2. It transpires further on in the letter that Van Gogh and Bernard had had a difference of opinion about the usefulness of a studio training for a painter (Van Gogh felt that there was little an artist could learn in those surroundings), and about Bernard’s attitude towards the Neo-Impressionist Paul Signac. Bernard did not want to exhibit together with Signac. Van Gogh, however, was concerned with a more common interest.

3. See for Tolstoy’s A la recherche du bonheur: letter 574, n. 19.

4. This was probably Théophile Silvestre’s Eugène Delacroix. Documents nouveaux (1864), which Van Gogh also refers to as an article elsewhere. We know that on one occasion he lent it to Bernard (see letter 735).

5. That was indeed Armand Guillaumin’s address. It had previously been the studio of the painter Charles-François Daubigny.

6. It is not known which of Bernard’s self-portraits he is referring to.

7. In the course of 1887 Bernard and Anquetin had demonstratively distanced themselves from the Pointillism of Seurat and Signac. They developed a ‘synthetizing’ style that became known as Cloisonnism and was heavily influenced by Japanese printmaking. Line and contour governed their work, and as regards colour they sought the solution in simplified, large areas instead of small dots. Cf. exhib. cat. Toronto 1981 and letter 620, nn. 11 and 12.

Whereas Bernard rejected the Neo-Impressionists, Van Gogh wanted to involve them with the group of artists who had exhibited together in Restaurant du Chalet: ‘This group, to which he wished to introduce Seurat and Signac, was not to survive; its life was therefore limited to this single presentation’ (Ce groupe auquel il voulait rattacher Seurat et Signac, ne devait pas vivre; son existence se borna donc à cette unique présentation). See Bernard 1994, vol. 1, pp. 241-242. The exhibition in Restaurant du Chalet is mentioned later in the letter (see n. 9 below).

8. Bernard’s military service was a regular topic of conversation. In 1888 it seemed for a while that he would have to go to Algeria, but in the end he was not called up.

9. In November-December 1887, Van Gogh organized an exhibition of painters of the ‘Petit Boulevard’ – Anquetin, Bernard, Koning, Toulouse-Lautrec and himself – in Grand Bouillon-Restaurant du Chalet, 43, avenue de Clichy. See exhib. cat. Paris 1988, p. 33. For the ‘Petit Boulevard’ see letter 584, n. 6. According to Bernard, the show was ‘an endeavour on Van Gogh’s part alone’ (une tentative de Van Gogh seul). See Bernard 1994, vol. 1, p. 242.

Bernard wrote about the room: ‘The room referred to here is the dining-room of a working-class restaurant on avenue de Clichy, whose owner Vincent had won over, and which he had turned into an exhibition of our paintings. Unfortunately, this socialist exhibition of our inflammatory canvases came to a rather sorry end. There was a violent altercation between the owner and Vincent, which made Vincent decide to take a hand-barrow without delay and cart the whole exhibition to his studio in rue Lepic. Obviously, the art of the Petit Boulevard had not been understood by its Barnum.’ (La salle dont il est question ici est celle d’un restaurant populaire de l’avenue de Clichy dont Vincent avait conquis le patron et qu’il avait transformée en exposition de nos tableaux. Par malheur, cette exhibition socialiste de nos toiles incendiaires se termina assez piteusement. Il y eut une altercation violente entre le patron et Vincent, ce qui décida ce dernier à prendre sans retard une charette à bras et à porter toute l’exposition à son atelier de la rue Lepic. Evidemment l’art du petit boulevard n’avait pas été compris de son barnum). See Lettres à Bernard 1911, p. 75.