The French did not approve of conversation taking this sentimental and emotional turn. They talked to amuse themselves, for laughter’s sake. To laugh was their chief concern; it was a mark of taste to take everything with a laugh, even affairs of the heart; and any genuineness of sentiment was sure to appear ridiculous, whereas in Italy a false sentiment strove to appear genuine. Moreover, to speak of serious things, to appear in any other character than that of an absolutely useless and incapable man, far above (or below) everything literary, was unfashionable. On the other hand the French appreciated the unexpected, a crispness of phrase, the sword-play of wit, smart retorts.[264] Conversation was a duel. The Frenchmen of that time were inimitable in verve and wit; they had a really unrivalled ease and sprightliness of manner. When the Italians tried to imitate them, they only succeeded in losing their suavity and making themselves look foolish. At the court of Francis I. talking and flirting were subdued to no platonic considerations. If a man was inspired with a good thing, he said it frankly and bluntly and with much gesturing. As La Bruyère observes: “It costs women little to tell what they do not feel; it costs men still less to tell what they do feel”;[265] and the more crudely the latter expressed themselves, the more they were looked upon as right good fellows. A woman of the world would listen to anything, and reply with her “yes” or “no,” without ever taking offence. The more the domination of man asserted itself, the more pronounced this liberty in word and action became, and women came to think that they could employ no better means of getting even with men than to adopt the language of the barrack-room, and make frequent quotations from the grossest books. They made men a present of their garters. Naturally the men were very well pleased, by no means detesting women of so facile a disposition. A German would entertain the young lady next him at table with tomfoolery of the coarsest description, prating, for instance, about heavy drinking, or low-necked dresses, or a woman showing her leg or hunting for fleas: or perhaps, to appear intellectual, he would maintain that evil has no real existence, but is only a human invention. Another would allow fun to be poked at his wife or fiancée. Rabelais and Hütten were the shining lights of this class of talkers. Even Savonarola, in his character of a monk of the people, sometimes went very near the border line; here and there in his sermons there are phrases at which a salted skipper would blush.