§ 24. Two years ago, when I was first beginning to work out the subject,
and chatting with one of my keenest-minded friends (Mr. Brett, the
painter of the Val d'Aosta in the Exhibition of 1859), I casually asked
him, "What is vulgarity?" merely to see what he would say, not supposing
it possible to get a sudden answer. He thought for about a minute, then
answered quietly, "It is merely one of the forms of Death." I did not
see the meaning of the reply at the time; but on testing it, found that
it met every phase of the difficulties connected with the inquiry, and
summed the true conclusion. Yet, in order to be complete, it ought to be
made a distinctive as well as conclusive definition; showing _what_
form of death vulgarity is; for death itself is not vulgar, but only
death mingled with life. I cannot, however, construct a short-worded
definition which will include all the minor conditions of bodily
degeneracy; but the term "deathful selfishness" will embrace all the
most fatal and essential forms of mental vulgarity.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] We ought always in pure English to use the term "good breeding"
literally; and to say "good nurture" for what we usually mean by good
breeding. Given the race and make of the animal, you may turn it to
good or bad account; you may spoil your good dog or colt, and make
him as vicious as you choose, or break his back at once by ill-usage;
and you may, on the other hand, make something serviceable and
respectable out of your poor cur or colt if you educate them
carefully; but ill bred they will both of them be to their lives'
end; and the best you will ever be able to say of them is, that they
are useful, and decently behaved ill-bred creatures. An error, which
is associated with the truth, and which makes it always look weak and
disputable, is the confusion of race with name; and the supposition
that the blood of a family must still be good, if its genealogy be
unbroken and its name not lost, though sire and son have been
indulging age after age in habits involving perpetual degeneracy of
race. Of course it is equally an error to suppose that, because a
man's name is common, his blood must be base; since his family may
have been ennobling it by pureness of moral habit for many
generations, and yet may not have got any title, or other sign of
nobleness attached to their names. Nevertheless, the probability is
always in favor of the race which has had acknowledged supremacy, and
in which every motive leads to the endeavor to preserve their true
nobility.
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