Classic French Course in English

(La Bruyère: 1646 (?)-1696

d's pen. But the "Maxims" are so much more famous than either the "Letters" or the "Memoirs," that their author may be said to be known only by those. If it were not for the "Maxims," the "Letters" and the "Memoirs" would probabl

upy more than the half of a moderate-sized page. The "Maxims," detached, as we have described them, have no very marked logical sequence in the order in which they stand. They all, however, have a profound mutual relation. An unvarying monotone of sentiment, in fact, runs through them. They are so man

sceptical method of Montaigne. His result, too, was much the same result as his master's. But the pupil surpassed the master in the quality of his work. There is a fineness, an exquisiteness, in the literary form of La Rochefoucauld, which Montaigne might indeed have disdained to seek, but which he could never, even with seeking, have attained. Each maxim of La Rochefoucauld is a "gem of purest ray serene," wrought to the last degree of perfection in form with infinite artistic pains. Purity, precision, clearne

ckons of its own, La Rochefoucauld ran a career consistent throughout with his own master-principle, self-love. He had a wife whose conjugal fidelity her husband seems to have thought a sufficient supply in that virtue for both himself and her. He behaved himself accordingly. His illicit relations with other women were notorious. But they unhappily did n

venture to conform more exactly to the sense of the original), we give almost at hazard a few specimens

sometimes produces prodigality, and prodigality avarice:

impatiently the condemnation of

e natural human greatness is containe

oxicated with their good fortune; it is a vain parade of the strength of our mind; and, in short,

quiet satire in

ength enough to bea

parently great of this world. He could not bear that

es is only the art of locking up

as much apparent truth, have pointed out, that to lock up uneasiness in th

aunting itself is thus softly e

r troubles passed and troubles to come

for blaming those brethren as self-seekers, he acted on the sam

ide, we should not comp

to elude the presence of mind, the inexorable ey

sorts of languages, and plays all sorts

so happy, or so unh

is, in most men, only the

the following maxim introduces into

accommodation of interests, and an exchange of good offices: it is, in sh

s of his memory, and no on

ikingness, is the first following, and what a wi

vice, to console themselves for bein

isguise ourselves to others, that, at l

deceived, is to think one'

own lawyer, has a fool for his client," finds

be wise for others, tha

sues his prey, "the human soul, in

speak ill of ourselves, t

Rochefoucauld, recalls that bitter definition of the bore,-"One who insists on t

what is said to him. The cleverest and the most compliant think it enough to show an attentive air; while we see in their eyes and in their mind a wandering from what is said to them, and a hurry to return to what the

it is probably rather because they are part

g flattery, hidden and delicate, which, in different ways, pleases him who gives and him who receives it

se generally onl

ugh to prefer wholesome b

raise is a wish to be

ter ourselves, the flattery

rder to atone, by our sincerity, for th

appear able often pre

, deceives himself much; but whoever thinks the wor

the soldier's business, rightly conceived, is self-sacrifi

s a perilous calling, which they have

ost current of all La R

s a homage which vic

end upon the assumption, implicit, that there is such a thing as virtue,-an

ive the f

ss to requite an obligatio

st men is only a secret desi

ose who bore us, but we cann

lest particulars of what has happened to us, and yet not have eno

and courtiers. It might be entitled, "How to in

or virtues they have not, is

le people, except those who

d of our best actions, if the worl

verse of those we have: when we ar

axim that does not depr

ctions heartily, is in som

is much less

d make a bad bargain, by giving up the good that i

, al

to the truth, in the opinions the

ainly "suppressed" by the aut

best friends, we always find some

illation of ill-natured pleasure in seeing another suffer;" and Burke, after both, wrote (in his "Sublime and Beautiful") with a h

man, he wins upon you less. His maxims are like hard and sharp crystals, p

Bible. They willingly accept it,-nay, accept it complacently, hugging themsel

rary production. Bossuet got him employed to teach history to a great duke, who became his patron, and settled a life-long annuity upon him. He publish

houghts and observations on a variety of subjects. It shows the author to have been a man of deep and wise reflection, but especially a consummate master of style. The book is one to read in, rather than to re

ate, after more than seven thousand years that

at length unusual for him, of pulpit eloqu

s of facial expression, by inflexions of the voice, by regularity of gesticulation, by choice of words, and by long categories. The sacred word is no lon

ak, from the bar,... where it is no longer employ

o condemn or to applaud, and is no more converted by the discourse which he praises than by that which he pronounces against. The orator pleases some, di

an obvious application to certain illustrious contemporary examples amo

enes and Cicero. Both of them, masters of pulpit eloquence, have had the for

a commonplace sentiment by means of a striking form of expression; the

r No, deserves to be believed;

ss the following thrust at a contemporary author, not named by th

gent they may be, have fine traits; he points these out;

usly, La Bruyère did his literary w

a long time in search of without reaching it, and which at length he has found, is that which was the most simpl

rs. He was somewhat over-exquisite. His art at times became artifice-infinite labor of style to make commonplace thought seem valuable by

or of what one experiences in one's self. The one inspires, astonishes, masters, instructs; the other pleases, moves, touches, penetrates. Whatever there is most beautiful, most noble, most imperial, in the reason is made use of by the former; by the latter, whatever is most seductive and most delicate in passion. Yo

he fame of his two predecessors. This writer, during his brief life (he died at thirty-two), produced one not inconsiderable literary work more integral and regular

ruitful to him of hardship, but not of promotion. In spite of all that was thus against him, Vauvenargues, in those years, few and evil, that were his, thought finely and justly enough to earn for himself a lasting place in the literary history of his nation. He was in the eighteenth century of France, without being of it. You have to separate him in thought from the infidels and the "philosophers" of his time. He belongs in spirit to an earlier age. His moral and intellectual kindred was with such as Pascal, far more than with such as Voltaire. Vauven

hings without inspiring them; Racine

a good

mediocrity always to b

rldly wisdo

digalities to good account, prac

se they seem to themselves to

our strength makes

for Vauv