American fiction -- 20th century; Chicago (Ill.) -- Fiction; Journalists -- Fiction; Marriage -- Fiction
In this frame of mind, on the final night of the bill, which had managed
to eke out a four weeks’ run, he went to another little supper party,
with Rose-Ann, Clive and Phyllis, and the players, and heard—with
somewhat less sense of being “guyed”—their extravagant praises....
Besides, he knew something that they did not know—not even, as yet,
Rose-Ann: an actor-manager-playwright from New York, who happened to be
in town, had seen “The Dryad,” liked it, and said that it could be made
into a successful three-act play—had, in fact, offered to collaborate
with him upon it! That sounded like the real thing. Perhaps these
praises were not the absurdities they seemed....
That evening Clive was in a difficult mood; he and Phyllis had been
tormenting each other of late to the point of exacerbation. Clive’s
ironies lacked tonight the quality, whatever it was, that made them
agreeable. He managed by some satirical remark to offend Miss Macklin,
to whom he had been paying special attentions. He commenced to drink
recklessly. Phyllis refused contemptuously to speak to him. And then
suddenly he disappeared.
Phyllis came home with Felix and Rose-Ann. At the studio they made
coffee, and talked about the ball and their costumes. At last Felix told
them about the actor-manager and his offer.
“Well,” Phyllis asked, “how does it feel to have everything you want?”
“It feels,” Felix said, “unreal—disturbing. It can’t be true. Do you
remember the story of Polycrates?”
“No,” said Phyllis.
“Herodotus tells about it—and I was thinking about it only today, and I
made up a little rhyme about it. I’ll tell you the story....”
2
Phyllis, sitting on the floor, with her coffee beside her, was looking
up at him with eager eyes, eyes full of pride greater even than
Rose-Ann’s. Rose-Ann was a realist. She knew all this did not amount to
so much. This story was addressed to Phyllis. Rose-Ann, reclining on the
settle, seemed a little outside the circle of its intention, someone
accidentally looking on.
“He was a Persian king—very rich, very powerful, very happy. And there
came to visit him a Greek philosopher. The Persian king asked him, ‘What
is the use of philosophy?’ And the Greek philosopher answered. ‘It
serves to reconcile us to the unhappiness of our lot.’ ‘Then what use is
it to me?’ the king asked. ‘I am not unhappy. I am the happiest of
mortals.’ ‘Yes,’ said the philosopher, ‘you are too happy. You had
better beware!’ ‘Of What?’ asked the king. ‘Of the jealousy of the
gods,’ said the philosopher.
“That sounded reasonable enough to the king. He had nothing to fear from
men; but the gods—they might well be jealous of him. ‘What shall I do to
appease their wrath?’ he asked.
“Take the most precious thing you own, and throw it into the sea!” was
the advice of the philosopher.
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