And yet, when you think about what a painting can give to the world, he’s providing exactly what the twenty-first century needs.

Image: Is that why his reputation has seen a resurgence in the last three years? Are we returning to Rouault’s aesthetic? And what specifically is it?

MF: Yes. Last week at Sotheby’s a work of his went for triple the asking price. That hadn’t happened in a long time. Rouault is getting attention today because we’re longing for an authentic reality. The human heart cannot bear to live in virtual reality for long.

Image: We’re disenchanted with gnosticism?

MF: Definitely. With gnosticism and its offspring, which to me involves the kind of existentialism that sees a “no exit” sort of closed reality. I love thinking about the time when Rouault and Picasso were painting, Brancusi was sculpting, and Sartre was writing. The shadowy figures of Brancusi (which I love) became thinner and thinner, and Picasso began to flatten and fragment everything almost mathematically, and Kandinsky also began to flatten his imagery and become more geometric. Sartre was writing No Exit. There was a movement toward ideology, but Rouault swam against the current. That’s why his art is not popular in academic circles...