34 Wills, Clair. Dublin 1916: The Siege of the GPO, Profle Books: London, 2010 Lennon, Joseph. Irish Orientalism: A Literary and Intellectual History, Syracuse University Press: New York, 2008 Kennedy, S.B. Irish Art and Modernism: 1888–1950, Queens Univeristy Press: Bel ast, 1991 Huxley, Aldous. introd. To Bhagavad Gita; The Song of God, trans. by Swami Prabhavanda and Christopher Isherwood, Mentor Books: New York, 1955 Young, Ella. Flowering Dusk: Things Remembered Accurately and Inaccurately, New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1945 Marvin-Williams, Gertrude, Madame Blavatsky: Priestess of the Occult, New York: Knop , 1946 LOGAN SISLEY barbarISM or awaKeneD VISIon: THeoSopHISTS anD poSTIMpreSSIonIST In DubLIn 77 78 Barbarism or Awakened Vision: Theosophists and Post-Impressionists in Dublin LoGan SISLey The Exhibition o Works by Post Impressionist Painters held in Dublin in 1911 incited divisive debate within the city’s art community. Two o the protagonists were the artists George Russell (A.E.) and Percy Oswald Reeves, and their respective positions opposing and supporting the work o the predominantly French painters provide an interesting example within an Irish context o the complex relationships between mystical thought and the development o modern art. The exhibition was organised by Ellen Duncan, who was a key gure in the introduction o Avant-Garde art to Dublin. She had ounded the United Arts Club in 1907, in part to support Hugh Lane’s initiative to establish a modern art gallery in Dublin, and was later appointed the rst curator o the Municipal Gallery o Modern Art (now Dublin City Gallery The Hugh Lane). Duncan’s 1911 exhibition was e ectively an edited version o Manet and the Post Impressionists, organised by Roger Fry and shown at the Gra on Galleries in London in 1910, and which had generated considerable controversy in England.1 Fry coined the term Post-Impressionism to describe a broad group o artists in uenced by, but departing om the work o the Impressionists. Duncan eatured works by twenty artists in the Dublin exhibition including Paul Gauguin, Vincent Van Gogh, Paul Cézanne, Henri Matisse, Paul Signac and Pablo Picasso, along with Maurice Denis, Paul Sérusier, Auguste Herbin and Jules Flandrin. The PostImpressionist exhibition was held at the United Arts Club om 25th o January to 14th o February 1911. The Club was then based at 44 St Stephen’s Green, having relocated om temporary premises at 22 Lincoln Place, a building it had shared with Russell’s employer, the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society. Many critics derided the French painters; among these was the painter, poet, journalist, political organiser and Theosophist, George Russell (A.E.). While an engagement with Theosophy provided a number o early twentieth-century artists with the conceptual amework to explore abstraction, Russell was unconvinced by the Avant-Garde works on display. His attack on the exhibition was published in The Irish Times with the subtitle “Art and Barbarism”.2 On the other side o the debate was the Arts and Cra s artist, enameller and metalworker, Percy Oswald Reeves, who used his de ence o the painters in The Irish Architect and Cra sman to outline his philosophy o the ve stages o visual consciousness.3 These texts 79 Barbarism or Awakened Vision reveal the two artists’ thinking – at times overlapping and at times divergent – on art and its relationship to material and spiritual worlds. While Ellen Duncan did have a ew supporters such as the Director o the National Gallery o Ireland Thomas Bodkin, the exhibition was largely received with outrage and resistance.4 The then president o the Royal Hibernian Academy, Dermod O’Brien, privately warned Hugh Lane: “I don’t know how the post imps […] have been treated in Dublin but I expect they have been treated with a good deal o well deserved abuse. Don’t get taken in by them. Whatever talent a ew have as impressionists, they have nothing o interest to say as ar as I could see.”5 The architect Page Dickinson argued that most pictures by these ‘Post-Pre-Raphaelites’ or ‘Pre-Twenty-Fi h Centuryites’ were: “the results o an ordinary child who wishes to paint but does not know how”.6 Similar yet more-damning sentiments are ound in the personal papers o the poet and philosopher Joseph Mary Plunkett, whose annotated copy o the exhibition catalogue includes the note, “A child can do it (but shouldn’t be let)”, in response to Henri Manguin’s Paysage.7 He also noted that Picasso, Maurice de Vlaminck and Félix Vallotton were idiots and that Van Gogh, Matisse and Flandrin ought to be shot. Plunkett would go on to become one o the leaders o the 1916 Rising. His papers also contain a manuscript bibliography which reveals diverse interests, om science and sociology to languages, religion and spirituality. It includes numerous books on ancient Egypt and on Buddhism, as well as the seminal Theosophical text, The Secret Doctrine by the movement’s ounder Madame Helena P. Blavatsky, evidence o its circulation in intellectual circles in Ireland. The Dublin Lodge o the Theosophical Society had rst been ounded in 1886 and the movement had experienced wavering levels o support in Ireland. There was renewed interest ollowing the visit to Dublin in 1909 o Annie Besant, who was then worldwide leader o the movement. Besant and C.W. Leadbeater had written a book called Thought Forms, which attempted to give visual representation to invisible thought and emotion. This volume in uenced Wassily Kandinsky, who was one o a number o artists in the early twentieth century who were drawn to occult and mystical knowledge and to Theosophy in particular. 8 Piet Mondrian, or example, had joined the Theosophical Society o Amsterdam in 1909. This eld o enquiry opened up new possibilities in making art including abstraction. Two o the artists included in the 1911 Dublin exhibition, Gauguin and Sérusier, took an avid interest in Theosophy, the latter being in uenced by Édouard Shuré’s 1889 book Les Grands Initiés, which explored esoteric roots o various religious traditions. Theosophy also appealed to a number o Irish artists and writers, notable George Russell (A.E.), W.B. Yeats and James Stephens. Russell had been an active member o the Dublin Theosophical Society om the 1880s and while he le to re orm the Hermetic Society in 1898, Theosophical teachings remained core to his thinking. He expressed a complex synthesis o Theosophy, nationalism and mysticism in his writing and painting. In the 1911 census he identi ed his religion as Eidetic, re erring to his capacity as a seer, and he sought to give orm to his visions through painting. Yeats recalled that even as an art student Russell did not always paint the given model as “some other image always rose be ore his eyes”.9 Russell himsel later wrote that his paintings were “the artistic recreations o a writer who slipped into painting when he was 40, because when he closed his eyes he saw pictures”.10 While his approach to art was certainly unconventional, it did not extend to the ormal experimentation o other artists associated with Theosophy such as Mondrian, Kandinsky, or Gauguin. Russell had previously written that in art the least important aspect o colours and orms “is their re erence to an external nature, and the more important is that they become the symbols o internal things, dreams, spiritual longings and the reveries o the soul”.11 While he ailed to appreciate such qualities in the work o Van Gogh or Cézanne, he had identi ed spiritual qualities in the work o other artists including Edward Burne-Jones, George Frederic Watts, Gustave Moreau, Jean-Francois Millet and Jean-Baptiste-Camille Corot (all o whom with the exception o Moreau were included in the original collection o the Municipal Gallery o Modern Art, o which Russell was a supporter). He wrote that Corot painted “visible spirit, an almost pantheistic presentment o nature, a vision in the Divine imagination”.12 He likened Millet to the poet William Wordsworth when he wrote that the painter had “this vision o the divine imagination brooding in joy over desolate places shunned by men” and “interpreted it in what may be called at most pantheistic art”.13 In contrast Russell described most artists represented in the Post-Impressionist exhibition as “merely decrepit” and argued that any art that is li eless or stupid should not be tolerated. He believed 81 Barbarism or Awakened Vision: Theosophists and Post-Impressionists in Dublin 80 A MODERN PANARION Glimpses o Occultism in Dublin the works had only received a warm reception om the “easilyhypnotised” who wanted to appear modern and at the ore ont o taste. Ellen Duncan de ended the “evocative power” o the paintings against Russell’s “brilliant diatribe” which she described as “the ipse dixit o a man who is so wrapped up in his vision o the glory o the world that he orgets that there are other hilltops om which other men watch, with serious eyes, the un olding o the mystery that is new-born with each sunrise”.14 To some degree Russell excluded Gauguin, Denis and Signac om his attack. However, his praise or these artists was tempered; Denis showed “a pretty colour picture or a child’s book o wonder tales” and Signac exhibited “a per ectly unemotional and cold application o science to art”. When science comes in the door, Russell argued, “art ies out the window”.15 He compared Signac un avourably to J.M.W. Turner: “That old magician breathed light with his mind as we breathe air with our nostrils. It was instinctive.”16 With eight pictures Gauguin was the best represented o the artists in the Dublin exhibition.17 Russell described him as a “man o talent, though not a master”, yet suggested his appeal lay partly in the novelty o his Paci c subjects: “His Maori [sic] women attract one or a moment, as any art does which exhibits a local colour we have not seen be ore.”18 He suggested that the European viewer would soon be bored i another artist ollowed in Gauguin’s ootsteps: “One or two archaic types competently rendered are interesting om an ethnological point o view, but i we have a whole village o them we soon look at them as indi erently as we do at the chance passer-by in our own streets […] To repeat Gauguin’s success he must be the rst artist somewhere.”19 Gauguin is o en gured as the archetypal gure in primitivist modernism, through his search or cultural renewal in Brittany and later in Tahiti.20 This retreat om urban modernity evident in cultural primitivism in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries is also ound in the Celtic Revival, which turned to the rural west o the island or an authentic national cultural expression.21 Russell was a key member o the Celtic Revival and took annual painting trips to Donegal. Given this parallel a less ambivalent attitude towards Gauguin might have been expected om Russell. Gauguin’s belie in the importance o painting om memory should also have struck a chord with Russell, who pre erred to paint om memory or the imagination rather than working directly om the model. Gauguin also advocated painting om memory as he believed that it allowed access to a realm o truth otherwise inaccessible to the senses, consistent with his own interest in Theosophy.22 Peter Kuch has noted, however, that the extent to which Russell was aware o Gauguin’s interest in Theosophy is open to conjecture.23 Russell’s use o the term barbarism in relation to the PostImpressionist exhibition echoes an earlier analysis o Gauguin by Hugh Lane. His iend and later Director o the National Gallery o Ireland, Thomas Bodkin, recalled, “When I evinced great interest in the revealing exhibition o Gauguin’s work, held in the Salon d’Automne o 1906, Lane warned me sternly against the danger o undue sympathy with what he regarded, in common with most critics o the time, as a barbaric and trivial type o art.”24 In contrast, Lane’s iend W.B. Yeats was more open to the radical developments in French painting. Bodkin recalled overhearing Yeats praising the work o Cézanne, Van Gogh, Matisse and Gauguin when he visited the exhibition at the United Arts Club in January 1911. Yeats wrote to Lady Gregory, ‘I nd seeing them as I do more constantly they grow on me greatly. I am buying some larger photographs, through Mrs Duncan who brought the collection over.’25 In addition to the photographs acquired through Ellen Duncan, in 1936 Yeats acquired a canvas reproduction o Gauguin’s Ta Matete (1892) which he hung above the replace in his dining room. Gauguin also made an impact on Percy Oswald Reeves when he saw his paintings at the Gra on Galleries exhibition organised by Roger Fry in London in 1910. He lamented the act that only a small selection o those paintings were shown in Dublin, or in London a wall o works by Gauguin stood “in the memory exalted and alone”.26 He believed that the artist was unappreciated in both cities: “[…] the crowd passed by them unseeing; laughing, pitying, jeering, shouting their derision, because these paintings ailed to tickle their appetites. Not to understand! How much it means!”27 Reeves was an English Arts and Cra s artist who came to Dublin in 1903 to teach metalwork and enamelling at the Metropolitan School o Art (now the National College o Art and Design or NCAD). He was listed in the 1911 census as a ‘ ollower o the Buddha’ – then one o the very ew Buddhists in Ireland – and om 1910 to 1917 was a member o the council o the Buddhist Society o Great Britain and Ireland. Buddhism was one o the religions om which Theosophy 83 Barbarism or Awakened Vision: Theosophists and Post-Impressionists in Dublin 82 A MODERN PANARION Glimpses o Occultism in Dublin drew inspiration (notably via Al ed Percy Sinnett’s Esoteric Buddhism, rst published in 1883), although Laurence Cox has argued that its role was more marginal in Irish Theosophy. 28 Despite this connection there is no reason to believe that Reeves was associated with Theosophy. His extended review o the Exhibition o Works by Post Impressionist Painters appeared over two issues o The Irish Architect and Cra sman, a periodical to which he contributed several texts outlining his philosophy o art, o en uncredited under the banner o the Arts and Cra s Society o Ireland. Reeves believed “the sphere o nature is the outward universe, that o art is the inward universe”.29 Art there ore should not simply depict things in the world but rather the inward universe. He equated any art that depicted only the outward universe with photography. In contrast, art was “the revelation o what has arisen in this inward universe o the mind. Photography can never enter there.”30 In his de ence o Ellen Duncan’s exhibition, he outlined his theory o the ve stages o visual consciousness. He sought to assist viewers in arriving at a visual sympathy with the Post-Impressionist pictures and argued that the paintings “should reveal the signi cance o things rather than the things themselves: that is should embrace the higher and more worthy types o visual activity”.31 Reeves’ ve stages o visual consciousness began with the ‘limited normal’ type – “associated with hal -closed eyes” – ollowed by the ‘normal’ and ‘extended normal’ types. In the third stage, with which he aligned the Impressionists, colour and tone are seen as aspects o light, not o material, and the detachment om objects has commenced.32 In relation to the third stage he also re erenced Turner, quoting the artist’s reply to a critic who said he couldn’t see the colour in the rocks Turner had painted: “Don’t you wish you could?”33 Reeves argued that as with the initial reception o the Impressionists the works on display could not be properly seen, “unless our aculty responds with a higher type o activity than the one to which modern pictures generally have accustomed us”.34 Most o these new works Reeves categorised as belonging to the ourth ‘awakened’ type o vision. Those attaining the ourth stage were beginning to appreciate the signifcance o orm as not solely a quality o material things: “Whereas the normal vision sees the world in static terms, this type perceives it in dynamic terms, as purpose ul animation revealed in orm.”35 Foremost among this group he identi ed Van Gogh, whose landscapes conveyed “a consciousness o the visual signi cance o broad open country”. 36 In the h and nal stage identi ed by Reeves – the ‘ ully awakened’ type – the attachment to external phenomena is eradicated and “colour… has great breadth, great intensity and extreme purity”.37 Only Gauguin belonged to the h type, and this distinction is consistent with Gauguin’s own belie that the Impressionists were too attached to observing the appearance o nature. Reeves acknowledged that judged on technique alone Gauguin’s paintings might appear strange, coarse or violent but he argued that it was important not to compare them to other paintings but to judge them on the success o achieving the intended state o visual consciousness. He believed the French painters were pursuing the true goal o the artist by seeking to convey their experience beyond that o the material world: “They represent higher things, and in their manner o doing so have revealed a knowledge and power o draughtsmanship ar greater than that generally understood.”38 While Reeves was capable o appreciating the paintings and Russell was unable to accept the new orms o expression, the rhetoric employed by both reveals a shared belie that the artist should express an inner vision. Russell agreed that technique should not be the sole actor by which one judged an artwork. He wrote o William Blake: “I am unconcerned about the correctness o Blake’s drawing, or he had always the eyesight o the eagle, and the incorrect line o en ollowed the motions o some beauti ul creature o the night, light and swi as a cloud.”39 He orgave Turner: “however his orms ailed in precision, we always eel the certainty o the vision that was there”.40 He praised the “mythic sunshine which glows through his scarlet trees and blue ruins” and his “cities, temples and hills lit with an unearthly glow”.41 Russell sought a luminous quality in his own paintings, which he achieved through the application o thin layers o paint. Russell admitted he was slow to accept Impressionism, which he had come to appreciate by 1904 when Hugh Lane showed paintings by Monet, Degas, Pissarro, Renoir and Sisley at the Royal Hibernian Academy.42 However, the passage o time did not diminish his opposition to Cézanne or to Roger Fry. In 1927 he reviewed Fry’s Cézanne: A Study o his Development43 or The Irish Statesman, writing o the artist’s “monstrous men and women in wooden attitudes, impossible anatomies, bodies like bladders, limbs less articulated than 85 Barbarism or Awakened Vision: Theosophists and Post-Impressionists in Dublin 84 A MODERN PANARION Glimpses o Occultism in Dublin 86 A MODERN PANARION Glimpses o Occultism in Dublin the toys o children, imsy landscapes tottering houses, and the very clever ellow aced with these apparitions discovers masterpieces in them”.44 Eighteen months later in the same publication he conceded to being sometimes attracted to the colour but not the orm in Cubist painting, at least in the work o Mainie Jellett and Evie Hone. He accepted they were brave people who elt they were pioneering a new art which will not be representational, “except o things seen in the imagination, a psychological art may be, or may be symbolist, using not the crude orms chosen by the rst cubists but drawing on the mystic symbolism o the religions and their evocative power”.45 He elt they needed to expand their vocabulary, and – remarkably – hoped they would not return “to representation, but will try to explore urther in the psyche and create a purely imaginative art”.46 A similar so ening o Russell’s attitude is ound in his review o the 1929 RHA Annual Exhibition: “The cranks, who or a quarter o a century played such strange pranks as cubists or uturists, have broken up the academic mentality. And the public who raged at the artists ound strangely that a er looking at them they had no longer the old a ection or the care ully painted, uninspired academic art. I they could not accept the cubists or uturists, neither could they accept a dull competence.”47 Back in 1911 the nationalist paper, Irish Freedom, had viewed the French Post-Impressionist paintings as “a special message or Ireland where we are making a beginning with so many things, in the determination o the artist to achieve sel -expression no matter what hoary convention su ers in the process”.48 While Russell might be considered radical in the diverse areas o social and political activism in which he was engaged, he did not share the view that the modern paintings Ellen Duncan had introduced to Dublin would liberate Irish cultural li e. He rejected their ormal experimentation and remained committed to gurative painting as the most apt visual orm to express his inner visions. Reeves on the other hand championed the PostImpressionist paintings, not or their political potential but or what he viewed as pathways to a state o higher visual consciousness, a state that most Dublin audiences were unwilling to embrace. George Willi m Russell (Æ), The Winged Horse, 1904, oil on o rd, 31.5 x 45.8 m. Colle tion Du lin City G llery The Hugh L ne; Reg. 28, L ne gift 1912 Percy Oswald Reeves, ‘The Work o the PostImpressionists’, Irish 3. A.E. (George Russell), ‘The Post Impressionists: Art and Barbarism’, The Irish Times, 26th o January 1911, p. 5. 2. Roger Fry was the editor o The Burlington Magazine , to which Ellen Duncan contributed, and he had given the Hermione Lectures on ‘Florentine Art o the Early Renaissance period’ at Alexandra College in Dublin in 1900. Many o the works shown in Dublin were displayed at an exhibition o PostImpressionism organised by The Sandon Society in Liverpool which opened at the Liberty Buildings (now the Bluecoat Arts Centre) on 4th o March 1911. For analysis o the London exhibition see Benedict Nicolson, ‘PostImpressionism and Roger Fry’, The Burlington Magazine , vol. 93, no. 574 (January 1951), pp. 10–15, and “Manet and the Post-Impressionists: A Centenary Issue”, The Burlington Magazine, vol. 152, no. 1293 (December 2010). Ellen Duncan also organised a subsequent exhibition o Modern French Paintings at the United Arts Club in 1912 and planned a Futurist exhibition, which was not realised. 1. ENDNOTES See or example, Thomas Buser, ‘Gauguin’s Religion’, Art Journal, vol. 27, no. 4 (Summer 1968), pp. 375–380; Linda Dalrymple Henderson, “Mysticism and Occultism in Modern Art”, Art Journal, vol. 46, no. 1 (Spring 1987), pp. 5–8; Rose-Carol Washton Long, ‘Occultism, Anarchism, and Abstraction: Kandinsky’s Art o the Future’, Art Journal, 8. Joseph Mary Plunkett papers, National Library o Ireland, Ms 10,999/11/4. 7. Page L. Dickinson MRIAI, “The Post-Impressionist Painters”, The Irish Architect and Cra tsman, pp. 36–7. 6. Dermod O’Brien to Hugh Lane, 7th o February 1911, National Library o Ireland, Ms 35,823/6. Despite expressing this opinion, O’Brien did o cially open the 1912 exhibition o Modern French Painters at the United Arts Club, de ending himsel against those who thought participating in the event was derogatory to his position and “perhaps, thereby leading the young astray by countenancing it all”. He stated that people should at least be given the opportunity to see the works and make up their own minds. See “United Arts Club Exhibition: Opening Ceremony”, Freeman’s Journal, 30th o March 1912, p. 10. 5. Thomas Bodkin, “Letters to the Editor”, The Irish Times, 27th o January 1911, p. 6. 4. Architect and Cra tsman , 18th o February 1911, pp. 50–51 and 25th o February 1911, pp. 64–5 FuLL CIrCLe: THe pop CuLTuraL orbIT oF THeoSopHICaL THouGHT 89 < George Russell, Ireland”, p. 240. 12. “Art in George Russell, “Art in Ireland”, originally published in Daily Express, 10th o September 1898; republished in Peter Kuch (ed.), Writings on Literature and Art by G.W. Russell ‘A.E.’, (Gerrards Cross: 2011), p. 240. 11. A.E. (George Russell), ‘Some Irish Artists’, originally published in The New York Times, 24th o March 1929; republished in Peter Kuch (ed.), Writings on Literature and Art by G.W. Russell ‘A.E.’, (Gerrards Cross: 2011), p. 279. 10. W. B. Yeats, ‘Reveries over Childhood and Youth’, in William H. O’Donnell and Douglas N. Archibald (eds), Autobiographies: The Collected Works o W.B. Yeats, Volume III (New York: 1999), p. 90. 9. vol. 46, no. 1 (Spring 1987), pp. 38–45; Sixten Ringbom, ‘Art in “The Epoch o the Great Spiritual”: Occult Elements in the Early Theory o Abstract Painting”’, Journal o the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, vol. 29 (1966), pp. 386–418; VojtEch Jirat, WasiutyNski, ‘Paul Gauguin’s “Sel -Portrait with Halo and Snake”: The Artist as Initiate and Magus’, Art Journal, vol. 46, no. 1 (Spring 1987), pp22– 28; Michael White, ‘“Dreaming in the Abstract”: Mondrian, Psychoanalysis and Abstract Art in the Netherlands’, The Burlington Magazine, vol. 148, no. 1235 (February 2006), pp. 98–106. 13. See or example, James F. Knapp, ‘Primitivism and Empire: John Synge and 21. See or example Caroline Vercoe, ‘I Am My Other I Am Mysel : Encounters with Gauguin in Polynesia’, Australia and New Zealand Journal o Art, vol. 13 (2013), pp. 105–25. 20. Ibid. 19. George Russell, ‘The Post Impressionists: Art and Barbarism’. 18. These included La Religieuse (known as The Sister o Charity, 1902, McNay Art Museum, San Antonio), L’Arlesienne (known as Woman in Front o a Still Li e, 1890, Art Institute o Chicago), Maori Women, Oil Painting (un nished) (then owned by Roger Fry and now known as Tahitians, c. 1891, Tate, London). 17. Ibid. 16. George Russell, ‘The Post Impressionists: Art and Barbarism’. 15. Ellen Duncan, ‘The PostImpressionists’, The Irish Times, 15th o February 1911, p. 5. 14. George Russell, ‘Spiritual Infuence o Art’, originally published in Daily Express, 22th April 1899; republished in Peter Kuch (ed.), Writings on Literature and Art by G.W. Russell A.E., (Gerrards Cross: 2011), p. 246. Percy Oswald Reeves, ‘Art and Nature’, The Irish Architect and Cra tsman, 26th o August 1911, p. 427. 29. Laurence Cox, Buddhism and Ireland: From the Celts to the Counter-Culture and Beyond (She eld: 2013), p. 176. 28. Ibid. 27. Percy Oswald Reeves, ‘The Work o the PostImpressionists’, pp. 64–5. 26. W.B. Yeats to Lady Gregory, 1st o February 1911, Berg Collection, New York Public Library, quoted in Richard J. Finneran and George Bornstein (eds), The Collected Works o W. B. Yeats, Volume IV: Early Essays (New York: 2007) pp. 466–7. 25. Thomas Bodkin, Hugh Lane and his Pictures (Dublin: 1956), p. 70. The 1906 Salon d’Automne in Paris eatured a retrospective o Paul Gauguin’s work thus introducing it to a wider public. 24. Peter Kuch (ed.), Writings on Literature and Art, n. 4, p. 435. 23. Mark A. Cheetham, ‘Mystical Memories: Gauguin’s Neoplatonism and “Abstraction” in Late Nineteenth-Century French Painting’, Art Journal, vol. 46, no. 1 (Spring 1987), pp. 15–21. 22. Paul Gauguin’, Comparative Literature, vol. 41, no. 1 (Winter 1989), pp. 53–68. George Russell, ‘The Post Impressionists: Art and Barbarism’. 39. Ibid., p. 65. 38. Percy Oswald Reeves, ‘The Work o the PostImpressionists’, p. 51. 37. Percy Oswald Reeves, ‘The Work o the PostImpressionists’, p. 64. The only landscape among the our pictures by Van Gogh exhibited in Dublin was Orchard in Provence (possibly The Pink Orchard, 1888, now in the Van Gogh Museum). 36. Ibid., p. 51. 35. Ibid., p. 64. 34. Ibid. 33. Ibid., p. 51. 32. Percy Oswald Reeves, ‘The Work o the PostImpressionists’, The Irish Architect and Cra tsman, 18th o February 1911, p. 51. 31. Ibid., p. 428. See also Nicola Gordon Bowe, ‘Evocative and Symbolic Memorials and Trophies by Percy Oswald Reeves’, Irish Arts Review Yearbook, vol. 16 (2000), p. 131. 30. The Irish Architect and Cra tsman was edited by Horace O’Rourke who would later design the extension to Charlemont House to accommodate the Municipal Gallery o Modern Art. From May 1911 it became the O cial Organ o the Arts and Cra ts Society o Ireland. FuLL CIrCLe: THe pop CuLTuraL orbIT oF THeoSopHICaL THouGHT 91 40. Irish Freedom, May 1911, quoted in Patricia Boylan, All Cultivated People: A History o the United Arts Club, Dublin (Gerrards Cross: 1988) p. 47. 48. Y.O. (George Russell), ‘The Hibernian Academy’, Irish Statesman, 13th o April 1929, pp. 106–7. 47. Ibid., p. 401. 46. Y.O. (George Russell), ‘Cubist Paintings: The Gallery, 7 Stephen’s Green’, Irish Statesman , 1st o June 1929, pp. 400–1. 45. Ibid., p. 400. 44. Y.O. (George Russell), ‘Cezanne: A Study o his Development by Roger Fry’, Irish Statesman, 31st o December 1927, pp. 400–1. 43. The exhibition o Pictures Presented to the City o Dublin to Form the Nucleus o a Gallery o Modern Art also Pictures Lent by the Executors o the Late Mr. J. Staats Forbes, and Others, was held at Royal Hibernian Academy, Lower Abbey Street, Dublin rom November 1904, and subsequently at the National Museum, Kildare Street in 1905. This was the rst public exhibition o the works collected or pledged or the new Gallery o Modern Art that Lane sought to establish in Dublin, now Dublin City Gallery The Hugh Lane. 42. Ibid. 41. Ibid. ROSA ABBOTT FuLL CIrCLe: THe pop CuLTuraL orbIT oF THeoSopHICaL THouGHT 93