Generally speaking, I neither understand old books very well, nor do I
care for them--I have been able to read only Shakespeare, and perhaps
one or two others, with the interest with which I approach modern
writers.
It has sometimes seemed to me that the unreadableness of the older
authors might be made the foundation of a philosophic system. Yet I
have met with some surprises.
One was that I enjoyed the _Odyssey_.
"Am I a hypocrite?" I asked myself.
I do not find old painters to be as incompatible as old authors. On the
contrary, my experience has been that they are the reverse. I greatly
prefer a canvas by Botticelli, Mantegna, El Greco or Velázquez to a
modern picture.
The only famous painter of the past for whom I have entertained an
antipathy, is Raphael; yet, when I was in Rome and saw the frescos in
the Vatican, I was obliged again to ask myself if my attitude was a
pose, because they struck me frankly as admirable.
I do not pretend to taste, but I am sincere; nor do I endeavour to be
consistent. Consistency does not interest me.
The only consistency possible is a consistency which comes from without,
which proceeds from fear of public opinion, and anything of this sort
appears to me to be contemptible.
Not to change because of what others may think, is one of the most
abject forms of slavery.
Let us change all we can. My ideal is continual change--change of life,
change of home, of food, and even of skin.