Many look forward to a time when these everlasting political questions

will cease to burn so fiercely, when the suppression of State or

Church will no longer be a daily question, and more modest and

practical measures of reform can be taken in hand. A committee of

lawyers has elaborated an important scheme for the reform of our

criminal procedure, long known to be seriously defective. Will there

be an opportunity of bringing it before the Chambers? Even more

interesting is the divorce question, which has found an able,

persevering, and eloquent advocate in M. Naquet. Of all others, this

reform is the most urgent. Those acquainted with family life in France

know the fatal moral consequences arising from judicial separation,

the only resource of ill-assorted couples. Not to speak of the

flagrant injustice which allows the man to separate from his wife on

account of offences she is obliged to tolerate in him, the two, though

separated, remain jointly and severally liable. The woman is obliged,

in a number of instances, such as the marriage of a child confided to

her care, to obtain the husband's authorization, whilst she, on her

part, can drag in the mire the name of her husband which she continues

to bear, or pass off children upon him which are not his. Separation

has all the drawbacks of divorce, besides others peculiar to it, which

divorce remedies. M. Naquet has treated the question from the tribune,

as also in a series of articles published in the _Voltaire_, wherein

he cites a number of heartrending cases in which divorce would be

the only possible remedy, and, finally, in the lectures he has been

holding in all the large towns. His campaign has been crowned with

success, and the law will, it is believed, be passed by the Chambers.

No small credit is due to M. Naquet, for he had to contend with

prejudices of several kinds--the religious prejudices of Catholicism,

which does not admit the power of the civil law to cancel a sacrament

of the Church; the political prejudices of Republican theorists, who

affect to attach a more sacred and indelible character to the civil

consecration of the magistrate than to the religious one of the

priest; the prejudices of immoral and unprincipled men, who form a

numerous class everywhere, who never having felt the restraints of

moral law are not troubled by the misfortunes springing from unhappy

marriages, but, on the contrary, are glad to take advantage of them;

finally, with the prejudices of some serious-minded persons, who are

afraid that in sanctioning divorce the Republic may appear to violate

the respect due to marriage. The last aspect of the question has

been ably supported by a deputy, M. Louis Legrand, in his interesting

study, "Le Mariage;" but M. Naquet finds no difficulty in proving

that marriage is more respected where divorce is possible than where

judicial separation only can be obtained, nor in showing religious men

that the Church has always recognised fourteen cases in which marriage

becomes void, whilst the French law only recognises one, mistaken

identity, which practically never occurs.

We have but to open a French novel, or visit the theatre, to convince

ourselves of the necessity of divorce. Mme. Gréville, in "Lucie Rodey"

(Plon), depicts a young woman reduced by her husband to the most

wretched condition, with no resource but resignation and a pardon

all but dishonourable to her; Mme. Bentzon, in "Georgette" (Lévy),

describes with exquisite delicacy the painful position of a woman who,

separated from her husband, and living on terms the world condemns

with a man of elevated character, is driven in the presence of her

innocent daughter to blush for a position the disgrace of which her

own elevation of sentiment had hitherto veiled from her. Half

the novels in France turn on the domestic misery arising from the

indissolubility of the marriage tie. Hackneyed as the subject is, it

presents so many aspects that new effects can always be derived

from it. Such dramas will ever remain the most touching source the

imagination of the novelist has to draw upon. From the princess to the

peasant, humanity is the same in its affections and sufferings. If you

want to know how the peasant suffers read "Un Coin de Village," by M.

Camille Lemonnier (Lemerre), a picturesque and piquant young writer,

who combines the touching grace of Erckmann-Chatrian with a power of

realistic observation quite his own. If you wish for something more

_recherché_, dealing with the richer and higher classes of society,

M. Gualdi, a young naturalized Italian, French in talent, provides

you with a drama of the most brilliant originality in his "Mariage

Extraordinaire" (Lemerre). A charming but poor girl, Elise, is on the

point of marrying a man she does not love to save her parents from

ruin. She is attached to a young man, Giulio, worthy of her, but poor

also; he has been obliged to expatriate himself, and Elise's mother

makes her believe that her _fiancé_ has forgotten and betrayed her.

The Comte d'Astorre, an elegant and magnificent _viveur_, with a

generous soul under his frivolous exterior, is touched by Elise's

fate; to enable her to escape a hateful marriage he offers her the

shelter of his name and house, promising that he will consider himself

as a friend, not a husband. For a time the compact is kept, but the

Comte d'Astorre ends by falling in love with his wife; the quondam

_viveur_ becomes the timid, trembling, and naïf suitor. Elise ends

by allowing herself to be moved, and when poor Giulio comes back from

India, true to the faith he had sworn, she repulses him, first in

the name of duty, and soon, one is made to feel, in the name of a new

nascent love. This singular and delicate theme is treated by M. Gualdi

with a refinement of touch that indicates the acute psychologist, and

the passionate scene between Giulio and Elise on their meeting again

is really beautiful.

To ascend a step higher in the social hierarchy and learn what a

queen, wounded in her feelings as a woman and a mother, can suffer,

read M. A. Daudet's last novel, "Les Rois en Exil" (Dentu), in which

he continues to work the vein he opened so successfully in "Le Nabab,"

the portraiture of Parisian life, viewed from its most brilliant side

as from that most flecked with impurity, disorder, and adventure. In

the "Nabab," M. Daudet had the advantage of describing the world he

had been most familiar with, since his two chief personages were M. de

Morny, whose secretary he had been for several years, and M. Bravay,

his former friend. But this advantage was also a defect, for no true

novel is possible with very well-known contemporary personages for

the characters; and the "Nabab," marvellous as regards truth and vivid

detail, was poor as regards composition. In "Les Rois en Exil"

we again meet with a number of well-known personages: the King of

Hanover, the Queen of Spain, the Prince of Orange, the Queen of

Naples, Don Carlos. Elysée Méraut, the little prince's tutor, is

said to be the portrait of an excellent youth, by name Thérion, also

entrusted with a prince's education, and who was horrified to find

that he believed more firmly in the principles of legitimacy and

divine right than his pupil's parents. The father of Elysée Méraut,

the old Legitimist peasant who sees his son's future insured because

the Comte de Chambord promises to bear him in mind, is no other than

A. Daudet's own father. But all the real portraits are secondary

characters that form the background of the picture. The leading

personages of the drama, Christian II., the dethroned king of Illyria,

who takes his exile very lightly, and forgets it by wallowing in the

mire of Parisian dissipations; his wife, the noble Fréderique, who

lives but for one thing, the recovery of the throne of her husband and

son, and in that hope endures every affront; their trusty attendants,

the two Rosens; and finally John Lévis, the unscrupulous man of

business, who knows the tariff of all the vices, and with his wife

Séphora, takes advantage of the dissolute weakness of Christian

II.,--all these leading figures, though compounded of traits, if not

real at least profoundly true, are the author's own creation. They

are artistically superior, moreover, to those of the "Nabab," more

complete, more lifelike even, for they are stripped of such traits as

are too personal, secondary, fleeting, contrary to actual reality, and

wear rather the character of types. Types they truly are, this king

and queen, representative of all the grandeur and vileness, the

heroism and cowardice, the noble pride and foolish prejudice, dwelling

in the exiled sovereigns who came to Paris, some to weep for monarchy,

others to hold its carnival, some as to the centre of pleasure,

others to that of political intrigue; and is there not a philosophy,

historical and political, in M. Daudet's novel, in his picture

of Christian II. forced to abdicate his royal pretensions after

sacrificing them to the love of an unworthy woman who has fooled him,

and Fréderique bidding farewell to all the hopes that centred in

her little Zara, forgetting everything besides being a mother, and

devoting all her powers towards rescuing her child from the sickness

that is killing him? It is unfair to M. Daudet to say that he only

possesses the art of painting the _chatoyant_ lights, the picturesque

outside of Parisian life, the dresses, the furniture, and the scenery;

to represent him as merely a skilful manufacturer of _bimbeloterie_.

We may tax him with abuse of description, and that habit of

_reportage_ peculiar to the daily press; and it would be vain to look

in him for the sobriety that enhances the beauty of some immortal

works of art; but such sobriety is incompatible with an art which aims

at painting human life in all its aspects, all its details, all its

colours. Neither Shakspeare, Dickens, nor Balzac is sober. To be

sure M. Daudet is neither a Dickens nor a Balzac, but his delicate

sensibility makes him penetrate far below the outer crust, to the

human ground of the characters, and the life they live is a real one.

On account of this, the first quality of a novelist, one forgives the

brutality and the pretentious passages, an imitation, the one of M.

Zola, the other of M. de Goncourt, and the inequalities of a style

which is, nevertheless, in wonderful harmony with the world he paints.

That which constitutes M. Daudet's great superiority over other

novelists of the realistic school, is that he has no contempt for

humanity, that he always loves it, often pities, and sometimes admires

it. Nothing can be more false, more unpleasant, or, we may venture

to say, more tiresome, than the view taken by a certain would-be

scientific pessimism of humanity, as being nothing but a compound of

vileness, vapidness, and folly. M. Zola is learning it to his cost.

After the immense success of "L'Assommoir," due to the great power of

the painter, as also to the horror inspired by scenes of unparalleled

crudeness, he wished to outdo himself and depict in "Nana" the

lowest depths of Parisian corruption. To make the impression the more

complete, he has not let in a single breath of pure air; or introduced

a single character which was not insipidly stupid and sensual,

enslaved by the lowest appetites, incapable of a single noble thought

or generous sentiment. The effect on the public was weariness rather

than disgust. _Le Voltaire_, which had expected to make its fortune by

bringing out the book in _feuilletons_, was greatly surprised to see

its circulation rapidly fail, actually on account of M. Zola's novel.

We are afraid the same thing will happen with regard to the work

announced by M. Flaubert. This great writer and conscientious

artist is unfortunately persuaded, in spite of his admiration for I.

Tourguéneff (that true painter of humanity, of its virtues as of its

vices), that the novel should confine itself to the portrayal of the

mediocre and uniform mass which makes up the majority of men. Already

in "L'Education Sentimentale" he sought to show the vulgarity and

coarseness that generally conceal themselves under what is called

love; in the novel he is now engaged on he shows us two men brutalized

by the mechanical routine of a bureaucratic career, studying every

human science, and finding in the study merely an occasion for the

better display of their incurable folly. Such mistakes committed

by men of genius cause us the better to appreciate less powerful

certainly, but more human, works, by writers who seek to render life

attractive to us, such as A. Theuriet, for instance, who has just

produced a new novel, "Le Fils Mangars" (Charpentier). M. Theuriet is

one of the few French writers of fiction who, instead of dealing

with the tragedies of guilty passion succeed in shedding a dramatic

interest over the affections and sufferings of pure young hearts.

In this he resembles the English novelists. Innocent love forms the

groundwork of his books, and constitutes their poetry and their charm.

"Le Fils Mangars" is the first of a series of studies entitled "Nos

Enfants," dealing with the various complications arising out of the

disagreement of parents and children. In "Le Fils Mangars" we are

introduced to a father, who has devoted all his efforts towards

amassing a fortune for his son, has to that end made use of dishonest

means, and finds his punishment in the loyalty of the one for whom

he committed the wrong. His son refuses to benefit by the wealth

dishonestly acquired, and falls in love with the daughter of one of

the men his father has ruined. This poignant theme is handled with the

airy and attractive delicacy that characterizes Theuriet's touch.

Were the surly critics to be trusted, we should not be leaving the

domain of fiction in turning to the new volume M. Renan has devoted

to the history of the sources of Christianity, entitled "L'Eglise

Chrétienne" (Lévy). It deals with the definitive constitution of the

Church, at the moment when dogma forms itself by contact with, and

in opposition to, the various heresies, and the organization of

the hierarchy takes place. It is true that M. Renan could, if he so

wished, be a wonderful writer of fiction. With what art he brings on

his personages, how admirably he infuses life into the thousand dry

and scattered fragments collected by erudition, and forms them into a

co-ordinate and complete whole! With what psychological penetration

he enters into the minds of his personages, and makes us familiarly

acquainted with the Roman Cæsars or the Church Fathers! What wealth

of imagination! what witchery of style! At times he is, no doubt, led

away by his imagination; too often the desire to invest old facts with

life and reality leads him to compare, or even assimilate, the present

with the past, and, in his exposition of ancient ideas, to mix them up

with his own, ideas so peculiar to our time and to M. Renan himself,

that the intermixture produces a false impression. It is daring to

ascribe the Fourth Gospel to Cerinthus, and still more so to regard

the letter of the Lyons Church on the martyrdom of Pothin and his

companions as a proof of the Lyonnese being false-minded, and to

connect the fact with the Socialist tendencies of modern Lyons. From

his comparing Hadrian in some respects to Nero, we gather that M.

Renan has yielded to the indulgence he had already testified towards

Nero in his volume on "L'Antechrist," an indulgence grounded on the

artistic tastes, or rather pretensions, of the royal stage-player. But

these blemishes, and occasional breaches of historical truth or good

taste, ought not to blind us to the historical value of a work which,

if it be the work of a great artist, is likewise that of a scholar of

the first order. Numbers of men can pore over texts and critics, but

to revive the past, and introduce into the domain of history, and

make the general public familiar with subjects reserved hitherto to

theologians and critics by profession, is the work of a genius only.

Scholars find much to censure in Michelet's "Histoire de Franceau

moyen Age;" but whatever its inexactitudes, he is the only man who has

succeeded in restoring to life the France of bygone days. And is not

life one of the most important elements of reality? Even an imperfect

acquaintance with a living man enables one to form a truer notion

of the man than the most minute autopsy of a dead body. Moreover,

as regards the past we have not the whole body, but only

scattered fragments; the breath of genius must pass over these dry

bones--restore to them flesh, blood, colour, movement, and voice.

But genius can only do her magic work when the materials that are

to serve for this wonderful transformation have been collected

by erudition. M. Renan would not have been able to construct his

historical monument had not German criticism prepared the way for

him. Erudition occasionally arrives at astonishing results by digging,

either in the earth which has swallowed up the ancient buildings or

in the dust of the archives. Here is an individual who played a very

important part in the fifteenth century in the struggle between France

and England, who, though a stranger and fighting more especially as an

adventurer greedy of spoil, helped to restore France to independence,

who was almost unknown, whose name was not mentioned in any of our

histories. M. I. Quicherat has brought him to life, and "Rodrigue de

Villandrando" (Hachette) will see his name cited in all the histories

of the reign of Charles VII. The book is a model of historical

reconstruction. It is wonderful to see how, with a series of scattered

indications, most of them the very driest of documents, not only the

incidents of a life, but the features of a character, can be pieced

together again.

Such a character as Rodrigue's is not very complicated, it is true.

There are historical personages to penetrate the depths of whose

nature an accumulation of documents and testimony would be necessary.

Such is Napoleon, whom each day throws some new light upon, and on

whom, after his having been magnified beyond all measure, posterity

will, no doubt, be called to pass severe judgment. Never was such

overwhelming testimony pronounced against him as in the "Mémoires de

Madame de Rémusat," the first volume of which is just out. Mme. de

Rémusat was so placed as to be more thoroughly acquainted than any one

with the character of Napoleon. Lady-in-waiting to Josephine, and wife

of one of Napoleon's "Maîtres du palais," she bowed for a long while

to the ascendancy of Napoleon's genius, and the liking he testified

for her was sufficiently strong to awaken, though unjustly, the

momentary jealousy of Josephine. The speaker is not an enemy,

therefore, but an old friend who tries to explain at once her

adherence to the imperial régime and the motives that caused her to

alter her political creed. She is thus in the best state of mind,

according to M. Renan, for judging a great man or a doctrine, that of

having believed and believing no longer. Add to this the sweetness of

mind natural to a woman, and the kind of indulgence peculiar to times

when sudden political changes lead to frequent changes of opinion. All

these considerations only render Mme. de Rémusat's testimony the more

overwhelming for Napoleon, and its value is singularly increased on

its being seen to agree with that which all the sincere witnesses of

the time, Ph. de Ségur, Miot de Mélito, as well as Sismondi, lead us

to infer. The genius of Napoleon is not diminished, and nothing is

more remarkable than the conversations related by Mme. de Rémusat,

wherein he judges everything, literature, politics, and history, with

a haughty originality from the point of view of his own interests and

passions. Some of his sayings relative to the government of men

are worthy of Machiavelli. The reasonings whereby he explains and

justifies the assassination of the Duc d'Enghien would form a splendid

chapter to the "Prince." But from the moral point of view Napoleon

strikes us as the most perfect type of a tyrant. No moral law exists

for him; he does not admit the obligation of any duty; he does not

even recognise those duties of a sovereign, that subordination of

the individual to the interests of the State, which constitute the

greatness of a Cromwell or a Frederick II.; he recognises but one law,

that of his nature, which insists on dominating and being superior to

everything that surrounds him. _Quia nominor Leo_, is his only

rule. Morals always have their revenge on those whose encroaching

personality refuses to recognise laws. Writers or sovereigns, whatever

their genius, relapse into falsehood and extravagance. This was

Napoleon's fate. You are always conscious in him of the _parvenu_

acting a part--the _commediante tragediante_, as Pius VII. put it.

He had fits of goodness, of weakness even, but his human and generous

sides had been crushed by his frightful egoism. He liked to make those

he loved best suffer. He treated his wife and his mistresses with

brutal contempt; he could no longer lament the death of those who

seemed dearest to him. "Je n'ai pas le temps de m'occuper des morts,"

he said to Talleyrand. By the side of this great figure Mme. de

Rémusat has, in her Memoirs, sketched many others--the frivolous,

good, touching, and unfortunate Josephine; the amiable Hortense

Beauharnais, the dry, cold Louis, Napoleon's sisters, jealous, proud,

and immoral; and others--but all pale before the imperial colossus.

Besides M. Daudet's novel, M. Renan's new volume, and the Memoirs of

Mme. de Rémusat, the last three months have witnessed another literary

event of some consequence--the birth of an important Review, which

aims at the position occupied for thirty years past by the _Revue

des Deux Mondes_. The _Nouvelle Revue_ was started and is edited by a

woman, Mme. Edmond Adam, known as a writer under the name of Juliette

Lamber. A new phenomenon this in the literary world, the strangest

feature of it being that Mme. Adam has taken exclusively upon herself

the bulletin of foreign politics. If the task of editing a Review be

arduous for a man, who in the interest of his undertaking must brave

every enmity and quench his individual sympathies, how much more

so for a woman whose staff of contributors is recruited from the

_habitués_ of her _salon_, and who must be constantly tempted to carry

into her official transactions the habits of gracious hospitality

which have made her house one of the most courted political and

literary centres of Paris?

The aim of the _Nouvelle Revue_ also is to be up with the times; it is

inclined to judge an article rather by the fame of the name at the end

of it than by its own intrinsic merit; it will insert the superficial

lucubrations of General Turr or M. Castelar, which but for the

signature are worthless. It gives political questions an importance

hardly appreciated by those who find all their political needs

supplied by the daily press, and look to a Review for literary or

scientific interests. Finally, the chief obstacle in the way of the

_Nouvelle Revue_ is that our best essayists are bound not only by

chains of gratitude and habit, but also by chains of gold, to the

_Revue des Deux Mondes_. Nevertheless there is plenty of room in

our literary world for a new review, so far at least as writers

are concerned. If she makes talent her aim, and not merely opinions

agreeing with her own, Mme. Adam will not want for contributors. To

get readers will be more difficult in a country of routine, where

the _Revue des Deux Mondes_ has become an indispensable item of every

respectable family's household furniture. Until now the _Nouvelle

Revue_ has been successful; the sale has reached from 6000 to 8000

copies per number, and, without having yet published anything very

first-rate, it has been fairly well supplied with pleasant articles.

The recollections of the singer Duprez have hitherto been its greatest

attraction. A novel by Mme. Gréville, and articles by MM. de Bornier,

Bigot, and de Gubernatis also deserve mention.

The Contemporary Review, Volume 36, December 1879 · 第 21 / 22 段