in the mouth of Lorenzo who disdained neither stratagems nor spoils,
and who carried off the Jew’s ducats as well as the Jew’s daughter.
And Jessica, who sits by his side in the moonlight, and responds with
delicate grace
“I am never merry when I hear sweet music,”
is the girl who “gilded” herself with stolen gold, and gave her dead
mother’s ring for a monkey.
It is a convenience not to feel cold when the thermometer falls, and
it is a pleasure to listen appreciatively to a symphony concert. It is
also a convenience to relish the proximity of dogs, inasmuch as we live
surrounded by these animals, and it is a pleasure to respond to their
charm. But there is no virtue in liking them, any more than there is
virtue in liking wintry weather or stringed instruments. An affection
for dogs is not, as we have been given to understand, a test of an open
and generous disposition. Still less is their affection for us to be
accepted as a guarantee of our integrity. The assumption that a dog
knows a good from a bad human being when he sees one is unwarranted. It
is part of that engulfing wave of sentiment which swept the world in
the wake of popular fiction. Dickens is its most unflinching exponent.
Henry Gowan’s dog, Lion, springs at the throat of Blandois, alias
Lagnier, alias Rigaud, for no other reason than that he recognizes him
as a villain, without whom the world would be a safer and better place
to live in. Florence Dombey’s dog, Diogenes, looks out of an upper
window, observes Mr. Carker peacefully walking the London streets, and
tries to jump down and bite him then and there. He sees at once what
Mr. Dombey has not found out in years--that Carker is a base wretch,
unworthy of the confidence reposed in him.
A few animals of this kind might, in real life, close the courts of
justice. The Dickens dog is detective, prosecuting attorney, judge,
jury and executioner, all in one. He stands responsible for a whole
school of fictitious canines who combine the qualities of Vidocq,
Sherlock Holmes, and the Count of Monte Cristo. I read recently a story
in which the villain was introduced as “that anomalous being, the man
who doesn’t like dogs.” After that, no intelligent reader could have
been unprepared to find him murdering his friend and partner. So much
was inevitable. And no experienced reader could have been unprepared
for the behaviour of the friend and partner’s dog, which recognizes the
anomaly as a person likely to commit murder, and, without wasting time
on circumstantial evidence, tracks him down, and, unaided, brings him
to his death. A simple, clean-cut retribution, contrasting favourably
with the cumbersome processes of law.
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