because one of the permanent characters of this change is a greater accuracy in the statement of external facts.  When the eyes of men were fixed first upon themselves, and upon nature solely and secondarily as bearing upon their interests, it was of less consequence to them what the ultimate laws of nature were, than what their immediate effects were upon human beings.  Hence they could rest satisfied with phenomena instead of principles, and accepted without scrutiny every fable which seemed sufficiently or gracefully to account for those phenomena.  But so far as the eyes of men are now withdrawn from themselves, and turned upon the inanimate things about them, the results cease to be of importance, and the laws become essential.

In these respects, it might easily appear to us that this change was assuredly one of steady and natural advance.  But when we contemplate the others above noted, of which it is clearly one of the branches or consequences, we may suspect ourselves of over-rashness in our self-congratulation, and admit the necessity of a scrupulous analysis both of the feeling itself and of its tendencies.

Of course a complete analysis, or anything like it, would involve a treatise on the whole history of the world.  I shall merely endeavour to note some of the leading and more interesting circumstances bearing on the subject, and to show sufficient practical ground for the conclusion, that landscape-painting is indeed a noble and useful art, though one not long known by man.  I shall therefore examine, as best I can, the effect of landscape, 1st, on the Classical mind; 2dly, on the Mediaeval mind; and lastly, on the Modern mind.  But there is one point of some interest respecting the effect of it on any mind, which must be settled first; and this I will endeavour to do in the next chapter.

  [51] The Society of Painters in Water-Colours, often referred to as
  the Old Water-Colour Society.  Ruskin was elected an honorary member
  in 1873.

OF THE PATHETIC FALLACY

VOLUME III, CHAPTER 12

Now, therefore, putting these tiresome and absurd words[52] quite out of our way, we may go on at our ease to examine the point in question,—­namely, the difference between the ordinary, proper, and true appearances of things to us; and the extraordinary, or false appearances, when we are under the influence of emotion, or contemplative fancy; false appearances, I say, as being entirely unconnected with any real power or character in the object, and only imputed to it by us.

For instance—­

    The spendthrift crocus, bursting through the mould
    Naked and shivering, with his cup of gold.[53]

This is very beautiful, and yet very untrue.  The crocus is not a spendthrift, but a hardy plant; its yellow is not gold, but saffron.  How is it that we enjoy so much the having it put into our heads that it is anything else than a plain crocus?