XI.

You will say that I have left the main element out of the calculation;

that I have looked at marriage only in respect of its material

combinations, in which light it appears but as a body without the

soul; whereas, in its real wholeness it is penetrated by love which

transforms all common scenes, persons, and duties "into something rich

and strange." But will truth permit one to view it otherwise? Is

marriage, as we see it practically carried out, penetrated with this

vivifying and spiritualizing element? Love, indeed, calls nothing

common or unclean; but, as a matter of homely fact, is there love

enough in ordinary housekeeping to keep it sweet? The first year or

two runs well, but how much living love survives the first olympiad?

How much outlasts a decade? In marriages openly mercenary, we do not

count on finding affection; where they are entered into honestly, are

they followed by different results? If a woman marries for money, or

station, or respectability, she may compass her ends, but if she

marries for love, are not the odds against her? Motive affects her

character, but scarcely her fate. Her love will be wasted on a

thankless heart; she may consider herself fortunate if it be not

trampled under a brutal, or perhaps only a heedless foot. Love in

marriage! Marriage is the grave of love. Look at best for association,

habit, support, tranquillity, freedom from outside compassion, in

marriage, but do not look for love.

On such a topic as this the truth must be felt rather than proved, yet

authority is not wanting. So eminent and trustworthy a man as Paley,

in his Moral and Political Philosophy, having spoken of the necessity

that a man and wife should make mutual concession, adds: "A man and

woman in love with each other do this insensibly; but love is neither

general nor durable; and where that is wanting, no lessons of duty, no

delicacy of sentiment, will go half so far with the generality of

mankind as this one intelligible reflection, that they must each make

the best of their bargain."

This work was published in 1785. We have all studied it at school,

under the guidance of men and women, married and single. Its positions

have been variously, frequently, and sometimes successfully assailed.

But I have never heard a whisper breathed or seen a line written

impugning his statement, that love is neither general nor durable.

This statement is not made under the influence of passion, or to

compass any purpose, but is simply the basis of an argument,--a

general truth, as if he should say that man is endowed with a

conscience.

In that most fascinating of biographies, the "Memoirs of Frederic

Perthes," written by his son, and published in Edinburgh, we have a

very charming picture of home life. Perthes, a man known throughout

Germany, the intimate friend of her most distinguished scholars and

statesmen, is the husband of Caroline, a woman whose character,

indirectly but minutely and impressively portrayed in her husband's

memoirs, seems to be without flaw. Fresh, simple, truthful, sensible,

sympathetic, affectionate, educated, and accomplished, the qualities

of her head and heart alike command something deeper than respect. As

daughter, wife, mother, and woman she is equally admirable. Her

letters to her husband and her children are as full of wisdom as of

love. Everywhere she shines white and clear and pure as the moon, yet

warm, beneficent, and bountiful as the sun. It is only as the wife of

Perthes that we know her; but, magnificent as Perthes unquestionably

was, he pales before the most beautiful, most gracious, most womanly

woman whom he won to his heart and home. No suspicion of her own

exceeding excellence ever seems to have dawned upon her own mind. Her

Perthes was the object of her deep respect and her lasting love. This

fact of itself shows that he must have been a man of extraordinary

conjugal merit. His relations to her must have been of a very rare

delicacy. He must have bestowed an attention and been capable of an

appreciation far beyond the ordinary measure, or such a woman as his

wife could not have written after several years of marriage, "The old

song is every morning new, that, if possible, I love Perthes still

better than the day before." If one may not find satisfaction in the

contemplation of a marriage passed under circumstances so favoring,

where shall he look for satisfaction? Nevertheless, listen to a story

lightly told by her son, the biographer, the learned law-professor of

the world-renowned Bonn,--told as the old prophets are supposed to

have frequently uttered their prophecies, with but the most vague and

imperfect comprehension of what it was that they were saying.

"With her lively fancy, and a heart ever seeking sympathy, she felt it

to be hard that Perthes, laden with cares, business, and interests of

all kinds, could devote so little time to her and the children. 'My

hope becomes every day less that Perthes will be able to make any such

arrangement of his time as will leave a few quiet hours for me and the

children. There is nothing that I can do but to love him, and to bear

him ever in my heart, till it shall please God to bring us together to

some region where we shall no longer need house or housekeeping, and

where there are neither bills to be paid nor books to be kept. Perthes

feels it a heavy trial, but he keeps up his spirits, and for this I

thank God.' To these and kindred feelings which she had long cherished

in her heart Caroline now gave expression in letters which she wrote

to Perthes during his absence. After eighteen years of trial and

vicissitude, her affection for her husband had retained all its

youthful freshness; life and love had not become merely habitual, they

remained fresh and spontaneous as in the bride. She always gave free

utterance to her feelings, in a manner at once unrestrained and

characteristic, and felt deeply when Perthes, as a husband, addressed

her otherwise than he had done as a bridegroom. During Perthes's

detention for some weeks in Leipsic, this state of feeling found

expression on both sides, half in jest and half in earnest. 'You

indeed renounced all sensibility for this year, because of your many

occupations,' wrote Caroline a few days after her husband's departure;

'but I, for my part, when I write to you, cannot do so without deep

feeling; for the thought of you excites all the sensibility of which

my heart is capable. Not a line have I yet received. Tell me, is it

not rather hard that you did not write me from Brunswick? At least I

thought so, and felt very much that your companion G. should have

written to his newly-married wife, and you not to me. It is the first

time you have ever gone on a journey without writing to me from your

first resting-place. I have been reading over your earlier letter to

find satisfaction to myself, in some measure at least, but it has been

a mixed pleasure. Last year, at Blankenese, you promised me many happy

hours of mutual companionship. I have not yet had them; and yet you

owe many such to me,--yes, you do indeed.' Perthes answered: 'You

write, telling me that I have renounced all sensibility for this year.

This is not true, my dearest heart; it is quite otherwise. I think

that, after so many years of mutual interchange of feeling and of

thought, and when people understand each other thoroughly, there is an

end of all those little tendernesses of expression, which represent a

relationship that is still piquant because new. Be content with me,

dear child, we understand each other. I did not write to you from

Brunswick, because we passed through quickly. Moreover, it is not fair

to compare me with my companion, the bridegroom; youth has its

features, and so also has middle age. It would be absurd, indeed, were

I now to be looking by moonlight under the trees and among the clouds

for young maidens, as I did twenty years ago, or were to imagine young

ladies to be angels. Nor would it become _you_ any better if you were

to be dancing a gallopade, or clambering up trees in fits of love

enthusiasm. We should not find fault with our having grown older; only

be satisfied, give God the praise, and exercise patience and

forbearance with me.'"

Can anything be more natural than Caroline's gentle remonstrance? Can

anything be more hopeless than Perthes's shuffling reply? Lonely wife,

languishing for a draught of the olden tenderness, and with nothing to

medicine her weariness but the information that it had all come to an

end; reaching out for a little of the love that was her life, and met

by the assertion that climbing trees was not becoming to a woman of

her age! It is good to know that she replied with spirit, though still

with no diminution of her immeasurable love. "Your last letter is

indeed a strange one. I must again say, that my affection knows

neither youth nor age, and is eternal. I can detect no change, except

that I now _know_ what formerly I only hoped and believed. I never

took you for an angel, nor do I now take you for the reverse; neither

did I ever beguile you by assuming an angel's form or angelic manners.

I never danced the gallopade, or climbed trees, and am now exactly

what I was then, only rather older; and you must take me as I am, my

Perthes;--in one word, love me, and tell me so sometimes, and that is

all I want."

Men, you to whose keeping a woman's heart is intrusted, can you hear

that simple prayer,--"Love me, and tell me so sometimes, and that is

all I want"?

Perthes, shamed out of his worldliness into at least an attempt at

sympathy, replies: "Your answer was just what it ought to have been;

only don't forget that my inward love for you is as eternal as yours

is for me; but I have so many things to think of."

Undoubtedly, after all his evasion, the truth came out at last,--"I

have so many things to think of." It was the best excuse he could

offer, and it is a great pity he had not brought it forward in the

beginning. He had suffered the cares of this world and the

deceitfulness of business to choke his love; but it would have been

far more honorable to himself and far more comfortable to his wife to

confess it frankly, than to affirm his indifference and neglect to be

the natural course of events. A love overgrown with weeds may be

revived, but for a love lost by natural decay there is no

resurrection. "I did not write to you from Brunswick, because we

passed through quickly." Did he pass through any more quickly than his

companion G., who found time to write to his newly-married wife? "We

understand each other thoroughly, and therefore there is an end of all

those little tendernesses of expression"; but there was no end of them

on Caroline's part. Her understanding was not less thorough than his,

yet her love craved expression. "My inward love for you is as eternal

as yours for me"; yet just before he had been pleading his increasing

years as an excuse for his diminishing tenderness, while Caroline's

stanch heart declared, "My affection knows neither youth nor age, and

is eternal. I can detect no change, except that I now _know_ what

formerly I only hoped and believed." Shortly afterwards, while

spending a summer at Wandsbeck for her health, almost daily letters

were exchanged between herself and her husband. "While those of

Perthes were devoted to warnings and entreaties to take care of her

health, (a cheap substitute for affection which Perthes was not alone

in employing,) the few lines in which Caroline was wont to reply were

full of expressions of love, and of sorrow on account of their

necessary separation. 'I am seated in the garden,' she writes, 'and

all my merry little birds are around me. I let the sun shine upon me,

to make me well if he can. God grant it! if it only be so far as to

enable me to discharge my duties to my family.'--'I hope, my dear

Perthes, that you will again have pleasure in me; the waters seem

really to do me good. Come to-morrow, only not too late. My very soul

longs for you.'--'You shall be thanked for the delightful hours that I

enjoyed with you yesterday,' she writes, after a short visit to

Hamburg, 'and for the sight of your dear, kind face, as I got out of

the carriage.'--'I only live where you are with me. Send Matthias to

me, if it does not interfere with his lessons: if I cannot have the

father, I must put up with the son.'--'The children enjoy their

freedom, and are my joy and delight.... But you, dear old father! you,

too, are my joy and delight. Let me have a little letter; I cannot

help longing for one, and will read it, when I get it, ten times

over.'--'It is eighteen years to-day since I wrote you the last letter

before our marriage, and sent you my first request about the little

black cross. I have asked for many things in the eighteen years that

have passed since then, dear Perthes, and what shall I ask to-day? You

can tell, for you know me well, and know that I have never said an

untrue word to you. Only you cannot quite know my indescribable

affection, for it is infinite. Perthes, my heart is full of joy and

sadness,--would that you were here! This day eighteen years ago I did

not long for you more fervently or more ardently than now. I thank God

continually for everything. I am and remain yours in time, and, though

I know not how, for eternity, too! Be in a very good humor, when you

come to-morrow. Affection is certainly the greatest wonder in heaven

or on earth, and the only thing that I can represent to myself as

insatiable throughout eternity.'"

Do these extracts indicate that many years of mutual interchange of

feeling and thought had put an end to little tendernesses of

expression? Does his love seem as eternal as hers? It is true that he

falls back upon "inward" love; but we only know saints in their

bodies. Inward love that denies outward manifestation may satisfy men,

but it will never pass current with women. Little children, who have

been idle during their study-hour, will often excuse their failures by

declaring that they "know, but cannot think." No teacher, however, is

imposed on. A scholar that does not know his lesson well enough to

recite it, does not know it at all. A love that does not, in one way

or another, express itself sufficiently to satisfy the object of its

love, is not love. To satisfy the _object_ of its love, I say, for

love can never satisfy itself. It was not love that Perthes's letter

contained, but an apology for its absence.

What men love is the comforts of the married state, not the person who

provides them,--wifely duties rather than the wife. A man enjoys his

home. He likes the cheery fireside, the dressing-gown and slippers,

the bright tea-urn and the brighter eyes behind it. He likes to see

boys and girls growing up around him, bearing his name and inheriting

his qualities. He likes to have his clothes laid ready to his hand,

stockings in their integrity, buttons firm in their places, meals

pleasant, prompt, yet frugal. He likes a servant such as money cannot

hire;--attentive, affectionate, spontaneous, devoted, and trustworthy.

He likes very much the greatest comfort for the smallest outlay, and

certainly he likes to be loved. His love runs in the current of his

likings, and is speedily indistinguishable from them; but does he love

the woman who is his wife? Would he say to her, as poor Tom sadly

pleaded in "A Half-Life and Half a Life,"--"But I love you true and if

you can only fancy me, I'll work so hard that you'll be able to keep a

hired girl and have all your time for reading and going about the

woods, as you like to do"? Would he say, as Von Fink said to

Lenore,--"You will have no need to make my shirts, and if you don't

like account-keeping, why let it alone"? Listen, for it is good to

know that a man has lived and written who did not look for his

domestic happiness entirely in a bread-pan and a work-basket. "Just as

you are, Lenore,--resolute, bold, a little passionate devil,--just so

will I have you remain. We have been companions in arms, and so we

shall continue to be.... Were you not my heart's desire, were you a

man, I should like to have you for my life's companion; so, Lenore,

you will be to me not only a beloved wife, but a courageous friend,

the confidante of all my plans, my best and truest comrade."

Lenore shook her head; "I ought to be your housewife," sighed she (the

new love not yet having quite purged out the old leaven).

Fink--(but no matter what Fink did. We are concerned now only with

what he said.) "Be content, sweetheart," said he, tenderly, "and make

up your mind to it. We have been together in a fire strong enough to

bring love to maturity, and we know each other thoroughly. Between

ourselves, we shall have many a storm in our house. I am no easy-going

companion, at least for a woman, and you will very soon find that will

of yours again, the loss of which you are now lamenting. Be at rest,

darling, you shall be as headstrong as of yore; you need not distress

yourself on that account; so you may prepare for a few storms, but for

hearty love and merry life as well." Would your latter-day lover sign

such articles of agreement on his marriage-day?

Of course he would not. The shirts and the account-keeping are what he

marries for, and it would be a manifest absurdity to annul the

conclusion of the whole matter. It is not a question what women _like_

to do; they must bake and brew and make and mend, whether they like it

or not. Men do not marry for the purpose of making women happy, but to

make themselves happy. A girl looks forward in her marriage to what

she will do for her husband's happiness. A man, to what he will enjoy

through his wife's ministrations. "He needs a wife," say the good

women who were born and bred in these opinions and do not suspect

their grossness.

"It is a grand good match; I don't know anybody that needs a wife more

than he," said one of these at a little gathering, speaking of a

recent marriage.

"Why?" innocently questioned another woman, who was supposed to have

somewhat peculiar views concerning these things.

"O, you never want anybody to marry!" burst out a chorus of

voices,--which was surely a very broad inference from one narrow

monosyllable.

"But why does he need a wife?" persisted the questioner.

"For sympathy and companionship," triumphantly replied the first

woman, knowing that to such motives her interlocutor could take no

exception. But a third woman, not knowing that anything lay behind

these questions and answers, and feeling that the original position

was but feebly maintained by such unsubstantial things as sympathy and

companionship, being also a near neighbor of the person in question,

and acquainted with the facts, proceeded to strengthen the case by

adding, "Well, he was all alone, and he wa'n't very well, and he was

taken sick one night and couldn't get anybody to take care of him."

"But why not hire a nurse?"

"Well he did, and she was very good; but she wouldn't do his washing."

Only wait long enough, and you are tolerably sure to get the truth at

last. It was not sympathy and companionship, after all, that the man

wanted: it was his washing!

You see a most unconscious, but irrefragable testimony concerning the

relations which are deemed proper between a man and his wife in the

very common use of the phrase, "kind husband." It is often employed in

praise of the living and in eulogy of the dead. Compared with a cruel

husband, I suppose a kind husband is the more tolerable; but compared

with a true husband, there is no such thing as a kind husband. You are

kind to animals, to beggars, to the beetle that you step out of your

path to avoid treading on. One may be kind to people who have no

claims upon him, but he is not kind to his wife. He does not stand

towards her in any relation that makes kindness possible. He can no

more be kind to his wife than he can be to himself. His wife is not

his inferior, to be condescended to, but his treasure to be cherished,

his friend to be loved, his adviser to be deferred to. It is an insult

to a woman for her husband to assume, or for his biographer to assume

for him, that he _could_ be kind to her. Did you ever hear a woman

praised for being kind to her husband? Did you ever hear an obituary

declare a woman to be a dutiful daughter, a kind wife, a faithful

mother? You may be sure the phrase is never used by any one who has a

just idea of what marriage ought to be.

If love cannot outlast a few years of life, it is idle to lament that

it is so surely quenched by death. Absence cannot be blamed for

dissipating a love that has been already conquered by presence.

Nevertheless, in the alacrity with which one is off with the old love

and on with the new may be read the shallowness, the flimsiness, the

earthliness, of that which passes for the deepest, the most lasting,

and the most divine. Weary feet, aching brow, and disappointed heart

are at rest; or a vigorous young life is smitten before its heyday was

clouded; or the ripened sheaf is garnered at the harvest-time; but no

proprieties, no shock of premature loss, nor the "late remorse of

love," avails to make the impression indelible. The dead past may bury

its dead out of sight; the resurrection may adjust its own

perplexities; but in this world there must be good cheer. The funeral

baked meats shall coldly furnish forth the marriage-table. _La Reine

est morte: Vive la Reine!_ And when the loving wife is gone away from

the heart that entertained its angel unawares, people will tell you

with a sober face how "beautifully he bears it!" "perfectly resigned!"

"Christian calmness!" "kiss the rod!" It were to be wished he did not

bear it quite so beautifully. When a wife is prematurely torn from her

home, the only proper attitude for her husband is to sit in sackcloth

and ashes. It is fit that he should be stricken to the dust. It is not

becoming for him to indulge in pious reflections. Ill-timed

resignation is a breach of morals. He is not to be supposed capable of

a lasting fidelity, but he may be expected to be temporarily stunned

by the blow. It would be more decorous for him to follow the example

of the powerful and wealthy king in the fairy-tale, who, having lost

his wife, was so inconsolable that he shut himself up for eight entire

days in a little room, where he spent his time chiefly in knocking his

head against the wall!

It is pitiful to see a strong man tottering into a wrong path from

sheer lack of strength to walk in the right one, which yet he does not

lack clear vision to see. But the spectacle may be profitable for

doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in

righteousness. Perhaps no more faithful and graphic presentation of

the diplomacy that is employed in compassing a second marriage can be

given than is found in the proceedings of Perthes. When, after

twenty-four years of married life, his wife, the mother of his ten

children, left him, he repaired to Gotha and lived three years in the

family of a married daughter. In an early stage of his bereavement he

writes of his loneliness, and mentions, but almost with repugnance,

certainly with no apparent intention of entering it, or any intimation

of a possibility of receiving joy from it, "a new wedlock."

Nevertheless, the thought is there. His daughter's sister-in-law, a

widow of thirty years, and mother of four children, lives next door.

Presently comes down his mother-in-law to pay a visit. "She was much

concerned about Perthes's situation, and one day, while they were

walking in the orangery, expressed herself openly to him. She told him

that he was no more a master of his own house, that soon his younger

children would be leaving him, and that his strong health gave promise

of a long life yet to come; that for him solitude was not good, that

he could not bear it, and consequently that he ought not to put off

choosing a companion for the remainder of his life." All of which of

course came to him with the freshness of entire novelty. But

immediately we find that at these words "the thought of Charlotte shot

like lightning through his soul." So it seems that he had already

outstripped his mother-in-law. She dealt, only in generals, but he had

advanced to particulars. However, "he made no reply, but he had a hard

battle to fight with himself from that time forth. In September he

communicated to his mother-in-law the _pros_ and _cons_ which agitated

him so much, but without giving her to understand that it was no

longer the subject of marriage in general, but of one marriage in

particular, which now disquieted him. After stating the outward and

inward circumstances, which made a second marriage advisable in his

case, he goes on to say: 'I am quite certain that Caroline foresaw,

from her knowledge of my character and temperament, a second marriage

for me, and I am equally certain that no new union could ever disturb

my spirit's abiding union with her. [It is to be hoped that Charlotte

was duly made acquainted with this fact.] My inner life is filled with

her memory, and will be so till my latest day; but I must own that

this is possible only while I incorporate in thought her happy soul,

and think of her as a human being, still sharing my earthly existence,

still taking interest in all I do; and I cannot disguise from myself,

while viewing her under this aspect, that my dear Caroline would

prefer my living on alone, satisfied with her memory. Again, there can

be no doubt that Holy Scripture, although permitting a second

marriage, does so on account of the hardness of our hearts. The civil

law contains no prohibition either, and yet there has always existed a

social prejudice against such a marriage, and youth, whose ideal is

always fresh and fair, and women who are always young in soul, look

with secret disgust upon it. I know, too, that my remaining alone

would be, not only with reference to others, but in itself, the

worthier course; but, on the other hand, I know it would be so in

reality only if this worthiness were not assumed for the purpose of

appearing in a false light to myself, to other men, and perhaps even

before God, or for the purpose of cloaking selfishness under the guise

of fidelity to the departed.' It was not, however, by answering this

question, nor by reflecting upon the lawfulness of second marriages in

general, that Perthes's irresolution was subdued, but by an increasing

attachment to the lady whose character had attracted him."

Very honorable appears Perthes here, in that he argues the case

against himself with fulness and frankness, revealing to himself

without disguise the weakness under which he finally falls, and

conscious all the while that it is a weakness. He does not attempt to

hide the fact that Caroline would have preferred to live alone in his

memory, and he falls back on his only defensible ground,--the hardness

of his heart. Confession is forgiveness. Let him pass on to the new

bride, and the second family of eleven children that will spring up

around them.

But there are men, and women too,--there are always women enough to

echo men's opinions,--who assume that the spirit of the departed will

be delighted in her heavenly abode to know that the husband decides

not to spend his life in solitude. Some women indeed show the last

infirmity of noble minds by _recommending_ their husbands to take a

second wife, although it seems a pity to waste one's last breath in

bestowing advice which is so entirely superfluous. If a man will

marry, let him marry, but let no patient Griselda "gin the hous to

dight" for the "newe lady." If a man will marry, let him marry, but

let him not offer the world an apology for the act. The apology is

itself an accusation; a dishonor to both wives instead of one. He

knows his own motives and emotions. If they are upright and

sufficient, it is no matter what people say about him; he and the

other person immediately concerned should be so self-satisfied as to

be indifferent to outside comment. If they are not upright and

sufficient, attempting to make them appear so is an additional

offence.

I have said on this subject more than I intended. I meant only to

state a fact clearly enough to use it. The rest "whistled itself."

Practically, I do not know that I have any quarrel with any marriage

that is real, whether it come after the first or fiftieth attempt.

Judging from general observation, I should suppose that most people

might marry half a dozen times, and not be completely married then.

If, as Perthes seems to have thought, all this is the natural course

of events, why do you make all womanly honor and happiness converge in

the one focus of marriage, unless like a Mussulman you believe that on

such condition alone can women aspire to immortality? But even then it

would be a hard bargain. Immortality is dearly bought at the price of

immorality. When all other arguments fail, and you would mount to your

sublimest heights of moral elevation, you assure a woman that, no

matter how lofty her life may be, nor how deep her satisfaction may

seem, if she fails of marriage she fails of the highest development,

the deepest experience, the greatest benefit. You tell her that she

misses somewhat which Heaven itself cannot supply. But, on the other

hand, you have previously shown that marriage is but a temporary

arrangement, an entirely mundane affair. Love belongs as completely to

this world as houses and barns,--is in fact rather supplementary to

them,--especially to the house. It is of the body, and not of the

spirit; for the spirit lives forever, but when the body dies, love

dies also. There are no claims beyond the grave. Nay, it does not

reach to the grave. The delight, the spontaneity, the satisfaction,

the keenness, all die out before the person dies. The pulp shrivels,

and only a wrinkled skin of habit remains. But a woman is immortal.

Can a mortal love satisfy an immortal heart? Is it possible that an

undying soul must find its strongest development in a dying love? Does

a creature of the skies incur an irreparable loss, miss an

irreclaimable jewel, suffer an incurable wound, when it loses, or

misses, or suffers _anything_ which is but of the earth earthy? Can

anything finite be indispensable to an infinite life?

Again, if this accession of toil, and this diminution and decay of

perceptible love, and this falling back on inward love, is the natural

course of events, why not say so in the beginning? If inward love be

satisfactory at one time, why not at another, as well before marriage

as after? Why, when a man has once made and received affidavit of

love, should he not be content, and neither proffer nor demand

manifestations? Let men be satisfied with inward love during

courtship, and the honeymoon, if inward love is so all-sufficient. Not

in the least. Men are not one tenth part so capable of inward love as

women,--I mean of an inward love without outward expression. Their

inward love becomes outward love almost as soon as it becomes love at

all. They are ten times more tumultuous, more demonstrative, more

_phenomenal_, than women. They are as impatient as children, and more

unreasonable. They cannot, or they will not, brook delay, suspense,

refusal. Women accept all these drawbacks as a part of the programme,

and with "the endurance that outwearies wrong," while men fiercely, if

vainly, kick against the pricks and talk about _inward love_!

And if the true object of marriage be to help accumulate or frugally

to manage a fortune, to cook dinners, and act as a sewing-machine,

"warranted not to ravel," say that frankly also in the beginning. Tell

women plainly what you want of them. Do not lure them into your

service under false pretences. Do not wait till they are irrevocably

fastened to you, and then lay on them the burdens of labor and take

away the supports of love, and lecture them into acquiescence through

the newspapers. While there is yet left to them a freedom of choice,

make them fully acquainted with the circumstances of the case, that

they may be able to choose intelligently. When one does not expect

much, one is not disappointed at receiving little. One is not chilled

at heart by snow in winter. It is walking over sunny Southern lands,

and finding frosts when you looked for flowers, that freezes the

fountains of life. If you do not overwhelm a woman with your

protestations, if you do not lure her to your heart by presenting

yourself to her and praying her to be to you friend, comrade, and

lover, when what you really want is cook, laundress, and housekeeper,

she will at least know what is before her. But do not swear to her

eternal fidelity, knowing that, as soon as you thoroughly understand

each other, there will be an end of all little tendernesses of

expression. Do not span her with a rainbow, and spread diamond-dust

beneath her feet, knowing all the while that a very little time will

bring for the one but a cold, penetrating rain, and will change the

other into coarse, sharp pebbles that shall bruise her tender feet.

Change the formula of your marriage vows, and instead of promising to

love, honor, and cherish till death you do part, promise to do it only

till you understand her thoroughly, and then to make the best of the

bargain!

If we were forced to believe that these right-hand fallings-off and

left-hand defections were indeed the legitimate workings of the human

heart, the natural history of mankind, then should we be forced to

believe that this world is a stupendous failure, and the sooner it is

burned up the better. We should be forced to believe in the thorough

degradation and destructibility of both mind and matter. For the

essence of value is durability. A soap-bubble is as beautiful as a

pearl and as brilliant as a diamond; for what is called practical

service, for warmth, or shelter, or sustenance, one is quite as good

as another. What makes their different worth is, that the soap-bubble

yields up its lovely life to the first molecule that sails through the

air to solicit it, while the gems outlast a thousand years. But if

life is a soap-bubble, and not a pearl, shall a woman sell all that

she has and buy it? What advantageth the possession of a happiness

which melts in the grasp,--which is satisfactory only for the short

time that it is novel? Who would care to enter a path of roses,

knowing that a few steps will take him into a vast and barren desert,

whence escape is impossible? If this is real life, let us rather pitch

our tents in fairy-land; for then, when the Prince is at last restored

to his true manly form and his rightful throne, and united to the

beautiful, constant Princess, we invariably find, not only that their

happiness was quite inexpressible, but it lasted to the end of their

lives.

If we are to believe such propositions, we might as well call

ourselves infidels, and have done with it. To deny the existence of

love takes away no more hope from humanity than to deny the

immortality of love. It is no worse to take away life from the soul

than to give it a life which is but a protracted death. To make a

distinction between earthly and heavenly love hardly affects the case.

The direction of love is not love. All love is heavenly,--"bright

effluence of bright essence increate." If a man gives himself to the

pursuit of unworthy objects, or to the indulgence of unhallowed

pleasures, a pure name need not be dragged down into the mire that his

error may have a seemly christening. If that is love which fades out

long before its object; if, when its object disappears behind the veil

love rightly returns to earth, then are we of all creatures most

miserable; for we abnegate a future. We thought it had been he which

should have redeemed Israel; but thou shalt return unto the ground,

for out of it wast thou taken. Dust art thou, O love, and unto dust

shalt thou return.

Nay, let us have falsehood rather than truth, if this be truth. But

this cannot be truth. Love sets up his ladder on the earth, but the

top of it reaches unto heaven, and if the eye be clear and the heart

pure, the angels of God shall be seen ascending and descending on it.

The fashion of this world passeth away,

"But love strikes one hour,--LOVE."

Hear a woman's voice mingling now with angels' voices,--the voice of a

woman whose pathway to the skies was a line of light shining still

more and more unto the perfect day.

"I classed, appraising once,

Earth's lamentable sounds: the welladay,

The jarring yea and nay,

The fall of kisses on unanswering clay,

The sobbed farewell, the welcome mournfuller

But all did leaven the air

With a less bitter leaven of sure despair

Than these words,--'I loved ONCE.'

"And who saith, 'I loved ONCE'?

Not angels, whose clear eyes love, love foresee,

Love through eternity,

Who by To Love do apprehend To Be.

Not God, called LOVE, his noble crown-name, casting

A light too broad for blasting!

The great God, changing not from everlasting,

Saith never, 'I loved ONCE.'

"Nor ever the 'Loved ONCE'

Dost THOU say, Victim-Christ, misprised friend!

The cross and curse may rend;

But, having loved, Thou lovest to the end!

It is man's saying,--man's. Too weak to move

One sphered star above,

Man desecrates the eternal God-word Love

With his No More and Once.

* * * * *

"Say never, ye loved ONCE!

God is too near above, the grave below,

And all our moments go

Too quickly past our souls, for saying so.

The mysteries of life and death avenge

Affections light of range:

There comes no change to justify that change,

Whatever comes,--loved ONCE!"

A New Atmosphere · 第 16 / 22 题