FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235  
236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   >>   >|  
u would scarcely expect to meet with it. One little descriptive anecdote will illustrate what I mean. Having been invited to a stag-hunt in the Cote d'Or, I sat down to _dejeuner_ with the sportsmen in a good country-house or chateau (it was an old place with four towers), and in the midst of the meal in came a man smoking a cigar. After a bow to the ladies he declined to eat anything, and took a chair a little apart, but just opposite me. He resumed his hat and went on smoking with a _sans-gene_ that rather surprised me under the circumstances. He put one arm on the side-board: the hand hung down, and I perceived that it was dirty (so was the shirt), and that the nails had edges of ebony. On his chin there was a black stubble of two days' growth. He talked very loudly, and his dress and manners were exactly those of a bagman just arrived at his inn. Who and what could the man be? I learned afterwards that he had begun life as a distinguished pupil of the _Ecole Polytechnique_, that since then he had distinguished himself as an officer of artillery and had won the Legion of Honor on the field of battle, that he belonged to one of the principal families in the neighborhood, and had nearly 2000_l._ a year from landed property. Now, it may be a good thing for the roughs at the bottom of the social scale to level up to the bagman-ideal, but it does seem rather a pity (does it not?) that a born gentleman of more than common bravery and ability should level _down_ to it. And it is here that lies the principle objection to democracy from the point of view of culture, that its notion of life and manners is a uniform notion, not admitting much variety of classes, and not allowing the high development of graceful and accomplished humanity in any class which an aristocracy does at least encourage in one class, though it may be numerically a small class. I have not forgotten what Saint-Simon and La Bruyere have testified about the ignorance of the old noblesse. Saint-Simon said that they were fit for nothing but fighting, and only qualified for promotion even in the army by seniority; that the rest of their time was passed in "the most deadly uselessness, the consequence of their indolence and distaste for all instruction." I am sure that my modern artillery captain, notwithstanding his bad manners, _knew_ more than any of his forefathers; but where was his "perfect knighthood?" And we easily forget "how much talent runs into mann
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235  
236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

manners

 

notion

 
smoking
 

bagman

 

artillery

 

distinguished

 

uniform

 

classes

 

graceful

 

accomplished


humanity

 
development
 
variety
 

allowing

 
admitting
 
gentleman
 

common

 

bottom

 

social

 

bravery


ability

 

democracy

 

culture

 

objection

 

principle

 

roughs

 

modern

 

notwithstanding

 

captain

 
instruction

uselessness

 

deadly

 
consequence
 

indolence

 

distaste

 
talent
 

forget

 
easily
 

forefathers

 
perfect

knighthood

 

passed

 

Bruyere

 
testified
 

ignorance

 

noblesse

 
forgotten
 

aristocracy

 

encourage

 
numerically