Chapter 40

CRICHTON‐BROWNE, 384, 386.

Criminal character, 263.

Criteria of value of spiritual affections, 18.

CRUMP, 239.

Cure of bad habits, 270.

DAUDET, 167.

Death, 139, 364.

DERHAM, 493.

Design, argument from, 438, 492 ff.

Devoutness, 340.

DIONYSIUS AREOPAGITICUS, 416.

Disease, 99, 113.

Disorder in contents of world, 438.

Divided Self, Lecture VIII, passim; Cases of: Saint Augustine, 172, H. Alline, 173.

Divine, the, 31.

Dog, 281.

Dogmatism, 326, 333.

DOWIE, 113.

DRESSER, H. W., 96, 99, 289, 516.

Drink, 268.

Drummer, 476.

DRUMMOND, 262.

Drunkenness, 387, 403, 488.

“Dryness,” 204.

DUMAS, 279.

Dyes, on clothing, 294.

Earnestness, 264.

Ecclesiastical spirit, the, 335, 338.

ECKHART, 417.

EDDY, 106.

EDWARDS, JONATHAN, 20, 114, 200, 229, 238, 239, 248, 330.

EDWARDS, MRS. J., 276, 280.

Effects of religious states, 21.

Effeminacy, 365.

Ego of Apperception, 449.

ELLIS, HAVELOCK, 418.

ELWOOD, 292.

EMERSON, 32, 56, 167, 205, 239, 330.

Emotion, as alterer of life’s value, 150; of the character, 195, 261 ff., 279.

Empirical method, 18, 327 ff., 443.

Enemies, love your, 278, 283.

Energy, personal, 196; mystical states increase it, 414.

Environment, 356, 374.

Epictetus, 474.

Epicureans, 143.

Equanimity, 284.

Ether, mystical effects of, 392.

Evil, ignored by healthy‐mindedness, 88, 106, 131; due to _things_ or to the _Self_, 134; its reality, 163.

Evolutionist optimism, 91.

Excesses of piety, 340.

Excitement, its effects, 195, 266, 279, 325.

Experience, religious, the essence of, 508.

Extravagances of piety, 339, 486.

Extreme cases, why we take them, 486.

Failure, 139.

Faith, 246, 506.

Faith‐state, 505.

Fanaticism, 338 ff.

Fear, 98, 159, 161, 263, 275.

Feeling deeper than intellect in religion, 431.

FIELDING, 436.

FINNEY, 207, 215.

FLETCHER, 98, 181.

FLOURNOY, 67, 514.

Flower, 476.

FOSTER, 178, 383.

FOX, GEORGE, 7, 291, 335, 411.

FRANCIS, SAINT, D’ASSISI, 319.

FRANCIS, SAINT, DE SALES, 11.

FRASER, 454.

Fruits, of conversion, 237; of religion, 327; of Saintliness, 357.

FULLER, 41.

GAMOND, 288.

GARDINER, 269.

Genius and insanity, 16.

Geniuses, see Religious leaders.

Gentleman, character of the, 317, 371.

GERTRUDE, SAINT, 345.

“Gifts,” 151.

Glory of God, 342.

GOD, 31; sense of his presence, 66‐72, 272, 275 ff.; historic changes in idea of him, 74, 328 ff., 493; mind‐curer’s idea of him, 101; his honor, 342; described by negatives, 417; his attributes, scholastic proof of, 439; the metaphysical ones are for us meaningless, 445; the moral ones are ill‐deduced, 447; he is not a mere inference, 502; is _used_, not known, 506; his existence must make a difference among phenomena, 517, 522; his relation to the subconscious region, 242, 515; his tasks, 519; may be finite and plural, 525.

GODDARD, 96.

GOERRES, 407.

GOETHE, 137.

GOUGH, 203.

GOURDON, 171.

“Grace,” the operation of, 226; the state of, 260.

GRATRY, 146, 476, 506.

Greeks, their pessimism, 86, 142.

Guidance, 472.

GURNEY, 527.

GUYON, 276, 286.

HADLEY, 201, 268.

HALE, 82.

HAMON, 367.

Happiness, 47‐49, 79, 248, 279.

HARNACK, 100.

Healthy‐mindedness, Lectures IV and V, passim; its philosophy of evil, 131; compared with morbid‐mindedness, 162, 488.

Heart, softening of, 267.

HEGEL, 389, 449, 454.

HELMONT, VAN, 497.

Heroism, 364, 488, note.

Heterogeneous personality, 169, 193.

Higher criticism, 4.

HILTY, 79, 275, 472.

HODGSON, R., 524.

HOMER, 86.

HUGO, 171.

Hypocrisy, 338.

Hypothesis, what make a useful one, 517.

HYSLOP, 524.

IGNATIUS LOYOLA, 313, 406, 410.

Illness, 113.

“Imitation of Christ,” the, 44.

Immortality, 524.

Impulses, 261.

Individuality, 501.

Inhibitions, 261 ff.

Insane melancholy and religion, 144.

Insanity and genius, 16; and happiness, 279.

Institutional religion, 335.

Intellect a secondary force in religion, 431, 514.

Intellectual weakness of some saints, 370.

Intolerance, 342.

Irascibility, 264.

JESUS, HARNACK on, 100.

JOB, 76, 448.

JOHN, SAINT, OF THE CROSS, 304, 407, 413.

JOHNSTON, 258.

JONQUIL, 476.

JORDAN, 347.

JOUFFROY, 176, 198.

Judgments, existential and spiritual, 4.

KANT, 54, 448.

Karma, 522.

KELLNER, 401.

Kindliness, see Charity.

KINGSLEY, 385.

LAGNEAU, 285.

Leaders, see Religious leaders.

Leaders, of tribes, 371.

LEJEUNE, 113, 312.

LESSING, 318.

LEUBA, 201, 203, 220, 246, 506.

Life, its significance, 151.

Life, the subconscious, 207, 209.

LOCKER‐LAMPSON, 39.

Logic, Hegelian, 449.

Louis, Saint, of Gonzaga, 350.

Love, see Charity.

Love, cases of falling out of, 179.

Love of God, 276.

Love your enemies, 278, 283.

LOWELL, 65.

Loyalty, to God, 342.

LUTFULLAH, 164.

LUTHER, 128, 137, 244, 330, 348, 382.

Lutheran self‐despair, 108, 211.

Luxury, 365.

LYCAON, 86.

Lyre, 267.

Mahomet, 171. See MOHAMMED.

MARCUS AURELIUS, 42, 44, 474.

MARGARET MARY, see ALACOQUE.

Margin of consciousness, 232.

MARSHALL, 503.

MARTINEAU, 475.

MATHER, 303.

MAUDSLEY, 19.

Meaning of life, 151.

Medical criticism of religion, 413.

Medical materialism, 10 ff.

Melancholy, 145, 279; Lectures V and VI, passim; cases of, 148, 149, 157, 159, 198.

Melting moods, 267.

Method of judging value of religion, 18, 327.

Methodism, 227, 237.

MEYSENBUG, 395.

Militarism, 365‐367.

Military type of character, 371.

MILL, 204.

Mind‐cure, its sources and history, 94‐97; its opinion of fear, 98; cases of, 102‐105, 120, 123; its message, 108; its methods, 112‐123; it uses verification, 120‐124; its philosophy of evil, 131.

Miraculous character of conversion, 227.

MOHAMMED, 341, 481.

MOLINOS, 130.

MOLTKE, VON, 264, 367.

Monasteries, 296.

Monism, 416.

Morbidness compared with healthy‐mindedness, 488. See, also, Melancholy.

Mormon revelations, 482.

Mortification, see Asceticism.

MUIR, 482.

MULFORD, 497.

MÜLLER, 468.

MURISIER, 349.

MYERS, 233, 234, 466, 511, 524.

Mystic states, their effects, 21, 414.

Mystical experiences, 66.

Mysticism, Lectures XVI and XVII, passim; its marks, 380; its theoretic results, 416, 422, 428; it cannot warrant truth, 422; its results, 425; its relation to the sense of union, 509.

Mystical region of experience, 515.

Natural theology, 492.

Naturalism, 141, 167.

Nature, scientific view of, 491.

Negative accounts of deity, 417.

NELSON, 208, 423.

NETTLETON, 215.

NEWMAN, F. W., 80.

NEWMAN, J. H., on dogmatic theology, 434, 442; his type of imagination, 459.

NIETZSCHE, 371, 372.

Nitrous oxide, its mystical effects, 387.

No‐function, 261‐263, 299, 387, 416.

Non‐resistance, 281, 358, 376.

Obedience, 310.

OBERMANN, 476.

O’CONNELL, 257.

Omit, 296.

“Once‐born” type, 80, 166, 363, 488.

Oneness with God, see Union.

Optimism, systematic, 88; and evolutionism, 91; it may be shallow, 364.

Orderliness of world, 438.

Organism determines all mental states whatsoever, 14.

Origin of mental states no criterion of their value, 14 ff.

Orison, 406.

Over‐beliefs, 513; the author’s, 515.

Over‐soul, 516.

Oxford, graduate of, 220, 268.

Pagan feeling, 86.

Pantheism, 131, 416.

PARKER, 83.

PASCAL, 286.

PATON, 359.

PAUL, SAINT, 171, 357.

PEEK, 253.

PEIRCE, 444.

Penny, 323.

PERREYVE, 505.

Persecutions, 338, 342.

Personality, explained away by science, 119, 491; heterogeneous, 169; alterations of, 193, 210 ff.; is reality, 499. See Character.

PETER, SAINT, OF ALCANTARA, 360.

PHILO, 481.

Philosophy, Lecture XVIII, passim; must coerce assent, 433; scholastic, 439; idealistic, 448; unable to give a theoretic warrant to faith, 455; its true office in religion, 455.

Photisms, 251.

Piety, 339 ff.

Pluralism, 131.

Polytheism, 131, 526.

Poverty, 315, 367.

“Pragmatism,” 444, 519, 522‐524.

Prayer, 463; its definition, 464; its essence, 465; petitional, 467; its effects, 474‐477, 523.

“Presence,” sense of, 58‐63.

Presence of God, 66‐72, 272, 275 ff., 396, 418.

Presence of God, the practice of, 116.

Primitive human thought, 495.

PRINGLE‐PATTISON, 454.

Prophets, the Hebrew, 479.

Protestant theology, 244.

Protestantism and Catholicism, 114, 227, 330, 461.

Providential leading, 472.

Psychopathy and religion, 22 ff.

PUFFER, 394.

Purity, 274, 290, 348.

Quakers, 7, 291.

RAMAKRISHNA, 361, 365.

Rationalism, 73, 74; its authority overthrown by mysticism, 428.

RATISBONNE, 223, 257.

Reality of unseen objects, Lecture III, passim.

RÉCÉJAC, 407, 509.

“Recollection,” 116, 289.

Redemption, 157.

Reformation of character, 320.

Regeneration, see Conversion; by relaxation, 111.

REID, 446.

Relaxation, salvation by, 110. See Surrender.

Religion, to be tested by fruits, not by origin, 10 ff., 331; its definition, 26, 31; is solemn, 37; compared with Stoicism, 41; its unique function, 51; abstractness of its objects, 54; differs according to temperament, 75, 135, 333, and ought to differ, 487; considered to be a “survival,” 118, 490, 498; its relations to melancholy, 145; worldly passions may combine with it, 337; its essential characters, 369, 485; its relation to prayer, 463‐466; asserts a fact, not a theory, 489; its truth, 377; more than science, it holds by concrete reality, 500; attempts to evaporate it into philosophy, 502; it is concerned with personal destinies, 491, 503; with feeling and conduct, 504; is a sthenic affection, 505; is for life, not for knowledge, 506; its essential contents, 508; it postulates issues of fact, 518.

Religious emotion, 279.

Religious leaders, often nervously unstable, 6 ff., 30; their loneliness, 335.

“Religious sentiment,” 27.

RENAN, 37.

Renunciations, 349.

Repentance, 127.

Resignation, 286.

Revelation, the anæsthetic, 387‐393.

Revelations, see Automatisms.

Revelations, in Mormon Church, 482.

Revivalism, 228.

RIBET, 407.

RIBOT, 145, 502.

RODRIGUEZ, 313, 314, 317.

ROYCE, 454.

RUTHERFORD, MARK, 76.

SABATIER, A., 464.

Sacrifice, 303, 462.

SAINT‐PIERRE, 83.

SAINTE‐BEUVE, 260, 315.

Saintliness, Sainte‐Beuve on, 260; its characteristics, 272, 370; criticism of, 326 ff.

Saintly conduct, 356‐377.

Saints, dislike of natural man for, 371.

Salvation, 526.

SANDAYS, 480.

SATAN, in picture, 50.

SCHEFFLER, 417.

Scholastic arguments for God, 437.

Science, ignores personality and teleology, 491; her “facts,” 500, 501.

“Science of Religions,” 433, 455, 456, 488‐490.

Scientific conceptions, their late adoption, 496.

Second‐birth, 157, 165, 166.

SEELEY, 77.

Self of the world, 449.

Self‐despair, 110, 129, 208.

Self‐surrender, 110, 208.

SÉNANCOUR, 476.

SETH, 454.

Sexual temptation, 269.

Sexuality as cause of religion, 10, 11.

“Shrew,” 347.

Sickness, 113.

Sick souls, Lectures V and VI, passim.

SIGHELE, 263.

Sin, 209.

Sinners, Christ died for, 129.

Skepticism, 332 ff.

SKOBELEFF, 265.

SMITH, JOSEPH, 482.

Softening of the heart, 267.

Solemnity, 37, 48.

Soul, 195.

Soul, strength of, 273.

SPENCER, 355, 374.

SPINOZA, 9, 127.

Spiritism, 514.

Spirit‐return, 524.

Spiritual judgments, 4.

Spiritual states, tests of their value, 18.

STARBUCK, 198, 199, 204, 206, 208‐210, 249, 253, 258, 268, 276, 323, 353, 394.

STEVENSON, 138, 296.

Stoicism, 42‐45, 143.

Strange appearance of world, 151.

Strength of soul, 273.

Subconscious action in conversion, 236, 242.

Subconscious life, 115, 207, 209, 233, 236, 270, 483.

Subconscious Self, as intermediary between the Self and God, 511.

Subliminal, see Subconscious.

Sufis, 402, 420.

Suggestion, 112, 234.

Suicide, 147.

Supernaturalism its two kinds, 520; criticism of universalistic, 521.

Supernatural world, 518.

Surrender, salvation by, 110, 208, 211.

Survival‐theory of religion, 490, 498, 500.

SUSO, 306, 349.

SWINBURNE, 421.

SYMONDS, 385, 390.

Sympathetic magic, 496.

Sympathy, see Charity.

Systems, philosophic, 433.

Taine, 9.

TAYLOR, 246.

Tenderness, see Charity.

TENNYSON, 383, 384.

TERESA, SAINT, 20, 346, 360, 408, 411, 412, 414.

Theologia Germanica, 43.

Theologians, systematic, 446.

“Theopathy,” 343.

THOREAU, 275.

Threshold, 135.

Tiger, 164, 262.

Tobacco, 270, 290.

TOLSTOY, 149, 178, 184.

TOWIANSKI, 281.

Tragedy of life, 363.

Tranquillity, 285.

Transcendentalism criticised, 522.

Transcendentalists, 516.

TREVOR, 396.

TRINE, 101, 394.

Truth of religion, how to be tested, 377; what it is, 509; mystical perception of, 380, 410.

“Twice‐born,” type, 166, 363, 488.

TYNDALL, 299.

“Unconscious cerebration,” 207.

Unification of Self, 183, 349.

“UNION MORALE,” 272.

Union with God, 408, 418, 425, 451, 509 ff. See lectures on Conversion, passim.

Unity of universe, 131.

Unreality, sense of, 63.

Unseen realities, Lecture III, passim.

Upanishads, 419.

UPHAM, 289.

Utopias, 360.

VACHEROT, 502.

Value of spiritual affections, how tested, 18.

VAMBÉRY, 341.

Vedantism, 400, 419, 513, 522.

Veracity, 7, 291 ff.

VIVEKANANDA, 513.

VOLTAIRE, 38.

VOYSEY, 275.

War, 365‐367.

Wealth‐worship, 365.

WEAVER, 281.

WESLEY, 227.

Wesleyan self‐despair, 108, 211.

WHITEFIELD, 318.

WHITMAN, 84, 395, 396, 506.

WOLFF, 492, 493.

WOOD, HENRY, 96, 99, 117.

World, soul of the, 449.

Worry, 98, 181.

Yes‐function, 261‐263, 299, 387.

Yoga, 400.

YOUNG, 256.

FOOTNOTES

1 As with many ideas that float in the air of one’s time, this notion shrinks from dogmatic general statement and expresses itself only partially and by innuendo. It seems to me that few conceptions are less instructive than this re‐interpretation of religion as perverted sexuality. It reminds one, so crudely is it often employed, of the famous Catholic taunt, that the Reformation may be best understood by remembering that its _fons et origo_ was Luther’s wish to marry a nun:—the effects are infinitely wider than the alleged causes, and for the most part opposite in nature. It is true that in the vast collection of religious phenomena, some are undisguisedly amatory—e.g., sex‐deities and obscene rites in polytheism, and ecstatic feelings of union with the Saviour in a few Christian mystics. But then why not equally call religion an aberration of the digestive function, and prove one’s point by the worship of Bacchus and Ceres, or by the ecstatic feelings of some other saints about the Eucharist? Religious language clothes itself in such poor symbols as our life affords, and the whole organism gives overtones of comment whenever the mind is strongly stirred to expression. Language drawn from eating and drinking is probably as common in religious literature as is language drawn from the sexual life. We “hunger and thirst” after righteousness; we “find the Lord a sweet savor;” we “taste and see that he is good.” “Spiritual milk for American babes, drawn from the breasts of both testaments,” is a sub‐title of the once famous New England Primer, and Christian devotional literature indeed quite floats in milk, thought of from the point of view, not of the mother, but of the greedy babe.

Saint François de Sales, for instance, thus describes the “orison of quietude”: “In this state the soul is like a little child still at the breast, whose mother, to caress him whilst he is still in her arms, makes her milk distill into his mouth without his even moving his lips. So it is here.... Our Lord desires that our will should be satisfied with sucking the milk which His Majesty pours into our mouth, and that we should relish the sweetness without even knowing that it cometh from the Lord.” And again: “Consider the little infants, united and joined to the breasts of their nursing mothers, you will see that from time to time they press themselves closer by little starts to which the pleasure of sucking prompts them. Even so, during its orison, the heart united to its God oftentimes makes attempts at closer union by movements during which it presses closer upon the divine sweetness.” Chemin de la Perfection, ch. xxxi.; Amour de Dieu, vii. ch. i.

In fact, one might almost as well interpret religion as a perversion of the respiratory function. The Bible is full of the language of respiratory oppression: “Hide not thine ear at my breathing; my groaning is not hid from thee; my heart panteth, my strength faileth me; my bones are hot with my roaring all the night long; as the hart panteth after the water‐brooks, so my soul panteth after thee, O my God.” _God’s Breath in Man_ is the title of the chief work of our best known American mystic (Thomas Lake Harris); and in certain non‐ Christian countries the foundation of all religious discipline consists in regulation of the inspiration and expiration.

These arguments are as good as much of the reasoning one hears in favor of the sexual theory. But the champions of the latter will then say that their chief argument has no analogue elsewhere. The two main phenomena of religion, namely, melancholy and conversion, they will say, are essentially phenomena of adolescence, and therefore synchronous with the development of sexual life. To which the retort again is easy. Even were the asserted synchrony unrestrictedly true as a fact (which it is not), it is not only the sexual life, but the entire higher mental life which awakens during adolescence. One might then as well set up the thesis that the interest in mechanics, physics, chemistry, logic, philosophy, and sociology, which springs up during adolescent years along with that in poetry and religion, is also a perversion of the sexual instinct:—but that would be too absurd. Moreover, if the argument from synchrony is to decide, what is to be done with the fact that the religious age _par excellence_ would seem to be old age, when the uproar of the sexual life is past?

The plain truth is that to interpret religion one must in the end look at the immediate content of the religious consciousness. The moment one does this, one sees how wholly disconnected it is in the main from the content of the sexual consciousness. Everything about the two things differs, objects, moods, faculties concerned, and acts impelled to. Any _general_ assimilation is simply impossible: what we find most often is complete hostility and contrast. If now the defenders of the sex‐theory say that this makes no difference to their thesis; that without the chemical contributions which the sex‐ organs make to the blood, the brain would not be nourished so as to carry on religious activities, this final proposition may be true or not true; but at any rate it has become profoundly uninstructive: we can deduce no consequences from it which help us to interpret religion’s meaning or value. In this sense the religious life depends just as much upon the spleen, the pancreas, and the kidneys as on the sexual apparatus, and the whole theory has lost its point in evaporating into a vague general assertion of the dependence, _somehow_, of the mind upon the body.

2 For a first‐rate example of medical‐materialist reasoning, see an article on “les Variétés du Type dévot,” by Dr. Binet‐Sanglé, in the Revue de l’Hypnotisme, xiv. 161.

3 J. F. NISBET: The Insanity of Genius, 3d ed., London, 1893, pp. xvi, xxiv.

4 MAX NORDAU, in his bulky book entitled _Degeneration_.

5 H. MAUDSLEY: Natural Causes and Supernatural Seemings, 1886, pp. 257, 256.

6 Autobiography, ch. xxviii.

7 Superior intellect, as Professor Bain has admirably shown, seems to consist in nothing so much as in a large development of the faculty of association by similarity.

8 I may refer to a criticism of the insanity theory of genius in the Psychological Review, ii. 287 (1895).

9 I can do no better here than refer my readers to the extended and admirable remarks on the futility of all these definitions of religion, in an article by Professor Leuba, published in the Monist for January, 1901, after my own text was written.

10 Miscellanies, 1868, p. 120 (abridged).

11 Lectures and Biographical Sketches, 1868, p. 186.

12 Feuilles détachées, pp. 394‐398 (abridged).

13 Op. cit., pp. 314, 313.

14 Book V., ch. x. (abridged).

15 Book V., ch. ix. (abridged).

16 Chaps. x., xi. (abridged): Winkworth’s translation.

17 Book IV., § 23.

18 Benham’s translation: Book III., chaps. xv., lix. Compare Mary Moody Emerson: “Let me be a blot on this fair world, the obscurest, the loneliest sufferer, with one proviso,—that I know it is His agency. I will love Him though He shed frost and darkness on every way of mine.” R. W. EMERSON: Lectures and Biographical Sketches, p. 188.

19 Once more, there are plenty of men, constitutionally sombre men, in whose religious life this rapturousness is lacking. They are religious in the wider sense; yet in this acutest of all senses they are not so, and it is religion in the acutest sense that I wish, without disputing about words, to study first, so as to get at its typical _differentia_.

20 The New Spirit, p. 232.

21 I owe this allegorical illustration to my lamented colleague and friend, Charles Carroll Everett.

22 Example: “I have had much comfort lately in meditating on the passages which show the personality of the Holy Ghost, and his distinctness from the Father and the Son. It is a subject that requires searching into to find out, but, when realized, gives one so much more true and lively a sense of the fullness of the Godhead, and its work in us and to us, than when only thinking of the Spirit in its effect on us.” AUGUSTUS HARE: Memorials, i. 244, Maria Hare to Lucy H. Hare.

23 Symposium, Jowett, 1871, i. 527.

24 Example: “Nature is always so interesting, under whatever aspect she shows herself, that when it rains, I seem to see a beautiful woman weeping. She appears the more beautiful, the more afflicted she is.” B. de St. Pierre.

25 Journal of the S. P. R., February, 1895, p. 26.

26 E. GURNEY: Phantasms of the Living, i. 384.

27 Pensées d’un Solitaire, p. 66.

28 Letters of Lowell, i. 75.

29 I borrow it, with Professor Flournoy’s permission, from his rich collection of psychological documents.

30 Mark Rutherford’s Deliverance, London, 1885, pp. 196, 198.

31 In his book (too little read, I fear), Natural Religion, 3d edition, Boston, 1886, pp. 91, 122.

32 C. HILTY: Glück, dritter Theil, 1900, p. 18.

33 The Soul; its Sorrows and its Aspirations, 3d edition, 1852, pp. 89, 91.

34 I once heard a lady describe the pleasure it gave her to think that she “could always cuddle up to God.”

35 JOHN WEISS: Life of Theodore Parker, i. 152, 32.

36 STARBUCK: Psychology of Religion, pp. 305, 306.

37 “I know not to what physical laws philosophers will some day refer the feelings of melancholy. For myself, I find that they are the most voluptuous of all sensations,” writes Saint Pierre, and accordingly he devotes a series of sections of his work on Nature to the Plaisirs de la Ruine, Plaisirs des Tombeaux, Ruines de la Nature, Plaisirs de la Solitude—each of them more optimistic than the last.

This finding of a luxury in woe is very common during adolescence. The truth‐telling Marie Bashkirtseff expresses it well:—