The writer goes on to speak of the

métier que faisait l'homme en question, prêchant le déisme tout à

découvert aux toilettes de nos jeunes seigneurs ... L'Ancien

Testament, selon lui, n'est qu'un tissu de contes et de fables, les

apôtres étaient de bonnes gens idiots, simples, et crédules, et les

pères de l'Eglise, Saint Bernard surtout, auquel il en veut le

plus, n'étaient que des charlatans et des suborneurs.

'Je voudrais être homme d'authorité,' he adds, 'pour un jour seulement,

afin d'enfermer ce poète entre quatre murailles pour toute sa vie.' That

Voltaire at this early date should have already given rise to such pious

ecclesiastical wishes shows clearly enough that he had little to learn

from the deists of England. And, in the second place, the deists of

England had very little to teach a disciple of Bayle, Fontenelle, and

Montesquieu. They were, almost without exception, a group of second-rate

and insignificant writers whose 'onslaught' upon current beliefs was

only to a faint extent 'systematic and reasoned.' The feeble and

fluctuating rationalism of Toland and Wollaston, the crude and confused

rationalism of Collins, the half-crazy rationalism of Woolston, may each

and all, no doubt, have furnished Voltaire with arguments and

suggestions, but they cannot have seriously influenced his thought.

Bolingbroke was a more important figure, and he was in close personal

relation with Voltaire; but his controversial writings were clumsy and

superficial to an extraordinary degree. As Voltaire himself said, 'in

his works there are many leaves and little fruit; distorted expressions

and periods intolerably long.' Tindal and Middleton were more vigorous;

but their work did not appear until a later period. The masterly and

far-reaching speculations of Hume belong, of course, to a totally

different class.

Apart from politics and metaphysics, there were two directions in which

the _Lettres Philosophiques_ did pioneer work of a highly important

kind: they introduced both Newton and Shakespeare to the French public.

The four letters on Newton show Voltaire at his best--succinct, lucid,

persuasive, and bold. The few paragraphs on Shakespeare, on the other

hand, show him at his worst. Their principal merit is that they mention

his existence--a fact hitherto unknown in France; otherwise they merely

afford a striking example of the singular contradiction in Voltaire's

nature which made him a revolutionary in intellect and kept him a high

Tory in taste. Never was such speculative audacity combined with such

aesthetic timidity; it is as if he had reserved all his superstition for

matters of art. From his account of Shakespeare, it is clear that he had

never dared to open his eyes and frankly look at what he should see

before him. All was 'barbare, dépourvu de bienséances, d'ordre, de

vraisemblance'; in the hurly-burly he was dimly aware of a figured and

elevated style, and of some few 'lueurs étonnantes'; but to the true

significance of Shakespeare's genius he remained utterly blind.

Characteristically enough, Voltaire, at the last moment, did his best to

reinforce his tentative metaphysical observations on 'M. Loke' by

slipping into his book, as it were accidentally, an additional letter,

quite disconnected from the rest of the work, containing reflexions upon

some of the _Pensées_ of Pascal. He no doubt hoped that these

reflexions, into which he had distilled some of his most insidious

venom, might, under cover of the rest, pass unobserved. But all his

subterfuges were useless. It was in vain that he pulled wires and

intrigued with high personages; in vain that he made his way to the aged

Minister, Cardinal Fleury, and attempted, by reading him some choice

extracts on the Quakers, to obtain permission for the publication of his

book. The old Cardinal could not help smiling, though Voltaire had felt

that it would be safer to skip the best parts--'the poor man!' he said

afterwards, 'he didn't realise what he had missed'--but the permission

never came. Voltaire was obliged to have recourse to an illicit

publication; and then the authorities acted with full force. The

_Lettres Philosophiques_ were officially condemned; the book was

declared to be scandalous and 'contraire à la religion, aux bonnes

moeurs, et au respect dû aux puissances,' and it was ordered to be

publicly burned by the executioner. The result was precisely what might

have been expected: the prohibitions and fulminations, so far from

putting a stop to the sale of such exciting matter, sent it up by leaps

and bounds. England suddenly became the fashion; the theories of M. Loke

and Sir Newton began to be discussed; even the plays of 'ce fou de

Shakespeare' began to be read. And, at the same time, the whispered

message of tolerance, of free inquiry, of enlightened curiosity, was

carried over the land. The success of Voltaire's work was complete.

He himself, however, had been obliged to seek refuge from the wrath of

the government in the remote seclusion of Madame du Châtelet's country

house at Cirey. In this retirement he pursued his studies of Newton, and

a few years later produced an exact and brilliant summary of the work of

the great English philosopher. Once more the authorities intervened, and

condemned Voltaire's book. The Newtonian system destroyed that of

Descartes, and Descartes still spoke in France with the voice of

orthodoxy; therefore, of course, the voice of Newton must not be heard.

But, somehow or other, the voice of Newton _was_ heard. The men of

science were converted to the new doctrine; and thus it is not too much

to say that the wonderful advances in the study of mathematics which

took place in France during the later years of the eighteenth century

were the result of the illuminating zeal of Voltaire.

With his work on Newton, Voltaire's direct connexion with English

influences came to an end. For the rest of his life, indeed, he never

lost his interest in England; he was never tired of reading English

books, of being polite to English travellers, and of doing his best, in

the intervals of more serious labours, to destroy the reputation of that

deplorable English buffoon, whom, unfortunately, he himself had been so

foolish as first to introduce to the attention of his countrymen. But it

is curious to notice how, as time went on, the force of Voltaire's

nature inevitably carried him further and further away from the central

standpoints of the English mind. The stimulus which he had received in

England only served to urge him into a path which no Englishman has ever

trod. The movement of English thought in the eighteenth century found

its perfect expression in the profound, sceptical, and yet essentially

conservative, genius of Hume. How different was the attitude of

Voltaire! With what a reckless audacity, what a fierce uncompromising

passion he charged and fought and charged again! He had no time for the

nice discriminations of an elaborate philosophy, and no desire for the

careful balance of the judicial mind; his creed was simple and explicit,

and it also possessed the supreme merit of brevity: 'Écrasez l'infâme!'

was enough for him.

1914.

Books and Characters, French & English · 第 18 / 56 题