Chimney sweeps -- Juvenile fiction; Fairy tales -- England
And therefore it is, that there are dozens and hundreds of things in the
world which we should certainly have said were contrary to nature, if we
did not see them going on under our eyes all day long. If people had
never seen little seeds grow into great plants and trees, of quite
different shape from themselves, and these trees again produce fresh
seeds, to grow into fresh trees, they would have said, "The thing cannot
be; it is contrary to nature." And they would have been quite as right
in saying so, as in saying that most other things cannot be.
[Illustration]
Or suppose again, that you had come a traveller from unknown parts; and
that no human being had ever seen or heard of an elephant. And suppose
that you described him to people, and said, "This is the shape, and
plan, and anatomy of the beast, and of his feet, and of his trunk, and
of his grinders, and of his tusks, though they are not tusks at all, but
two fore teeth run mad; and this is the section of his skull, more like
a mushroom than a reasonable skull of a reasonable or unreasonable
beast; and so forth, and so forth; and though the beast (which I assure
you I have seen and shot) is first cousin to the little hairy coney of
Scripture, second cousin to a pig, and (I suspect) thirteenth or
fourteenth cousin to a rabbit, yet he is the wisest of all beasts, and
can do everything save read, write, and cast accounts." People would
surely have said, "Nonsense; your elephant is contrary to nature," and
have thought you were telling stories--as the French thought of Le
Vaillant when he came back to Paris and said that he had shot a giraffe;
and as the king of the Cannibal Islands thought of the English sailor,
when he said that in his country water turned to marble, and rain fell
as feathers. They would tell you, the more they knew of science, "Your
elephant is an impossible monster, contrary to the laws of comparative
anatomy, as far as yet known." To which you would answer the less, the
more you thought.
[Illustration]
Did not learned men, too, hold, till within the last twenty-five years,
that a flying dragon was an impossible monster? And do we not now know
that there are hundreds of them found fossil up and down the world?
People call them Pterodactyles: but that is only because they are
ashamed to call them flying dragons, after denying so long that flying
dragons could exist.
The truth is, that folks' fancy that such and such things cannot be,
simply because they have not seen them is worth no more than a savage's
fancy that there cannot be such a thing as a locomotive, because he
never saw one running wild in the forest. Wise men know that their
business is to examine what is, and not to settle what is not. They know
that there are elephants; they know that there have been flying dragons;
and the wiser they are, the less inclined they will be to say positively
that there are no water-babies.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account