character. But it is evident that the resemblance is quite suggestive enough to confuse the crowd, and to provide mud for the ever-ready hand of the religious controversialist. Let it be remembered, also, that we are not dealing here with any of the deeper results of the complications which arise owing to the diverse functions of the machinery of emotion. Dean Swift, in his ruffianly onslaught on the revivalists of his day, had enough truth on his side to give point to his parable. In our religious devotee the physical results of excitement do not break through the barrier set up by the inhibitory centers, and come into the region of conduct.
Having had occasion to make free use of the word "artist," it may be worth while to devote a few words to the class most generally known by that name. In the case of most painters, and all sculptors, another and most important expression factor comes into play. I allude to the effect of unconscious imitation.
This subject was touched upon in my previous article, when an explanation was attempted of the remarkable resemblance which often becomes apparent between persons who live together.
There appears good reason for believing that even an unsubstantial ideal face which is always before the mind's eye will influence the expression muscles in a like manner. Among the majority of artists who paint or model the human figure certain standards of perfection, generally founded upon the old Greek masterpieces, are ever present to the mind more so, probably, than the face of any human companion. Now when we strive to realize a mental picture of another face, whether it be that of a god or a costermonger, we unconsciously imitate it. Careful observation of a considerable number of artists' faces has convinced me that such involuntary mimicry is a considerable factor in determining that classic cast of visage which is certainly more common among men of this profession than among those of any other. On the other hand, we find that caricaturists and all low comedians of the pencil tend to develop an eccentric expression. Those who have lived long enough to watch the development of certain well-known faces in the artistic world will, I think, agree with me that in most cases the acquired expressions are broadly reflections of those chosen ideals which have been occupying the thoughts and employing the hands of the artists.
Landscape and genre painters are of course free from this kind of influence. There is nothing in their work or in their ideals that can be reproduced by the mechanism of the body, and any reaction of the nervous system must be akin to that of ordinary sensuous impressions. These, as we have seen in the case of the musician, do not conduce to personal beauty. It seems prob-
