Delphine does not allow herself to be persuaded. Faithful to the

motto of the book, that a woman must bow to public opinion, she even

determines to place another obstacle between herself and Léonce. By the

time his wife dies, Delphine has taken the veil. Once more, though in

another form, we have strong opposition to a vow generally regarded as

sacred. Again it is Henri who is spokesman, but this time he appeals to

Léonce: "Are you able to listen to bold, salutary advice, the following

of which would save you from an abyss of misery? Are you capable of

taking a step which would offend what you have been accustomed all your

life to defer to, public opinion and established custom, but which

would be consonant with morality, reason, and humanity? I was born a

Protestant, and have, I grant, not been brought up in awe of those

insane and barbarous institutions of society which demand of so many

innocent beings the sacrifice of all natural inclinations; but ought

you to have less confidence in my judgment because it is uninfluenced

by prejudice? A proud and high-minded man should only obey the dictates

of universal morality. Of what signification are those duties which are

merely the outcome of accidental circumstances, and depend upon the

caprices of law or the will of a priest? duties that subject a man's

conscience to the judgment of other men, of men, too, who have long

bent their necks under the yoke of the prejudices and self-interest of

their order? The laws of France will release Delphine from the vows

unhappy circumstances have forced from her. Come and live with her upon

our native soil! What is it that keeps you apart? A vow she has made

to God? Believe me, the Supreme Being knows our nature too well ever

to accept irrevocable vows from us. Possibly something in your heart

rebels against profiting by laws which are the outcome of a Revolution

to which you are antagonistic? My friend, this Revolution, which has

unfortunately been soiled by so many violent deeds, will be extolled by

posterity because of the freedom it has bestowed upon France. If it is

followed only by fresh forms of slavery, this period of slavery will be

the most ignominious period in the history of the world; but if freedom

is its result, then happiness, honour, virtue, all that is noble in

humanity, is so inseparably bound up with freedom, that centuries to

come will be lenient in their judgment of the events which prepared the

way for the age of freedom."

Besides attacking to this extent certain definite social institutions,

the book makes protest throughout against the great mass of received

opinions, the prejudices with which most men are clad as it were in a

coat of triple mail, the beliefs which must not even be approached,

because the very ground around them is holy within a circumference of

so and so many square miles. It cannot be too plainly asserted that,

in this particular, _Delphine_ is a more vigorous, remarkable work

than most of the other productions of the Emigrant Literature. For

a nation has a literature in order that its horizon may be widened

and its theories of life confronted with life. In his early youth

society offers the individual an extraordinary, patched-together suit

of prejudices which it expects him to wear. "Am I really obliged,"

asks the man, "to wear this tattered cloak? Can I not dispense with

these old rags? Is it absolutely necessary for me either to blacken

my face or hide it under this sheep's mask? Am I compelled to swear

that Polichinelle has no hump, to believe that Pierrot is an eminently

honourable, and Harlequin a particularly serious man? May I not look

up into any of their faces, or write on any hand, 'I know you, fair

mask!'? Is there no help?" There is no help, unless you are prepared to

be beaten by Polichinelle, kicked by Pierrot, and whacked by Harlequin.

But literature is, or should be, the territory where officialism

ceases, established customs are disregarded, masks are torn off, and

that terrible thing, the truth, is told.

_Delphine_ met with much disapprobation. The most famous critic of the

day wrote: "One cannot conceive more dangerous and immoral doctrines

than those which are disseminated by this book. The authoress would

seem to have forgotten the ideas with which she, as Necker's daughter,

was brought up. Regardless of the Protestant faith of her family, she

expresses her contempt for revealed religion; and in this pernicious

book, which, it must be confessed, is written with no small ability,

she presents us with a long vindication of divorce. Delphine speaks

of love like a Bacchante, of God like a Quakeress, of death like a

grenadier, and of morality like a sophist." High-sounding words these,

but just the high-sounding words which the future must always listen

to from the toothless past, whose heavy artillery is charged to the

muzzle with the wet powder of orthodox belief and the paper balls of

narrow-mindedness.

Whereas Mme. de Staël's contemporaries lavishly praised the style

of the book and the literary ability of its authoress, in order to

be the better able to reprobate her views of life and her aims, the

modern critic has little to say for the loose and diffuse style which

the novel has in common with almost all others written in the form of

letters; but, as regards the ideas of the book, they hold good to-day;

they have actually not yet penetrated into all the countries of Europe,

although the present century has striven to realise them ever more and

more fully.

The breach between society and the individual depicted in _Delphine_

is entirely in the spirit of the Emigrant Literature. The same bold

revolt followed by the same despair in view of the uselessness of the

struggle, is to be found throughout the whole group of writings. In

the present case the revolt is a spirited, desperate attempt to hold

fast one of the gains of the Revolution at the moment when it is being

wrested away by the reaction. The despair is due to the sorrowful

feeling that no remonstrance will avail, that the retrograde movement

must run its course, must exceed all reasonable limits, before a better

condition of things can be looked for. Was a woman's novel likely to

prevail against an autocrat's compact with a Pope!

The "war with society" which she depicts is less a conflict with the

state or the law than with the jumble of conventions and beliefs, old

and new, artificial and natural, reasonable and unreasonable, hurtful

and beneficial, which, fused together into a cohesive and apparently

homogeneous mass, constitute the stuff whereof public opinion is made.

Just as the so-called sound common sense, which is always ready to set

itself in opposition to any new philosophy, is at any given time to a

great extent simply the congealed remains of a philosophy of earlier

date, so the rules of society and the verdicts pronounced by society in

accordance with these rules, verdicts always unfavourable in the case

of new ideas, are to a great extent founded upon ideas which in their

day had a hard struggle to assert themselves in face of the opposition

of the then prevailing public opinion. That which was once an original,

living idea, stiffens in time into the corpse of an idea. Social laws

are universal laws, the same for all, and, like everything that is

universal, they in numberless cases victimise. No matter how singular

the individual may be, he is treated like every one else. The genius

is in much the position of the clever head-boy in a stupid class; he

has to listen to the same old lessons over and over again because of

the dunces who have not learned them and yet must learn them. The

verdict of society is an irresponsible verdict; while the judgments of

the individual, as such, must always to a certain extent be a natural

product, those of society are in most cases a manufactured article,

provided wholesale by those whose business it is to concoct public

opinion; and no responsibility is felt by the individual in giving his

adherence to them. The natural course would be for the individual to

form his own views and principles, make his own rules of conduct, and,

according to his powers, search for the truth with his own brains; but

instead of this, in modern society the individual finds a ready-made

religion, a different one in each country, the religion of his parents,

with which he is inoculated long before he is capable of religious

thought or feeling. The result is that his religion-producing powers

are nipped in the bud, or if they are not, then woe be to him! His

essays are a gauntlet flung in the face of society. And in the same way

all originality of moral feeling is, in the majority of men, crushed

or checked by the ready-made moral code of society and ready-made

public opinion. The verdicts of society, which are the outcome of all

the pious and moral doctrines accepted by it on trust, are necessarily

untrustworthy, often extremely narrow-minded, not infrequently cruel.

It was Mme. de Staël's lot to be brought face to face with more

prejudices than the generality of authors are. She was a Protestant in

a Catholic country, and in sympathy with Catholics although brought

up in a Protestant family. In France she was the daughter of a Swiss

citizen, and in Switzerland she felt herself a Parisian. As a woman

of intellect and strong passions, she was predestined to collision

with public opinion, as the authoress, the woman of genius, to war,

offensive and defensive, with a social order which relegates woman to

the sphere of private life. But that she saw through the prejudices by

which she was surrounded, more clearly than did any other contemporary

writer, was principally due to the fact that, as a political refugee,

she was obliged to travel in one foreign country after another; this

gave her ever-active, inquiring mind the opportunity of comparing the

spirit and the ideals of one people with those of another.

[1] Friedrich Kapp: "Justus Erich Bollmann."

[2] _De la Littérature_, p. 257. Paris, 1820.

[3] _Dix Années d'Exil_, 1820, p. 84.

IX

EXILE

When the edict banishing Mme. de Staël from Paris was made known to

her, she inquired through Joseph Bonaparte, who was among the number

of her friends, whether she would be permitted to travel in Germany or

would be brought back from there. After some delay a passport was sent

her, and she set out for Weimar. There she made the acquaintance of the

ducal family, had long conversations with Schiller on the reciprocal

relations of French and German literature, and pestered Goethe with

questions upon every subject in heaven and earth. The eager discussion

of problematical questions was, he says, her special passion. But

what surprised both Goethe and the other German celebrities most was,

that she not only wished to make their acquaintance, but to influence

affairs generally; she always talked as if the moment for action had

come, and they must all be up and doing. She went on from Weimar to

Berlin, made acquaintance with Prince Louis Ferdinand, was taken up by

the Fichte, Jacobi, and Henriette Herz circles, and carried off A. W.

Schlegel as tutor to her children.

The following year she travelled in Italy, studied its ancient

monuments, its art, the southern manners and customs of its people, and

absorbed impressions of Italian nature at every pore. Then she returned

to Coppet and wrote _Corinne, ou l'Italie_.

Her longing for France, however, gave her no peace. She had been

forbidden to come within forty leagues of Paris, but she took up

her abode just outside that limit, first at Auxerre, then at Rouen.

(The prefect of this latter town was suspended for having shown her

some courteous attention.) She eventually received permission to

superintend the publishing of _Corinne_ from a country house only

twelve leagues from Paris. But the book was barely published before

a new edict banished her from France altogether. _Corinne_ was a

grand success, and Napoleon could not endure any success in which

he had no share. Mme. de Staël returned to Coppet, and, like the

Emperor, continued to extend her realm. It grew as her emotional

nature expanded, her intellectual grasp widened, and the number of her

friendships increased. She held a regular court at Coppet. Remarkable

men from all parts of Europe gathered round her there. In her house

were to be met statesmen like Constant--whom in her infatuation she

calls the cleverest man in the world--historians like Sismondi, poets

like Zacharias Werner and Oehlenschläger, German princes, Polish

princes and princesses, the flower of the aristocracy of birth and of

intellect. Since her visit to Germany she had steadily continued to

study the German language and literature, but she found that it would

be necessary for her to make another sojourn in that country if she

desired to present to her countrymen a complete picture of the new

world which had revealed itself to her. She had been in North Germany,

now she spent a year in Vienna, and upon her return to Switzerland set

to work upon her great three-volume book, _De l'Allemagne_. It was

completed in 1810. The next thing was to get it published in Paris.

A law had been passed which forbade the publication of any book until

it had been approved of by the Censors; on this followed another

regulation, specially aimed at Mme. de Staël, which gave the Chief of

the Police authority to suppress a book if he saw fit, even though it

had been published with the approval of the Censors. This was a law

which did away with all law. Having again received permission to take

up her abode at a distance of forty leagues from Paris to superintend

the publication of her book, Mme. de Staël went to Blois, lived first

at the château of Chaumont-sur-Loire, then at Fossé, and afterwards

at the country-houses of friends in the neighbourhood; she fluttered

round her beloved Paris at the required distance, as a moth flutters

round a candle. Once she even ventured into the capital. Meanwhile the

Censors examined her book, corrected, deleted, and gave the mangled

remains their _imprimatur_. Ten thousand copies were printed. But on

the day on which they were to be issued, the Chief of the Police sent

his gendarmes into the publisher's shop, after placing a sentinel at

every exit, and, by order of the Government, performed the heroic feat

of hacking the ten thousand copies to pieces. The mass was kneaded into

a dough, and the publisher received twenty louis d'or in compensation.

Mme. de Staël was at the same time ordered to deliver up her manuscript

(representing the labours and hopes of six years) and to leave France

in the course of twenty-four hours. In the letter which she received

from the Chief of the Police on this occasion occur the following

sentences: "You are not to seek the reason of the command I have

communicated to you in your omission of all reference to the Emperor in

your last work; that would be a mistake; no place could be found for

him in it that would be worthy of him: your banishment is the natural

consequence of the course you have persistently pursued for some years

past. It appears to me that the air of this country does not suit you;

as for us, we are, fortunately, not yet reduced to seeking models

amongst the people you so much admire. Your last work is not French."

That was what doomed her--it was _not French_. And to think that it

was the epoch-making book, _De l'Allemagne_, epoch-making in French

literature, because, not accidentally but on principle, it broke

with all antiquated literary traditions and indicated new sources of

life--to think that it was this book which the spiritual policeman

of the nation presumed to condemn as _not French_! And the cruelly

ironical attempt to assume a tone of gallantry! "It appears to me that

the air of this country does not suit you "--therefore be kind enough

to betake yourself elsewhere! We seem to hear the intoxicated vanity

of France itself speak: "Because you have ventured to love liberty

even now, when the rest of us are happy under tyranny; because, whilst

we have been sunning ourselves in the beams of Napoleon's glory, you

have dared to depict in Corinne the sovereign independence of genius,

and, yourself banished from Paris, have crowned your ideal at the

Capitol; because, at the moment when the eagles of France are shining

resplendent with the glory of a thousand victories, and foreign nations

have become our lieges, you, a weak woman, have had the audacity to

represent to us our sources of spiritual life as almost dried up,

and to point us to the despised Germany as a land whose poetry far

outshines our own, to hated England, perfidious Albion, as a country

whose love of liberty is more persistent and genuine than ours, and

to dying Italy, the subjugated province of France, as a country whose

simple manners and customs and vast superiority in art are worthy of

imitation--because of all these things, you shall be stigmatised as

unpatriotic, the cockade of your country shall be torn from your brow,

your books shall be destroyed, even your manuscripts shall be torn into

fragments, and you yourself, with a couple of spies at your heels,

shall be chased like a wild animal across the frontier of France before

twenty-four hours have passed."

The Prefect of the department was sent to demand the manuscript of

the book; Mme. de Staël succeeded in saving it by giving him a rough

copy. But anxiety about her book was for the moment the least of

her anxieties. She had hoped to cross to England, but, expressly to

prevent this, the Chief of the Police had added a postscript to his

letter, forbidding her to embark at any northern port. She was half

inclined to sail in a French ship bound for America, on the chance of

the ship being captured by the English, but abandoned this plan as too

adventurous. Despondent and sorrowful, she retired once more to Coppet.

Here fresh persecutions of every description awaited her. The Prefect

of Geneva, on the strength of the first order he received, gave her

two sons to understand that they also were forbidden ever to return to

France, and this merely because they had made a fruitless attempt to

obtain an audience of Napoleon on behalf of their mother. A few days

later Mme. de Staël received a letter from the Prefect, in which he,

in the name of the Chief of the Police, demanded the proof-sheets of

her book on Germany. It had been ascertained by means of spies that

the proofs must be in existence, and the French Government had no

intention of resting contented with half measures, with the destruction

of the printed book; the work was to be completely annihilated, any

future edition of it made impossible. The authoress replied that the

proofs had already been sent abroad, but that she would willingly

promise never again to print any of her works on the Continent of

Europe. "There was no great merit in such a promise," she remarks in

her _Dix Années d'Exil_, "for of course no Continental government would

have sanctioned the publication of a book which had been interdicted

by Napoleon." Not long after this, the Prefect of Geneva, Barante,

the father of the historian, was banished for having shown too great

leniency towards Mme. de Staël. Her son falling ill, Mme. de Staël

accompanied him by the advice of the doctors to the baths of Aix in

Savoy, some twenty leagues from Coppet. Scarcely had she arrived

there when she received, by special messenger, an intimation from

the Prefect of the Department of Mont Blanc that she was not only

forbidden to leave Switzerland on any pretext whatever, but even to

travel in Switzerland itself; two leagues from Coppet was indicated

as the distance beyond which she might not go. Not satisfied with

transforming her sojourn upon her own estate into an imprisonment, the

Government took care that she should suffer not only from the loss of

freedom, but from that special curse of prison life, solitude--doubly

painful to one of her peculiarly social disposition. Schlegel, who

had lived in her house as tutor to her children for eight years, was

ordered to leave, on the foolish pretext that he influenced her against

France. To the inquiry how he did this, the answer was returned, that

in the comparison which he, as literary critic, had instituted between

Racine's Phèdre and the Phædra of Euripides, he had pronounced himself

in favour of the latter. Montmorency was exiled for having spent a few

days at Coppet, and Mme. Récamier, whom Mme. de Staël had not time to

warn of the punishment attending even a brief visit, was forbidden

to return to France, because on her way through Switzerland she had

gone to cheer her old friend with a little conversation. Even a man

of seventy-eight, St.-Priest, an old ministerial colleague of her

father's, was exiled for having paid a polite call at Coppet.

The isolation which is the lot of those who set themselves in

opposition to despotic power was not new to her. For long no man

of rank or fame, no politician who wished to stand well with the

Government, had dared to visit her at Coppet. They were all prevented

by business or illness. "Ah!" she said once, "how weary I am of all

this cowardice which calls itself consumption!" But now, to the pain

of seeing herself abandoned by so many former friends was added that

of seeing her real friends punished with exile for the slightest

expression of good-will towards her. She complained that she spread

misfortune round her like an infectious disease.

It stood in her power even now, after years of exile, persecution, and

practical imprisonment, to obtain liberty, and permission once more

to write and publish; it was privately intimated to her that a slight

change of opinion or attitude would procure her the right to return

to France; but she would not purchase liberty at this price. And when

it was said to her later in more definite terms: "Speak or write one

little word about the King of Rome, and all the capitals of Europe will

be open to you;" all she replied was: "I wish him a good nurse."

Isolated and closely confined, she came to the decision to make a

determined attempt to escape from Coppet. It was her desire to go to

America, but that was impossible without a passport, and how was she

to procure one? She feared, besides, that she might be arrested on her

way to the port she must sail from, on the pretext that she intended to

go to England, which was forbidden her under penalty of imprisonment.

And she was well aware that when the first scandal had blown over,

there would be nothing to prevent the Government quietly leaving her

in prison; she would soon be completely forgotten. She contemplated

the possibility of reaching Sweden by way of Russia, the whole of

North Germany being under the control of the French. She believed she

could manage to escape through the Tyrol without being delivered up by

Austria, but a passport to Russia must be procured from St. Petersburg,

and she feared that if she wrote for this from Coppet, she might be

denounced to the French Ambassador; she must get to Vienna first and

write from there. For six months she pored over the map of Europe,

studying it to find a way of escape as eagerly as Napoleon studied it

to find the paths by which he was to proceed on his conquest of the

world. When, after a month's delay, a last petition for a passport

to America was refused (although Mme. de Staël had pledged herself,

if it were granted, to publish nothing there), the weak, brave woman

determined upon a decisive attempt to escape. One day in 1812, she and

her daughter drove away from Coppet, with their fans in their hands,

and not a single box or package in the carriage. They arrived safely

at Vienna, and wrote to St. Petersburg for Russian passports. But the

Austrian Government was so anxious to avoid complications with France

that Mme. de Staël was detained upon the frontier of Galicia, and

was followed by spies through the whole of Austrian Poland. When she

stopped on her journey to spend a single day at Prince Lubomirski's,

the Prince was obliged to give an Austrian detective a seat at his

table, and it was only by threats that Mme. de Staël's son prevented

the man taking up his position at night in her bedroom. Not till she

had passed the Russian frontier did she breathe freely again. But

the feeling of freedom did not last long, for she had barely reached

Moscow before rumours that the French army was approaching the city

compelled her to take flight again, and it was not until she reached

St. Petersburg that she could consider herself in safety.

The year before her flight from Coppet, Mme. de Staël, then forty-five

years of age, had been privately married to a young French officer of

twenty-three, Albert de Rocca, who had been severely wounded, and had

come to Switzerland a complete invalid, exhausted by loss of blood. The

sympathy which Mme. de Staël showed him roused a passionate devotion

in the young soldier, and this led to a secret union. Rocca joined Mme.

de Staël upon the Russian frontier.

Main Currents in Nineteenth Century Literature - 1. The Emigrant Literature · 第 9 / 17 段