PART I--LETTERS
BOOKS--1905.
I.
"I have not read this author's
books, and if I have read them I have forgotten what they were
about."
These words are reported as
having been uttered in our midst not a hundred years ago, publicly,
from the seat of justice, by a civic magistrate. The words of our
municipal rulers have a solemnity and importance far above the
words of other mortals, because our municipal rulers more than any
other variety of our governors and masters represent the average
wisdom, temperament, sense and virtue of the community. This
generalisation, it ought to be promptly said in the interests of
eternal justice (and recent friendship), does not apply to the
United States of America. There, if one may believe the long and
helpless indignations of their daily and weekly Press, the majority
of municipal rulers appear to be thieves of a particularly
irrepressible sort. But this by the way. My concern is with a
statement issuing from the average temperament and the average
wisdom of a great and wealthy community, and uttered by a civic
magistrate obviously without fear and without reproach.
I confess I am pleased with his
temper, which is that of prudence. "I have not read the books,"
he says, and immediately he adds, "and if I have read them I have
forgotten." This is excellent caution. And I like his style: it
is unartificial and bears the stamp of manly sincerity. As a
reported piece of prose this declaration is easy to read and not
difficult to believe. Many books have not been read; still more
have been forgotten. As a piece of civic oratory this declaration
is strikingly effective. Calculated to fall in with the bent of the
popular mind, so familiar with all forms of forgetfulness, it has
also the power to stir up a subtle emotion while it starts a train
of thought--and what greater force can be expected from human
speech? But it is in naturalness that this declaration is perfectly
delightful, for there is nothing more natural than for a grave City
Father to forget what the books he has read once--long ago--in his
giddy youth maybe--were about.
And the books in question are
novels, or, at any rate, were written as novels. I
proceed thus cautiously
(following my illustrious example) because being without fear and
desiring to remain as far as possible without reproach, I confess
at once that I have not read them.
I have not; and of the million
persons or more who are said to have read them, I never met one yet
with the talent of lucid exposition sufficiently developed to give
me a connected account of what they are about. But they are
books, part and parcel of humanity, and as such, in their ever
increasing, jostling multitude, they are worthy of regard,
admiration, and compassion.
Especially of compassion. It has
been said a long time ago that books have their fate. They have,
and it is very much like the destiny of man. They share with us the
great incertitude of ignominy or glory--of severe justice and
senseless persecution--of calumny and misunderstanding--the shame
of undeserved success. Of all the inanimate objects, of all
men's creations, books are the nearest to us, for they contain our
very thought, our ambitions, our indignations, our illusions, our
fidelity to truth, and our persistent leaning towards error. But
most of all they resemble us in their precarious hold on life. A
bridge constructed according to the rules of the art of
bridge-building is certain of a long, honourable and useful career.
But a book as good in its way as the bridge may perish
obscurely on the very day of its birth. The art of their creators
is not sufficient to give them more than a moment of life. Of the
books born from the restlessness, the inspiration, and the vanity
of human minds, those that the Muses would love best lie more than
all others under the menace of an early death. Sometimes
their defects will save them. Sometimes a book fair to see may--to
use a lofty expression--have no individual soul. Obviously a book
of that sort cannot die. It can only crumble into dust. But the
best of books drawing sustenance from the sympathy and memory of
men have lived on the brink of destruction, for men's memories are
short, and their sympathy is, we must admit, a very fluctuating,
unprincipled emotion.
No secret of eternal life for our
books can be found amongst the formulas of art, any more than for
our bodies in a prescribed combination of drugs. This is not
because some books are not worthy of enduring life, but because the
formulas of art are dependent on things variable, unstable and
untrustworthy; on human sympathies, on prejudices, on likes and
dislikes, on the sense of virtue and the sense of propriety, on
beliefs and theories that, indestructible in themselves, always
change their form--often in the lifetime of one fleeting
generation.
II.
Of all books, novels, which the
Muses should love, make a serious claim on our compassion. The art
of the novelist is simple. At the same time it is the most elusive
of all creative arts, the most liable to be obscured by the
scruples of its servants and votaries, the one pre-eminently
destined to bring trouble to the mind and the heart of the
artist. After all, the creation of a world is not a small
undertaking except perhaps to the divinely gifted. In truth every
novelist must begin by creating for himself a world, great or
little, in which he can honestly believe. This world cannot be made
otherwise than in his own image: it is fated to remain individual
and a little mysterious, and yet it must resemble something already
familiar to the experience, the thoughts and the sensations of his
readers. At the heart of fiction, even the least worthy of the
name, some sort of truth can be found--if only the truth of a
childish theatrical ardour in the game of life, as in the novels of
Dumas the father. But the fair truth of human delicacy can
be found in Mr. Henry James's novels; and the comical, appalling
truth of human rapacity let loose amongst the spoils of existence
lives in the monstrous world created by Balzac. The pursuit of
happiness by means lawful and unlawful, through resignation or
revolt, by the clever manipulation of conventions or by solemn
hanging on to the skirts of the latest scientific theory, is the
only theme that can be legitimately developed by the novelist who
is the chronicler of the adventures of mankind amongst the dangers
of the kingdom of the earth. And the kingdom of this earth
itself, the ground upon which his individualities stand, stumble,
or die, must enter into his scheme of faithful record. To
encompass all this in one harmonious conception is a great feat;
and even to attempt it deliberately with serious intention, not
from the senseless prompting of an ignorant heart, is an honourable
ambition. For it requires some courage to step in calmly where
fools may be eager to rush. As a distinguished and successful
French novelist once observed of fiction, "C'est un art trop
difficile."
It is natural that the novelist
should doubt his ability to cope with his task. He imagines it more
gigantic than it is. And yet literary creation being only one
of the legitimate forms of human activity has no value but on the
condition of not excluding the fullest recognition of all the more
distinct forms of action. This condition is sometimes forgotten by
the man of letters, who often, especially in his youth, is inclined
to lay a claim of exclusive superiority for his own amongst all the
other tasks of the human mind. The mass of verse and prose may
glimmer here and there with the glow of a divine spark, but in the
sum of human effort it has no special importance. There is no
justificative formula for its existence any more than for any other
artistic achievement. With the rest of them it is destined to be
forgotten, without, perhaps, leaving the faintest trace. Where a
novelist has
an advantage over the workers in
other fields of thought is in his privilege of freedom--the freedom
of expression and the freedom of confessing his innermost
beliefs--which should console him for the hard slavery of the
pen.
III.
Liberty of imagination should be
the most precious possession of a novelist. To try voluntarily to
discover the fettering dogmas of some romantic, realistic, or
naturalistic creed in the free work of its own inspiration, is a
trick worthy of human perverseness which, after inventing an
absurdity, endeavours to find for it a pedigree of distinguished
ancestors. It is a weakness of inferior minds when it is not the
cunning device of those who, uncertain of their talent, would seek
to add lustre to it by the authority of a school. Such, for
instance, are the high priests who have proclaimed Stendhal for a
prophet of Naturalism. But Stendhal himself would have accepted no
limitation of his freedom. Stendhal's mind was of the first order.
His spirit above must be raging with a peculiarly Stendhalesque
scorn and indignation. For the truth is that more than one kind of
intellectual cowardice hides behind the literary formulas. And
Stendhal was pre-eminently courageous. He wrote his two great
novels, which so few people have read, in a spirit of fearless
liberty.
It must not be supposed that I
claim for the artist in fiction the freedom of moral Nihilism. I
would require from him many acts of faith of which the first would
be the cherishing of an undying hope; and hope, it will not be
contested, implies all the piety of effort and renunciation. It is
the God-sent form of trust in the magic force and inspiration
belonging to the life of this earth. We are inclined to forget that
the way of excellence is in the intellectual, as distinguished from
emotional, humility. What one feels so hopelessly barren in
declared pessimism is just its arrogance. It seems as if the
discovery made by many men at various times that there is much evil
in the world were a source of proud and unholy joy unto some of the
modern writers. That frame of mind is not the proper one in which
to approach seriously the art of fiction. It gives an
author--goodness only knows why--an elated sense of his own
superiority. And there is nothing more dangerous than such an
elation to that absolute loyalty towards his feelings and
sensations an author should keep hold of in his most exalted
moments of creation.
To be hopeful in an artistic
sense it is not necessary to think that the world is good. It is
enough to believe that there is no impossibility of its being made
so. If the flight of imaginative thought may be allowed to rise
superior to many moralities current amongst mankind, a novelist who
would think himself of a superior essence to other men would miss
the first condition of his calling. To have the gift of words is
no such great matter. A man furnished with a long- range weapon
does not become a hunter or a warrior by the mere possession of a
fire-arm; many other qualities of character and temperament are
necessary to
make him either one or the other.
Of him from whose armoury of phrases one in a hundred thousand may
perhaps hit the far-distant and elusive mark of art I would ask
that in his dealings with mankind he should be capable of giving
a tender recognition to their obscure virtues. I would not have him
impatient with their small failings and scornful of their errors. I
would not have him expect too much gratitude from that humanity
whose fate, as illustrated in individuals, it is open to him to
depict as ridiculous or terrible. I would wish him to look with a
large forgiveness at men's ideas and prejudices, which are by no
means the outcome of malevolence, but depend on their education,
their social status, even their professions. The good artist should
expect no recognition of his toil and no admiration of his genius,
because his toil can with difficulty be appraised and his genius
cannot possibly mean anything to the illiterate who, even from
the dreadful wisdom of their evoked dead, have, so far, culled
nothing but inanities and platitudes. I would wish him to enlarge
his sympathies by patient and loving observation while he grows in
mental power. It is in the impartial practice of life, if
anywhere, that the promise of perfection for his art can be found,
rather than in the absurd formulas trying to prescribe this or
that particular method of technique or conception. Let him
mature the strength of his imagination amongst the things of
this earth, which it is his business to cherish and know,
and refrain from calling down his inspiration ready-made from some
heaven of perfections of which he knows nothing. And I would not
grudge him the proud illusion that will come sometimes to a writer:
the illusion that his achievement has almost equalled the greatness
of his dream. For what else could give him the serenity and the
force to hug to his breast as a thing delightful and human, the
virtue, the rectitude and sagacity of his own City, declaring with
simple eloquence through the mouth of a Conscript Father: "I have
not read this author's books, and if I have read them I have
forgotten . . ."
HENRY JAMES--AN
APPRECIATION--1905
The critical faculty hesitates
before the magnitude of Mr. Henry James's work. His books stand on
my shelves in a place whose accessibility proclaims the habit of
frequent communion. But not all his books. There is no collected
edition to date, such as some of "our masters" have been provided
with; no neat rows of volumes in buckram or half calf, putting
forth a hasty claim to completeness, and conveying to my mind a
hint of finality, of a surrender to fate of that field in
which all these victories have been won. Nothing of the sort has
been done for Mr. Henry James's victories in England.
In a world such as ours, so
painful with all sorts of wonders, one would not exhaust oneself in
barren marvelling over mere bindings, had not the fact, or rather
the absence of the material fact, prominent in the case of other
men whose writing counts, (for good or evil)--had it not been, I
say, expressive of a direct truth spiritual and intellectual; an
accident of--I suppose--the publishing business acquiring a
symbolic meaning from its negative nature. Because, emphatically,
in the body of Mr. Henry James's work there is no
suggestion of finality, nowhere a hint of surrender, or even of
probability of surrender, to his own victorious achievement in that
field where he is a master. Happily, he will never be able to claim
completeness; and, were he to confess to it in a moment of
self-ignorance, he would not be believed by the very minds for whom
such a confession naturally would be meant. It is impossible to
think of Mr. Henry James becoming "complete" otherwise than by the
brutality of our common fate whose finality is meaningless--in the
sense of its logic being of a material order, the logic of a
falling stone.
I do not know into what brand of
ink Mr. Henry James dips his pen; indeed, I heard that of late he
had been dictating; but I know that his mind is steeped in the
waters flowing from the fountain of intellectual youth. The
thing--a privilege-- a miracle--what you will--is not quite hidden
from the meanest of us who run as we read. To those who have the
grace to stay their feet it is manifest. After some twenty years of
attentive acquaintance with Mr. Henry James's work, it grows
into absolute conviction which, all personal feeling apart, brings
a sense of happiness into one's artistic existence. If gratitude,
as someone defined it, is a lively sense of favours to come, it
becomes very easy to be grateful to the author of The
Ambassadors--to name the latest of his works. The favours are
sure to come; the spring of that benevolence will never run
dry. The stream of inspiration flows brimful in a predetermined
direction, unaffected by the periods of drought, untroubled in its
clearness by the storms of the land of letters, without
languor or violence in its force, never running back upon itself,
opening
new visions at every turn of its
course through that richly inhabited country its fertility has
created for our delectation, for our judgment, for our exploring.
It is, in fact, a magic spring.
With this phrase the metaphor of
the perennial spring, of the inextinguishable youth, of running
waters, as applied to Mr. Henry James's inspiration, may be
dropped. In its volume and force the body of his work may be
compared rather to a majestic river. All creative art is magic, is
evocation of the unseen in forms persuasive, enlightening, familiar
and surprising, for the edification of mankind, pinned down by the
conditions of its existence to the earnest consideration of the
most insignificant tides of reality.
Action in its essence, the
creative art of a writer of fiction may be compared to rescue work
carried out in darkness against cross gusts of wind swaying the
action of a great multitude. It is rescue work, this snatching of
vanishing phases of turbulence, disguised in fair words, out of the
native obscurity into a light where the struggling forms may be
seen, seized upon, endowed with the only possible form of
permanence in this world of relative values--the permanence of
memory. And the multitude feels it obscurely too; since the demand
of the individual to the artist is, in effect, the cry, "Take me
out of myself!" meaning really, out of my perishable activity into
the light of imperishable consciousness. But everything is
relative, and the light of consciousness is only enduring, merely
the most enduring of the things of this earth, imperishable only as
against the short-lived work of our industrious hands.
When the last aqueduct shall have
crumbled to pieces, the last airship fallen to the ground,
the last blade of grass have died upon a dying earth, man,
indomitable by his training in resistance to misery and pain, shall
set this undiminished light of his eyes against the feeble glow of
the sun. The artistic faculty, of which each of us has a minute
grain, may find its voice in some individual of that last group,
gifted with a power of expression and courageous enough to
interpret the ultimate experience of mankind in terms of his
temperament, in terms of art. I do not mean to say that he would
attempt to beguile the last moments of humanity by an ingenious
tale. It would be too much to expect--from humanity. I doubt the
heroism of the hearers. As to the heroism of the artist, no doubt
is necessary. There would be on his part no heroism. The artist in
his calling of interpreter creates (the clearest form of
demonstration) because he must. He is so much of a voice that,
for him, silence is like death; and the postulate was, that
there is a group alive, clustered on his threshold to watch the
last flicker of light on a black sky, to hear the last word uttered
in the stilled workshop of the earth. It is safe to affirm that, if
anybody, it will be the imaginative man who would be moved to speak
on the eve of that day without to- morrow--whether in austere
exhortation or in a phrase of sardonic comment, who
can guess?
For my own part, from a short and
cursory acquaintance with my kind, I am inclined to think that the
last utterance will formulate, strange as it may appear, some hope
now to us utterly inconceivable. For mankind is delightful in its
pride, its assurance, and its indomitable tenacity. It will sleep
on the battlefield among its own dead, in the manner of an army
having won a barren victory. It will not know when it is beaten.
And perhaps it is right in that quality. The victories are not,
perhaps, so barren as it may appear from a purely strategical,
utilitarian point of view. Mr. Henry James seems to hold that
belief. Nobody has rendered better, perhaps, the tenacity of
temper, or known how to drape the robe of spiritual honour about
the drooping form of a victor in a barren strife. And the honour is
always well won; for the struggles Mr. Henry James chronicles with
such subtle and direct insight are, though only personal contests,
desperate in their silence, none the less heroic (in the modern
sense) for the absence of shouted watchwords, clash of arms and
sound of trumpets. Those are adventures in which only choice souls
are ever involved. And Mr. Henry James records them with a fearless
and insistent fidelity to the peripeties of the contest, and the
feelings of the combatants.
The fiercest excitements of a
romance de cape et d'epee, the romance of yard-arm and boarding
pike so dear to youth, whose knowledge of action (as of other
things) is imperfect and limited, are matched, for the quickening
of our maturer years, by the tasks set, by the difficulties
presented, to the sense of truth, of necessity--before all, of
conduct--of Mr. Henry James's men and women. His mankind is
delightful. It is delightful in its tenacity; it refuses to
own itself beaten; it will sleep on the battlefield. These warlike
images come by themselves under the pen; since from the duality of
man's nature and the competition of individuals, the life-history
of the earth must in the last instance be a history of a really
very relentless warfare. Neither his fellows, nor his gods, nor his
passions will leave a man alone. In virtue of these allies and
enemies, he holds his precarious dominion, he possesses his
fleeting significance; and it is this relation in all its
manifestations, great and little, superficial or profound, and this
relation alone, that is commented upon, interpreted, demonstrated
by the art of the novelist in the only possible way in which the
task can be performed: by the independent creation of circumstance
and character, achieved against all the difficulties of expression,
in an imaginative effort finding its inspiration from the reality
of forms and sensations. That a sacrifice must be made, that
something has to be given up, is the truth engraved in the
innermost recesses of the fair temple built for our edification by
the masters of fiction. There is no other secret behind the
curtain. All adventure, all love, every success is resumed in
the supreme energy of an act of renunciation. It is the
uttermost limit of our power; it is the most potent and effective
force at our disposal on which rest the labours
of a solitary man in his study,
the rock on which have been built commonwealths whose might casts a
dwarfing shadow upon two oceans. Like a natural force which is
obscured as much as illuminated by the multiplicity of phenomena,
the power of renunciation is obscured by the mass of weaknesses,
vacillations, secondary motives and false steps and compromises
which make up the sum of our activity. But no man or woman worthy
of the name can pretend to anything more, to anything greater. And
Mr. Henry James's men and women are worthy of the name, within the
limits his art, so clear, so sure of itself, has drawn round their
activities. He would be the last to claim for them Titanic
proportions. The earth itself has grown smaller in the course of
ages. But in every sphere of human perplexities and emotions,
there are more greatnesses than one--not counting here the
greatness of the artist himself. Wherever he stands, at the
beginning or the end of things, a man has to sacrifice his gods to
his passions, or his passions to his gods. That is the problem,
great enough, in all truth, if approached in the spirit of
sincerity and knowledge.
In one of his critical studies,
published some fifteen years ago, Mr. Henry James claims for the
novelist the standing of the historian as the only adequate one, as
for himself and before his audience. I think that the claim cannot
be contested, and that the position is unassailable. Fiction is
history, human history, or it is nothing. But it is also more than
that; it stands on firmer ground, being based on the reality of
forms and the observation of social phenomena, whereas history is
based on documents, and the reading of print and handwriting--on
second- hand impression. Thus fiction is nearer truth. But let
that pass. A historian may be an artist too, and a novelist is a
historian, the preserver, the keeper, the expounder, of human
experience. As is meet for a man of his descent and tradition,
Mr. Henry James is the historian of fine consciences.
Of course, this is a general
statement; but I don't think its truth will be, or can be
questioned. Its fault is that it leaves so much out; and, besides,
Mr. Henry James is much too considerable to be put into the
nutshell of a phrase. The fact remains that he has made his
choice, and that his choice is justified up to the hilt by
the success of his art. He has taken for himself the greater
part. The range of a fine conscience covers more good and evil than
the range of conscience which may be called, roughly, not fine; a
conscience, less troubled by the nice discrimination of shades of
conduct. A fine conscience is more concerned with essentials; its
triumphs are more perfect, if less profitable, in a worldly
sense.
There is, in short, more truth
in its working for a historian to detect and to show. It is a
thing of infinite complication and suggestion. None of these
escapes the art of Mr. Henry James. He has mastered the country,
his domain, not wild indeed, but full of romantic glimpses, of deep
shadows and sunny places. There are no secrets left within his
range. He has disclosed them as they should be disclosed-- that is,
beautifully. And, indeed, ugliness has but little place in this
world of his
creation. Yet, it is always felt
in the truthfulness of his art; it is there, it surrounds the
scene, it presses close upon it. It is made visible, tangible, in
the struggles, in the contacts of the fine consciences, in their
perplexities, in the sophism of their mistakes. For a fine
conscience is naturally a virtuous one.
What is natural about it is just
its fineness, an abiding sense of the intangible, ever-present,
right. It is most visible in their ultimate triumph, in their
emergence from miracle, through an energetic act of renunciation.
Energetic, not violent: the distinction is wide, enormous, like
that between substance and shadow.
Through it all Mr. Henry James
keeps a firm hold of the substance, of what is worth having, of
what is worth holding. The contrary opinion has been, if not
absolutely affirmed, then at least implied, with some frequency. To
most of us, living willingly in a sort of intellectual moonlight,
in the faintly reflected light of truth, the shadows so firmly
renounced by Mr. Henry James's men and women, stand out endowed
with extraordinary value, with a value so extraordinary that their
rejection offends, by its uncalled-for scrupulousness, those
business-like instincts which a careful Providence has implanted in
our breasts. And, apart from that just cause of discontent, it is
obvious that a solution by rejection must always present a certain
lack of finality, especially startling when contrasted with the
usual methods of solution by rewards and punishments, by crowned
love, by fortune, by a broken leg or a sudden death. Why the
reading public which, as a body, has never laid upon a story-teller
the command to be an artist, should demand from him this sham of
Divine Omnipotence, is utterly incomprehensible. But so it is; and
these solutions are legitimate inasmuch as they satisfy the desire
for finality, for which our hearts yearn with a longing greater
than the longing for the loaves and fishes of this earth. Perhaps
the only true desire of mankind, coming thus to light in its hours
of leisure, is to be set at rest. One is never set at rest by Mr.
Henry James's novels. His books end as an episode in life ends. You
remain with the sense of the life still going on; and even the
subtle presence of the dead is felt in that silence that comes upon
the artist-creation when the last word has been read. It is
eminently satisfying, but it is not final. Mr. Henry James, great
artist and faithful historian, never attempts the impossible.
ALPHONSE DAUDET--1898
It is sweet to talk decorously of
the dead who are part of our past, our indisputable possession. One
must admit regretfully that to-day is but a scramble, that
to-morrow may never come; it is only the precious yesterday that
cannot be taken away from us. A gift from the dead, great and
little, it makes life supportable, it almost makes one believe in a
benevolent scheme of creation. And some kind of belief is very
necessary. But the real knowledge of matters infinitely more
profound than any conceivable scheme of creation is with the dead
alone.
That is why our talk about them
should be as decorous as their silence. Their generosity and their
discretion deserve nothing less at our hands; and they, who belong
already to the unchangeable, would probably disdain to claim more
than this from a mankind that changes its loves and its hates about
every twenty-five years--at the coming of every new and wiser
generation.
One of the most generous of the
dead is Daudet, who, with a prodigality approaching magnificence,
gave himself up to us without reserve in his work, with all his
qualities and all his faults. Neither his qualities nor his faults
were great, though they were by no means imperceptible. It is only
his generosity that is out of the common. What strikes one most in
his work is the disinterestedness of the toiler. With more talent
than many bigger men, he did not preach about himself, he did not
attempt to persuade mankind into a belief of his own greatness. He
never posed as a scientist or as a seer, not even as a prophet; and
he neglected his interests to the point of never propounding a
theory for the purpose of giving a tremendous significance to his
art, alone of all things, in a world that, by some strange
oversight, has not been supplied with an obvious meaning. Neither
did he affect a passive attitude before the spectacle of life, an
attitude which in gods--and in a rare mortal here and there--may
appear godlike, but assumed by some men, causes one, very
unwillingly, to think of the melancholy quietude of an ape. He
was not the wearisome expounder of this or that theory, here to-day
and spurned to-morrow. He was not a great artist, he was not an
artist at all, if you like--but he was Alphonse Daudet, a
man as naively clear, honest, and vibrating as the sunshine of his
native land; that regrettably undiscriminating sunshine which
matures grapes and pumpkins alike, and cannot, of course, obtain
the commendation of the very select who look at life from under a
parasol.
Naturally, being a man from the
South, he had a rather outspoken belief in himself, but his small
distinction, worth many a greater, was in not being in bondage to
some vanishing creed. He was a worker who could not compel the
admiration of the few, but who deserved the affection of the many;
and he may be
spoken of with tenderness and
regret, for he is not immortal--he is only dead. During his life
the simple man whose business it ought to have been to climb, in
the name of Art, some elevation or other, was content to remain
below, on the plain, amongst his creations, and take an eager part
in those disasters, weaknesses, and joys which are tragic enough
in their droll way, but are by no means so momentous and profound
as some writers--probably for the sake of Art--would like to make
us believe. There is, when one thinks of it, a considerable
want of candour in the august view of life. Without doubt a
cautious reticence on the
subject, or even a delicately false suggestion thrown out in that
direction is, in a way, praiseworthy, since it helps to uphold the
dignity of man--a matter of great importance, as anyone can see;
still one cannot help feeling that a certain amount of sincerity
would not be wholly blamable. To state, then, with studied
moderation a belief that in unfortunate moments of lucidity is
irresistibly borne in upon most of us--the blind agitation
caused mostly by hunger and complicated by love and ferocity does
not deserve either by its beauty, or its morality, or its
possible results, the artistic fuss made over it. It may be
consoling--for human folly is very bizarre--but it is scarcely
honest to shout at those who struggle drowning in an insignificant
pool: You are indeed admirable and great to be the victims of such
a profound, of such a terrible ocean!
And Daudet was honest; perhaps
because he knew no better--but he was very honest. If he saw only
the surface of things it is for the reason that most things have
nothing but a surface. He did not pretend--perhaps because he did
not know how--he did not pretend to see any depths in a life that
is only a film of unsteady appearances stretched over regions deep
indeed, but which have nothing to do with the half-truths,
half-thoughts, and whole illusions of existence. The road to
these distant regions does not lie through the domain of Art or the
domain of Science where well-known voices quarrel noisily in a
misty emptiness; it is a path of toilsome silence upon which travel
men simple and unknown, with closed lips, or, maybe, whispering
their pain softly--only to themselves.
But Daudet did not whisper; he
spoke loudly, with animation, with a clear felicity of tone--as a
bird sings. He saw life around him with extreme clearness, and
he felt it as it is--thinner than air and more elusive than a flash
of lightning. He hastened to offer it his compassion, his
indignation, his wonder, his sympathy, without giving a moment of
thought to the momentous issues that are supposed to lurk in the
logic of such sentiments. He tolerated the little foibles, the
small ruffianisms, the grave mistakes; the only thing he distinctly
would not forgive was hardness of heart. This unpractical attitude
would have been fatal to a better man, but his readers have
forgiven him. Withal he is chivalrous to exiled queens and deformed
sempstresses, he is pityingly tender to broken-down actors,
to
ruined gentlemen, to stupid
Academicians; he is glad of the joys of the commonplace people in
a commonplace way--and he never makes a secret of all this. No, the
man was not an artist. What if his creations are illumined by the
sunshine of his temperament so vividly that they stand before us
infinitely more real than the dingy illusions surrounding our
everyday existence? The misguided man is for ever pottering amongst
them, lifting up his voice, dotting his i's in the wrong places. He
takes Tartarin by the arm, he does not conceal his interest in the
Nabob's cheques, his sympathy for an honest Academician plus bete
que nature, his hate for an architect plus mauvais que la gale; he
is in the thick of it all. He feels with the Duc de Mora and with
Felicia Ruys--and he lets you see it. He does not sit on a pedestal
in the hieratic and imbecile pose of some cheap god whose greatness
consists in being too stupid to care. He cares immensely for his
Nabobs, his kings, his book-keepers, his Colettes, and his Saphos.
He vibrates together with his universe, and with lamentable
simplicity follows M. de Montpavon on that last walk along the
Boulevards.
"Monsieur de Montpavon marche a
la mort," and the creator of that unlucky gentilhomme follows with
stealthy footsteps, with wide eyes, with an impressively pointing
finger. And who wouldn't look? But it is hard; it is sometimes
very hard to forgive him the dotted i's, the pointing finger, this
making plain of obvious mysteries. "Monsieur de Montpavon marche a
la mort," and presently, on the crowded pavement, takes off his hat
with punctilious courtesy to the doctor's wife, who, elegant
and unhappy, is bound on the same pilgrimage. This is too much!
We feel we cannot forgive him such meetings, the constant whisper
of his presence. We feel we cannot, till suddenly the very
naivete of it all touches us with the revealed suggestion of a
truth. Then we see that the man is not false; all this is done in
transparent good faith. The man is not melodramatic; he is only
picturesque. He may not be an artist, but he comes as near the
truth as some of the greatest. His creations are seen; you can look
into their very eyes, and these are as thoughtless as the eyes of
any wise generation that has in its hands the fame of writers. Yes,
they are seen, and the man who is not an artist is seen also
commiserating, indignant, joyous, human and alive in their very
midst. Inevitably they marchent a la mort--and they are very near
the truth of our common destiny: their fate is poignant, it is
intensely interesting, and of not the slightest consequence.
GUY DE MAUPASSANT--1904
To introduce Maupassant to
English readers with apologetic explanations as though his art were
recondite and the tendency of his work immoral would be a
gratuitous impertinence.
Maupassant's conception of his
art is such as one would expect from a practical and resolute mind;
but in the consummate simplicity of his technique it ceases to be
perceptible. This is one of its greatest qualities, and like all
the great virtues it is based primarily on self- denial.
To pronounce a judgment upon the
general tendency of an author is a difficult task. One could not
depend upon reason alone, nor yet trust solely to one's emotions.
Used together, they would in many cases traverse each other,
because emotions have their own unanswerable logic. Our capacity
for emotion is limited, and the field of our intelligence is
restricted. Responsiveness to every feeling, combined with the
penetration of every intellectual subterfuge, would end, not in
judgment, but in universal absolution. Tout comprendre c'est tout
pardonner.
And in this benevolent neutrality
towards the warring errors of human nature all light would go out
from art and from life.