essays on paul bourget-第3部分

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


scattered　about　the　world　that　are　mere　superstitions；　frauds　that　have
lived　so　long　that　they　have　the　solid　look　of　facts。　　One　of　them　is　the
dogma　that　the　French　are　the　only　chaste　people　in　the　world。　　Ever
since　I　arrived　in　France　this　last　time　I　have　been　accumulating　doubts
about　that；　and　before　I　leave　this　sunny　land　again　I　will　gather　in　a
few　random　statistics　and　psychologize　the　plausibilities　out　of　it。　　If
people　are　to　come　over　to　America　and　find　fault　with　our　girls　and　our
women；　and　psychologize　every　little　thing　they　do；　and　try　to　teach　them
how　to　behave；　and　how　to　cultivate　themselves　up　to　where　one　cannot
tell　them　from　the　French　model；　I　intend　to　find　out　whether　those
missionaries　are　qualified　or　not。　　A　nation　ought　always　to　examine　into
this　detail　before　engaging　the　teacher　for　good。　　This　last　one　has　let
fall　a　remark　which　renewed　those　doubts　of　mine　when　I　read　it：

　　　　　　　　　　〃In　our　high　Parisian　existence；　for　instance；　we　find　applied
　　　　　　　　　　to　arts　and　luxury；　and　to　debauchery；　all　the　powers　and　all
　　　　　　　　　　the　weaknesses　of　the　French　soul。〃

You　see；　it　amounts　to　a　trade　with　the　French　soul；　a　profession；
a　science；　the　serious　business　of　life；　so　to　speak；　in　our　high
Parisian　existence。　　I　do　not　quite　like　the　look　of　it。　　I　question　if
it　can　be　taught　with　profit　in　our　country；　except；　of　course；　to　those
pathetic；　neglected　minds　that　are　waiting　there　so　yearningly　for　the
education　which　M。　　Bourget　is　going　to　furnish　them　from　the　serene
summits　of　our　high　Parisian　life。

I　spoke　a　moment　ago　of　the　existence　of　some　superstitions　that　have
been　parading　the　world　as　facts　this　long　time。　　For　instance；　consider
the　Dollar。　　The　world　seems　to　think　that　the　love　of　money　is
〃American〃；　and　that　the　mad　desire　to　get　suddenly　rich　is　〃American。〃
I　believe　that　both　of　these　things　are　merely　and　broadly　human；　not
American　monopolies　at　all。　　The　love　of　money　is　natural　to　all　nations；
for　money　is　a　good　and　strong　friend。　　I　think　that　this　love　has
existed　everywhere；　ever　since　the　Bible　called　it　the　root　of　all　evil。

I　think　that　the　reason　why　we　Americans　seem　to　be　so　addicted　to　trying
to　get　rich　suddenly　is　merely　because　the　opportunity　to　make　promising
efforts　in　that　direction　has　offered　itself　to　us　with　a　frequency　out
of　all　proportion　to　the　European　experience。　　For　eighty　years　this
opportunity　has　been　offering　itself　in　one　new　town　or　region　after
another　straight　westward；　step　by　step；　all　the　way　from　the　Atlantic
coast　to　the　Pacific。　　When　a　mechanic　could　buy　ten　town　lots　on
tolerably　long　credit　for　ten　months'　savings　out　of　his　wages；　and
reasonably　expect　to　sell　them　in　a　couple　of　years　for　ten　times　what　he
gave　for　them；　it　was　human　for　him　to　try　the　venture；　and　he　did　it　no
matter　what　his　nationality　was。　　He　would　have　done　it　in　Europe　or
China　if　he　had　had　the　same　chance。

In　the　flush　times　in　the　silver　regions　a　cook　or　any　other　humble
worker　stood　a　very　good　chance　to　get　rich　out　of　a　trifle　of　money
risked　in　a　stock　deal；　and　that　person　promptly　took　that　risk；　no
matter　what　his　or　her　nationality　might　be。　　I　was　there；　and　saw　it。

But　these　opportunities　have　not　been　plenty　in　our　Southern　States；　so
there　you　have　a　prodigious　region　where　the　rush　for　sudden　wealth　is
almost　an　unknown　thingand　has　been；　from　the　beginning。

Europe　has　offered　few　opportunities　for　poor　Tom；　Dick；　and　Harry；　but
when　she　has　offered　one；　there　has　been　no　noticeable　difference　between
European　eagerness　and　American。　　England　saw　this　in　the　wild　days　of
the　Railroad　King；　France　saw　it　in　1720time　of　Law　and　the　Mississippi
Bubble。　　I　am　sure　I　have　never　seen　in　the　gold　and　silver　mines　any
madness；　fury；　frenzy　to　get　suddenly　rich　which　was　even　remotely
comparable　to　that　which　raged　in　France　in　the　Bubble　day。　　If　I　had　a
cyclopaedia　here　I　could　turn　to　that　memorable　case；　and　satisfy　nearly
anybody　that　the　hunger　for　the　sudden　dollar　is　no　more　〃American〃　than
it　is　French。　　And　if　I　could　furnish　an　American　opportunity　to　staid
Germany；　I　think　I　could　wake　her　up　like　a　house　afire。

But　I　must　return　to　the　Generalizations；　Psychologizings；　Deductions。
When　M。　Bourget　is　exploiting　these　arts；　it　is　then　that　he　is
peculiarly　and　particularly　himself。　　His　ways　are　wholly　original　when
he　encounters　a　trait　or　a　custom　which　is　new　to　him。　　Another　person
would　merely　examine　the　find；　verify　it；　estimate　its　value；　and　let　it
go；　but　that　is　not　sufficient　for　M。　Bourget：　he　always　wants　to　know
why　that　thing　exists；　he　wants　to　know　how　it　came　to　happen；　and　he
will　not　let　go　of　it　until　he　has　found　out。　　And　in　every　instance　he
will　find　that　reason　where　no　one　but　himself　would　have　thought　of
looking　for　it。　　He　does　not　seem　to　care　for　a　reason　that　is　not
picturesquely　located；　one　might　almost　say　picturesquely　and　impossibly
located。

He　found　out　that　in　America　men　do　not　try　to　hunt　down　young　married
women。　　At　once；　as　usual；　he　wanted　to　know　why。　　Any　one　could　have
told　him。　　He　could　have　divined　it　by　the　lights　thrown　by　the　novels　of
the　country。　　But　no；　he　preferred　to　find　out　for　himself。　　He　has　a
trustfulness　as　regards　men　and　facts　which　is　fine　and　unusual；　he　is
not　particular　about　the　source　of　a　fact；　he　is　not　particular　about　the
character　and　standing　of　the　fact　itself；　but　when　it　comes　to　pounding
out　the　reason　for　the　existence　of　the　fact；　he　will　trust　no　one　but
himself。

In　the　present　instance　here　was　his　fact：　American　young　married　women
are　not　pursued　by　the　corruptor；　and　here　was　the　question：　　What　is　it
that　protects　her？

It　seems　quite　unlikely　that　that　problem　could　have　offered　difficulties
to　any　but　a　trained　philosopher。　　Nearly　any　person　would　have　said　to
M。　Bourget：　〃Oh；　that　is　very　simple。　　It　is　very　seldom　in　America　that
a　marriage　is　made　on　a　commercial　basis；　our　marriages；　from　the
beginning；　have　been　made　for　love；　and　where　love　is　there　is　no　room
for　the　corruptor。〃

Now；　it　is　interesting　to　see　the　formidable　way　in　which　M。　Bourget　went
at　that　poor；　humble　little　thing。　　He　moved　upon　it　in　columnthree
columnsand　with　artillery。

〃Two　reasons　of　a　very　different　kind　explain〃that　fact。

And　now　that　I　have　got　so　far；　I　am　almost　afraid　to　say　what　his　two
reasons　are；　lest　I　be　charged　with　inventing　them。　　But　I　will　not
retreat　now；　I　will　condense　them　and　print　them；　giving　my　word　that　I
am　honest　and　not　trying　to　deceive　any　one。

1。　　Young　married　women　are　protected　from　the　approaches　of　the　seducer
in　New　England　and　vicinity　by　the　diluted　remains　of　a　prudence　created
by　a　Puritan　law　of　two　hundred　years　ago；　which　for　a　while　punished
adultery　with　death。

2。　　And　young　married　women　of　the　other　forty　or　fifty　States　are
protected　by　laws　which　afford　extraordinary　facilities　for　divorce。

If　I　have　not　lost　my　mind　I　have　accurately　conveyed　those　two　Vesuvian
irruptions　of　philosophy。　　But　the　reader　can　consult　Chapter　IV。　of
'Outre…Mer'；　and　decide　for　himself。　　Let　us　examine　this　paralyzing
Deduction　or　Explanation　by　the　light　of　a　few　sane　facts。

1。　　This　universality　of　〃protection〃　has　existed　in　our　country　from　the
beginning；　before　the　death　penalty　existed　in　New　England；　and　during
all　the　generations　that　have　dragged　by　since　it　was　annulled。

2。　　Extraordinary　facilities　for　divorce　are　of　such　recent　creation　that
any　middle…aged　American　can　remember　a　time　when　such　things　had　not　yet
been　thought　of。

Let　us　suppose　that　the　first　easy　divorce　law　went　into　effect　forty
years　ago；　and　got　noised　around　and　fairly　started　in　business　thirty…
five　years　ago；　when　we　had；　say；　25；000；000　of　white　population。　　Let　us
suppose　that　among　5；000；000　of　them　the　young　married　women　were
〃protected〃　by　the　surviving　shudder　of　that　ancient　Puritan　scarewhat
is　M。　Bourget　going　to　do　about　those　who　lived　among　the　20；000；000？
They　were　clean　in　their　morals；　they　were　pure；　yet　there　was　no　easy
divorce　law　to　protect　them。

Awhile　ago　I　said　that　M。　　Bourget's　method　of　truth…seekinghunting　for
it　in　out…of…the…way　placeswas　new；　but　that　was　an　error。　　I　remember
that　when　Leverrier　discovered　the　Milky　Way；　he　and　the　other
astronomers　began　to　theorize　about　it　in　substantially　the　same　fashion
which　M。　Bourget　employs　in　his　seasonings　about　American　social　facts
and　their　origin。　　Leverrier　advanced　the　hypothesis　that　the　Milky　Way
was　caused　by　gaseous　protoplasmic　emanations　from　the　field　of　Waterloo；
which；　ascending　to　an　altitude　determinable　by　their　own　specific
gravity；　became　luminous　through　the　development　and　exposureby　the
natural　processes　of　animal　decayof　the　phosphorus　contained　in　them。

This　theory　was　warmly　complimented　by　Ptolemy；　who；　however；　after　much
thought　and　research；　decided　that　he　could　not　accept　it　as　final。　　His
own　theory　was　that　the　Milky　Way　was　an　emigration　of　lightning　bugs；
and　he　supported　and　reinforced　this　theorem　by　the　well…known　fact　that
the　locusts　do　like　that　in　Egypt。

Giordano　Bruno　also　was　outspoken　in　his　praises　of　Leverrier's　important
contribution　to　astronomical　science；　and　was　at　first　inclined　to　regard
it　as　conclusive；　but　later；　conceiving　it　to　be　erroneous；　he　pronounced
against　it；　and　advanced　the　hypothesis　that　the　Milky　Way　was　a
detachment　or　corps　of　stars　which　became　arrested　and　held　in　'suspenso
suspensorum'　by　refraction　of　gravitation　while　on　the　march　to　join
their　several　constellations；　a　proposition　for　which　he　was　afterwards
burned　at　the　stake　in　Jacksonville；　Illinois。

These　were　all　brilliant　and　picturesque　theories；　and　each　was　received
with　enthusiasm　by　the　scientific　world；　but　when　a　New　England　farmer；
who　was　not　a　thinker；　but　only　a　plain　sort　of　person　who　tried　to
account　for　large　facts　in　simple　ways；　came　out　with　the　opinion　that
the　Milky　Way　was　just　common；　ordinary　stars；　and　was　put　where　it　was
because　God　〃wanted　to　hev　it　so；〃　the　admirable　idea　fell　perfectly
flat。

As　a