IV.

It was some years before the Boyesen summer, which was the fourth or

fifth of our life in Cambridge, that I made the acquaintance of a man,

very much my senior, who remains one of the vividest personalities in my

recollection. I speak of him in this order perhaps because of an obscure

association with Boyesen through their religious faith, which was also

mine. But Henry James was incommensurably more Swedenborgian than either

of us: he lived and thought and felt Swedenborg with an entirety and

intensity far beyond the mere assent of other men. He did not do this in

any stupidly exclusive way, but in the most luminously inclusive way,

with a constant reference of these vain mundane shadows to the spiritual

realities from which they project. His piety, which sometimes expressed

itself in terms of alarming originality and freedom, was too large for

any ecclesiastical limits, and one may learn from the books which record

it, how absolutely individual his interpretations of Swedenborg were.

Clarifications they cannot be called, and in that other world whose

substantial verity was the inspiration of his life here, the two sages

may by this time have met and agreed to differ as to some points in the

doctrine of the Seer. In such a case, I cannot imagine the apostle

giving way; and I do not say he would be wrong to insist, but I think he

might now be willing to allow that the exegetic pages which sentence by

sentence were so brilliantly suggestive, had sometimes a collective

opacity which the most resolute vision could not penetrate. He put into

this dark wisdom the most brilliant intelligence ever brought to the

service of his mystical faith; he lighted it up with flashes of the

keenest wit and bathed it in the glow of a lambent humor, so that it is

truly wonderful to me how it should remain so unintelligible. But I have

only tried to read certain of his books, and perhaps if I had persisted

in the effort I might have found them all as clear at last as the one

which seems to me the clearest, and is certainly most encouragingly

suggestive: I mean the one called ‘Society the Redeemed Form of Man.’

He had his whole being in his belief; it had not only liberated him from

the bonds of the Calvinistic theology in which his youth was trammelled,

but it had secured him against the conscious ethicism of the prevailing

Unitarian doctrine which supremely worshipped Conduct; and it had colored

his vocabulary to such strange effects that he spoke of moral men with

abhorrence; as more hopelessly lost than sinners. Any one whose sphere

tempted him to recognition of the foibles of others, he called the Devil;

but in spite of his perception of such diabolism, he was rather fond of

yielding to it, for he had a most trenchant tongue. I myself once fell

under his condemnation as the Devil, by having too plainly shared his joy

in his characterization of certain fellow-men; perhaps a group of

Bostonians from whom he had just parted and whose reciprocal pleasure of

themselves he presented in the image of “simmering in their own fat and

putting a nice brown on each other.”

Swedenborg himself he did not spare as a man. He thought that very

likely his life had those lapses in it which some of his followers deny;

and he regarded him on the aesthetical side as essentially commonplace,

and as probably chosen for his prophetic function just because of his

imaginative nullity: his tremendous revelations could be the more

distinctly and unmistakably inscribed upon an intelligence of that sort,

which alone could render again a strictly literal report of them.

As to some other sorts of believers who thought they had a special

apprehension of the truth, he, had no mercy upon them if they betrayed,

however innocently, any self-complacency in their possession. I went one

evening to call upon him with a dear old Shaker elder, who had the

misfortune to say that his people believed themselves to be living the

angelic life. James fastened upon him with the suggestion that according

to Swedenborg the most celestial angels were unconscious of their own

perfection, and that if the Shakers felt they were of angelic condition

they were probably the sport of the hells. I was very glad to get my

poor old friend off alive, and to find that he was not even aware of

being cut asunder: I did not invite him to shake himself.

With spiritualists James had little or no sympathy; he was not so

impatient of them as the Swedenborgians commonly are, and he probably

acknowledged a measure of verity in the spiritistic phenomena; but he

seemed rather incurious concerning them, and he must have regarded them

as superfluities of naughtiness, mostly; as emanations from the hells.

His powerful and penetrating intellect interested itself with all social

and civil facts through his religion. He was essentially religious, but

he was very consciously a citizen, with most decided opinions upon

political questions. My own darkness as to anything like social reform

was then so dense that I cannot now be clear as to his feeling in such

matters, but I have the impression that it was far more radical than I

could understand. He was of a very merciful mind regarding things often

held in pitiless condemnation, but of charity, as it is commonly

understood, he had misgivings. He would never have turned away from him

that asketh; but he spoke with regret of some of his benefactions in the

past, large gifts of money to individuals, which he now thought had done

more harm than good.

I never knew him to judge men by the society scale. He was most human in

his relations with others, and was in correspondence with all sorts of

people seeking light and help; he answered their letters and tried to

instruct them, and no one was so low or weak but he or she could reach

him on his or her own level, though he had his humorous perception of

their foibles and disabilities; and he had that keen sense of the

grotesque which often goes with the kindliest nature. He told of his

dining, early in life, next a fellow-man from Cape Cod at the Astor

House, where such a man could seldom have found himself. When they were

served with meat this neighbor asked if he would mind his putting his fat

on James’s plate: he disliked fat. James said that he considered the

request, and seeing no good reason against it, consented.

He could be cruel with his tongue when he fancied insincerity or

pretence, and then cruelly sorry for the hurt he gave. He was indeed

tremulously sensitive, not only for himself but for others, and would

offer atonement far beyond the measure of the offence he supposed himself

to have given.

At all times he thought originally in words of delightful originality,

which painted a fact with the greatest vividness. Of a person who had a

nervous twitching of the face, and who wished to call up a friend to

them, he said, “He spasmed to the fellow across the room, and introduced

him.” His written style had traits of the same bold adventurousness, but

it was his speech which was most captivating. As I write of him I see

him before me: his white bearded face, with a kindly intensity which at

first glance seemed fierce, the mouth humorously shaping the mustache,

the eyes vague behind the glasses; his sensitive hand gripping the stick

on which he rested his weight to ease it from the artificial limb he

wore.

Literary Friends and Acquaintance; a Personal Retrospect of American Authorship · 第 87 / 126 题