Friendship may be said to require natures so rare and costly, each so
well tempered and so happily adapted, and withal so circumstanced (for
even in that particular, a poet says, love demands that the parties be
altogether paired), that its satisfaction can very seldom be assured.
It cannot subsist in its perfection, say some of those who are learned
in this warm lore of the heart, betwixt more than two. I am not quite
so strict in my terms, perhaps because I have never known so high a
fellowship as others. I please my imagination more with a circle of
godlike men and women variously related to each other and between whom
subsists a lofty intelligence. But I find this law of _one to one_
peremptory for conversation, which is the practice and consummation of
friendship. Do not mix waters too much. The best mix as ill as good and
bad. You shall have very useful and cheering discourse at several times
with two several men, but let all three of you come together and you
shall not have one new and hearty word. Two may talk and one may hear,
but three cannot take part in a conversation of the most sincere and
searching sort. In good company there is never such discourse between
two, across the table, as takes place when you leave them alone. In
good company the individuals merge their egotism into a social soul
exactly co-extensive with the several consciousnesses there present. No
partialities of friend to friend, no fondnesses of brother to sister,
of wife to husband, are there pertinent, but quite otherwise. Only he
may then speak who can sail on the common thought of the party, and not
poorly limited to his own. Now this convention, which good sense
demands, destroys the high freedom of great conversation, which
requires an absolute running of two souls into one.
No two men but being left alone with each other enter into simpler
relations. Yet it is affinity that determines _which_ two shall
converse. Unrelated men give little joy to each other, will never
suspect the latent powers of each. We talk sometimes of a great talent
for conversation, as if it were a permanent property in some
individuals. Conversation is an evanescent relation,—no more. A man is
reputed to have thought and eloquence; he cannot, for all that, say a
word to his cousin or his uncle. They accuse his silence with as much
reason as they would blame the insignificance of a dial in the shade.
In the sun it will mark the hour. Among those who enjoy his thought he
will regain his tongue.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account