus”; in a word, all that the journals of culture are pleased to term an artistic education.  We indulged in boisterous laughter, exaggerated in the hope of giving as much pain as possible, and deep down in our souls we knew that we were lying ­at least I did.

In the beginning of this century the tradition of French art ­the tradition of Boucher, Fragonard, and Watteau ­had been completely lost; having produced genius, their art died.  Ingres is the sublime flower of the classic art which succeeded the art of the palace and the boudoir:  further than Ingres it was impossible to go, and his art died.  Then the Turners and Constables came to France, and they begot Troyon, and Troyon begot Millet, Courbet, Corot, and Rousseau, and these in turn begot Degas, Pissarro, Madame Morizot and Guillaumin.  Degas is a pupil of Ingres, but he applies the marvellous acuteness of drawing he learned from his master to delineating the humblest aspects of modern life.  Degas draws not by the masses, but by the character; ­his subjects are shop-girls, ballet-girls, and washerwomen, but the qualities that endow them with immortality are precisely those which eternalise the virgins and saints of Leonardo da Vinci in the minds of men.  You see the fat, vulgar woman in the long cloak trying on a hat in front of the pier-glass.  So marvellously well are the lines of her face observed and rendered that you can tell exactly what her position in life is; you know what the furniture of her rooms is like; you know what she would say to you if she were to speak.  She is as typical of the nineteenth century as Fragonard’s ladies are of the Court of Louis XV.  To the right you see a picture of two shop-girls with bonnets in their hands.  So accurately are the habitual movements of the heads and the hands observed that you at once realise the years of bonnet-showing and servile words that these women have lived through.  We have seen Degas do this before ­it is a welcome repetition of a familiar note, but it is not until we turn to the set of nude figures that we find the great artist revealing any new phase of his talent.  The first, in an attitude which suggests the kneeling Venus, washes her thighs in a tin bath.  The second, a back view, full of the malformations of forty years, of children, of hard work, stands gripping her flanks with both hands.  The naked woman has become impossible in modern art; it required Degas’ genius to infuse new life into the worn-out theme.  Cynicism was the great means of eloquence of the middle ages, and with cynicism Degas has rendered the nude again an artistic possibility.  What Mr. Horsley or the British matron would say it is difficult to guess.  Perhaps the hideousness depicted by M. Degas would frighten them more than the sensuality which they condemn in Sir Frederick Leighton.  But, be this as it may, it is certain that the great, fat, short-legged creature, who in her humble and touching ugliness passes a chemise over her lumpy shoulders, is a triumph of art.  Ugliness is trivial, the monstrous is terrible; Velasquez knew this when he painted his dwarfs.

Pissarro exhibited a group of girls gathering apples in a garden ­sad greys and violets beautifully harmonised.  The figures seem to move as in a dream:  we are on the thither side of life, in a world of quiet colour and happy aspiration.  Those apples will never fall from the branches, those baskets that the stooping girls are filling will never be filled:  that garden is the garden of the peace that life has not for giving, but which the painter has set in an eternal dream of violet and grey.

Madame Morizot exhibited a series of delicate fancies.  Here are two young girls, the sweet atmosphere folds them as with a veil, they are all summer, their dreams are limitless, their days are fading, and their ideas follow the flight of the white butterflies through the standard roses.  Take note, too, of the stand of fans; what delicious fancies are there ­willows, balconies, gardens, and terraces.

Then, contrasting with these distant tendernesses, there was the vigorous painting of Guillaumin.  There life is rendered in violent and colourful brutality.  The ladies fishing in the park, with the violet of the skies and the green of the trees descending upon them, is a chef d’Å“uvre. Nature seems to be closing about them like a tomb; and that hillside, ­sunset flooding the skies with yellow and the earth with blue shadow, ­is another piece of painting that will one day find a place in one of the public galleries; and the same can be said of the portrait of the woman on a background of chintz flowers.

We could but utter coarse gibes and exclaim, “What could have induced him to paint such things? surely he must have seen that it was absurd.  I wonder if the Impressionists are in earnest or if it is only une blague qu’on nous fait?” Then we stood and screamed at Monet, that most exquisite painter of blonde light.  We stood before the “Turkeys,” and seriously we wondered if “it was serious work,” ­that chef d’Å“uvre! the high grass that the turkeys are gobbling is flooded with sunlight so swift and intense that for a moment the illusion is complete.  “Just look at the house! why, the turkeys couldn’t walk in at the door.  The perspective is all wrong.”  Then followed other remarks of an educational kind; and when we came to those piercingly personal visions of railway stations by the same painter, ­those rapid sensations of steel and vapour, ­our laughter knew no bounds.  “I say, Marshall, just look at this wheel; he dipped his brush into cadmium yellow and whisked it round, that’s all.”  Nor had we any more understanding for Renoir’s rich sensualities of tone; nor did the mastery with which he achieves an absence of shadow appeal to us.  You see colour and light in his pictures as you do in nature, and the child’s criticism of a portrait ­“Why is one side of the face black?” is answered.  There was a half-length nude figure of a girl.  How the round fresh breasts palpitate in the light! such a glorious glow of whiteness was attained never before.  But we saw nothing except that the eyes were out of drawing.

For art was not for us then as it is now, ­a mere emotion, right or wrong only in proportion to its intensity; we believed then in the grammar of art, perspective, anatomy, and la jambe qui porte; and we found all this in Julien’s studio.

A year passed; a year of art and dissipation ­one part art, two parts dissipation.  We mounted and descended at pleasure the rounds of society’s ladder.  One evening we would spend at Constant’s, Rue de la Gaieté, in the company of thieves and housebreakers; on the following evening we were dining with a duchess or a princess in the Champs Elysées.  And we prided ourselves vastly on our versatility in using with equal facility the language of the “fence’s” parlour, and that of the literary salon; on being able to appear as much at home in one as in the other.  Delighted at our prowess, we often whispered, “The princess, I swear, would not believe her eyes if she saw us now;” and then in terrible slang we shouted a benediction on some “crib” that was going to be broken into that evening.  And we thought there was something very thrilling in leaving the Rue de la Gaieté, returning home to dress, and presenting our spotless selves to the élite.  And we succeeded very well, as indeed all young men do who waltz perfectly and avoid making love to the wrong woman.

But the excitement of climbing up and down the social ladder did not stave off our craving for art; and about this time there came a very decisive event in our lives.  Marshall’s last and really grande passion had come to a violent termination, and monetary difficulties forced him to turn his thoughts to painting on china as a means of livelihood.  And as this young man always sought extremes he went to Belleville, donned a blouse, ate garlic with his food, and settled down to live there as a workman.  I had been to see him, and had found him building a wall.  And with sorrow I related his state that evening to Julien in the Café Veron.  He said, after a pause: ­

“Since you profess so much friendship for him, why do you not do him a service that cannot be forgotten since the result will always continue? why don’t you save him from the life you describe?  If you are not actually rich you are at least in easy circumstances, and can afford to give him a pension of three hundred francs a month.  I will give him the use of my studio, which means, as you know, models and teaching; Marshall has plenty of talent, all he wants is a year’s education:  in a year or a year-and-a-half, certainly at the end of two years, he will begin to make money.”

It is rather a shock to one who is at all concerned with his own genius to be asked to act as foster-mother to another’s.  Then three hundred francs meant a great deal, plainly it meant deprivation of those superfluities which are so intensely necessary to the delicate and refined.  Julien watched me.  This large crafty Southerner knew what was passing in me; he knew I was realising all the manifold inconveniences ­the duty of looking after Marshall’s wants for two years, and to make the pill easier he said: ­

“If three hundred francs a month are too heavy for your purse, you might take an apartment and ask Marshall to come and live with you.  You told me the other day you were tired of hotel life.  It would be an advantage to you to live with him.  You want to do something yourself; and the fact of his being obliged to attend the studio (for I should advise you to have a strict agreement with him regarding the work he is to do) would be an extra inducement to you to work hard.”

I always decide at once, reflection does not help me, and a moment after I said, “Very well, Julien, I will.”

And next day I went with the news to Belleville.  Marshall protested he had no real talent.  I protested he had.  The agreement was drawn up and signed.  He was to work in the studio eight hours a day; he was to draw until such time as M. Lefebvre set him to paint; and in proof of his industry he was to bring me at the end of each week a study from life and a composition, the subject of which the master gave at the beginning of each week, and in return I was to take an apartment near the studio, give him an abode, food, blanchissage, etc.  Once the matter was decided, Marshall manifested prodigious energy, and three days after he told me he had found an apartment in Le Passage des Panoramas which would suit us perfectly.  The plunge had to be taken.  I paid my hotel bill, and sent my taciturn valet to beef, beer and a wife.

It was unpleasant to have a window opening not to the sky, but to an unclean prospect of glass roofing; nor was it agreeable to get up at seven in the morning; and ten hours of work daily are trying to the resolution even of the best intentioned.  But we had sworn to forego all pleasures for the sake of art ­table d’hôtes in the Rue Maubeuge, French and foreign duchesses in the Champs Elysées, thieves in the Rue de la Gaieté.

I was entering therefore on a duel with Marshall for supremacy in an art for which, as has already been said, I possessed no qualifications.  It will readily be understood how a mind like mine, so intensely alive to all impulses, and so unsupported by any moral convictions, would suffer in so keen a contest waged under such unequal and cruel conditions.  It was in truth a year of great passion and great despair.  Defeat is bitter when it comes swiftly and conclusively, but when defeat falls by inches like the pendulum in the pit, the agony is a little beyond verbal expression.  I remember the first day of my martyrdom.  The clocks were striking eight; we chose our places, got into position.  After the first hour, I compared my drawing with Marshall’s.  He had, it is true, caught the movement of the figure better than I, but the character and the quality of his work was miserable.  That of mine was not.  I have said I possessed no artistic facility, but I did not say faculty; my drawing was never common; it was individual in feeling, it was refined.  I possessed all the rarer qualities, but not that primary power without which all is valueless; ­I mean the talent of the boy who can knock off a clever caricature of his school-master or make a lifelike sketch of his favourite horse on the barn door with a piece of chalk.

The following week Marshall made a great deal of progress; I thought the model did not suit me, and hoped for better luck next time.  That time never came, and at the end of the first month I was left toiling hopelessly in the distance.  Marshall’s mind, though shallow, was bright, and he understood with strange ease all that was told him, and was able to put into immediate practice the methods of work inculcated by the professors.  In fact, he showed himself singularly capable of education; little could be drawn out, but a great deal could be put in (using the word in its modern, not in its original sense).  He showed himself intensely anxious to learn and to accept all that was said:  the ideas and feelings of others ran into him like water into a bottle whose neck is suddenly stooped below the surface of the stream.  He was an ideal pupil.  It was Marshall here, it was Marshall there, and soon the studio was little but an agitation in praise of him, and his work, and anxious speculation arose as to the medals he would obtain.  I continued the struggle for nine months.  I was in the studio at eight in the morning, I measured my drawing, I plumbed it throughout, I sketched in, having regard to la jambe qui porte, I modelled par les masses.  During breakfast I considered how I should work during the afternoon, at night I lay awake thinking of what I might do to obtain a better result.  But my efforts availed me nothing, it was like one who, falling, stretches his arms for help and grasps the yielding air.  How terrible are the languors and yearnings of impotence! how wearing! what an aching void they leave in the heart!  And all this I suffered until the burden of unachieved desire grew intolerable.

I laid down my charcoal and said, “I will never draw or paint again.”  That vow I have kept.

Surrender brought relief, but my life seemed at an end.  I looked upon a blank space of years desolate as a grey and sailless sea.  “What shall I do?” I asked myself, and my heart was weary and hopeless.  Literature? my heart did not answer the question at once.  I was too broken and overcome by the shock of failure; failure precise and stern, admitting of no equivocation.  I strove to read:  but it was impossible to sit at home almost within earshot of the studio, and with all the memories of defeat still ringing their knells in my heart.  Marshall’s success clamoured loudly from without; every day, almost every hour of the day, I heard of the medals which he would carry off, of what Lefebvre thought of his drawing this week, of Boulanger’s opinion of his talent.  I do not wish to excuse my conduct, but I cannot help saying that Marshall showed me neither consideration nor pity, he did not even seem to understand that I was suffering, that my nerves had been terribly shaken, and he flaunted his superiority relentlessly in my face ­his good looks, his talents, his popularity.  I did not know then how little these studio successes really meant.

Vanity? no, it was not his vanity that maddened me; to me vanity is rarely displeasing, sometimes it is singularly attractive; but by a certain insistence and aggressiveness in the details of life he allowed me to feel that I was only a means for the moment, a serviceable thing enough, but one that would be very soon discarded and passed over.  This was intolerable.  I packed up my portmanteau and left, after having kept my promise for only ten months.  By so doing I involved my friend in grave and cruel difficulties; by this action I imperilled his future prospects.  It was a dastardly action, but his presence had grown unbearable; yes, unbearable in the fullest acceptation of the word, and in ridding myself of him I felt as if a world of misery were being lifted from me.