Inheritance and succession -- Fiction; London (England) -- Fiction; Man-woman relationships -- Fiction
Reine did not go back from her resolution; she did not change her mind,
as her mother expected, and forgive Herbert’s étourderie. Reine could
not look upon it as étourderie, and she was too deeply wounded to
recover the shock easily; but I think she had the satisfaction of giving
an almost equal shock to her brother, who, though he talked so about the
limitation of a girl’s understanding, and the superiority of his own,
was as much wounded as Reine was, when he found that his sister really
meant to desert him. He did not say a word to her, but he denounced to
his mother the insensibility of women, who only cared for a fellow so
long as he did exactly what they wished, and could not endure him to
have the least little bit of his own way. “I should never have heard
anything of this if I had taken her about with me everywhere, and gone
to bed at ten o’clock, as she wished,” he cried, with bitterness.
“You have reason, mon ’Erbert,” said Madame de Mirfleur; “had you cared
for her society, she would never have left you; but it is not amusing to
sit at home while les autres are amusing themselves. One would require
to be an angel for this.”
“I never thought Reine cared for amusement,” said Herbert; “she never
said so; she was always pleased to be at home; it must all have come on,
her love for gayety, to spite me.”
Madame de Mirfleur did not reply; she thought it wisest to say nothing
in such a controversy, having, I fear, a deep-rooted contempt for the
masculine understanding in such matters at least. En revanche, she
professed the most unbounded reverence for it in other matters, and
liked, as Miss Susan did, to consult “a man” in all difficult questions,
though I fear, like Miss Susan, it was only the advice of one who
agreed with her that she took. But with Herbert she was silent. What was
the use? she said to herself. If he could not see that Reine’s
indifference to amusement arose from her affection for himself, what
could she say to persuade him of it? and it was against her principles
to denounce him for selfishness, as probably an English mother would
have done. “Que voulez-vous? it is their nature,” Madame de Mirfleur
would have said, shrugging her shoulders. I am not sure, however, that
this silence was much more satisfactory to Herbert than an explanation
would have been. He was not really selfish, perhaps, only deceived by
the perpetual homage that had been paid to him during his illness, and
by the intoxicating sense of sudden emancipation now.
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