Autobiographical fiction; France -- Social life and customs -- Fiction
I ceased to take part in the conversation when it turned upon the
theatre, for on that topic Rachel was too malicious for my liking. She
did, it was true, take up in a tone of commiseration—against Saint-Loup,
which proved that he was accustomed to hearing Rachel attack her—the
defence of Berma, saying: “Oh, no, she’s a wonderful person, really. Of
course, the things she does no longer appeal to us, they don’t
correspond quite to what we are looking for, but one must think of her
at the period to which she belongs; we owe her a great deal. She has
done good work, you know. And besides she’s such a fine woman, she has
such a good heart; naturally she doesn’t care about the things that
interest us, but she has had in her time, with a rather impressive face,
a charming quality of mind.” (Our fingers, by the way, do not play the
same accompaniment to all our aesthetic judgments. If it is a picture
that is under discussion, to shew that it is a fine work with plenty of
paint, it is enough to stick out one’s thumb. But the “charming quality
of mind” is more exacting. It requires two fingers, or rather two
finger-nails, as though one were trying to flick off a particle of
dust.) But, with this single exception, Saint-Loup’s mistress referred
to the best-known actresses in a tone of ironical superiority which
annoyed me because I believed—quite mistakenly, as it happened—that it
was she who was inferior to them. She was clearly aware that I must
regard her as an indifferent actress, and on the other hand have a great
regard for those she despised. But she shewed no resentment, because
there is in all great talent while it is still, as hers was then,
unrecognised, however sure it may be of itself, a vein of humility, and
because we make the consideration that we expect from others
proportionate not to our latent powers but to the position to which we
have attained. (I was, an hour or so later, at the theatre, to see
Saint-Loup’s mistress shew great deference towards those very artists
against whom she was now bringing so harsh a judgment to bear.) And so,
in however little doubt my silence may have left her, she insisted
nevertheless on our dining together that evening, assuring me that never
had anyone’s conversation delighted her so much as mine. If we were not
yet in the theatre, to which we were to go after luncheon, we had the
sense of being in a green-room hung with portraits of old members of the
company, so markedly were the waiters’ faces those which, one thought,
had perished with a whole generation of obscure actors of the
Palais-Royal; they had a look, also, of Academicians; stopping before a
side table one of them was examining a dish of pears with the expression
of detached curiosity that M. de Jussieu might have worn. Others, on
either side of him, were casting about the room that gaze instinct with
curiosity and coldness which Members of the Institute, who have arrived
early, throw at the public, while they exchange a few murmured words
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