<p><SPAN name="link2H_4_0008" id="link2H_4_0008"></SPAN></p>
<h2> VIII. NONIMALIST AND REALIST. </h2>
<p>I CANNOT often enough say that a man is only a relative and representative
nature. Each is a hint of the truth, but far enough from being that truth
which yet he quite newly and inevitably suggests to us. If I seek it in
him I shall not find it. Could any man conduct into me the pure stream of
that which he pretends to be! Long afterwards I find that quality
elsewhere which he promised me. The genius of the Platonists is
intoxicating to the student, yet how few particulars of it can I detach
from all their books. The man momentarily stands for the thought, but will
not bear examination; and a society of men will cursorily represent well
enough a certain quality and culture, for example, chivalry or beauty of
manners; but separate them and there is no gentleman and no lady in the
group. The least hint sets us on the pursuit of a character which no man
realizes. We have such exorbitant eyes that on seeing the smallest arc we
complete the curve, and when the curtain is lifted from the diagram which
it seemed to veil, we are vexed to find that no more was drawn than just
that fragment of an arc which we first beheld. We are greatly too liberal
in our construction of each other's faculty and promise. Exactly what the
parties have already done they shall do again; but that which we inferred
from their nature and inception, they will not do. That is in nature, but
not in them. That happens in the world, which we often witness in a public
debate. Each of the speakers expresses himself imperfectly; no one of them
hears much that another says, such is the preoccupation of mind of each;
and the audience, who have only to hear and not to speak, judge very
wisely and superiorly how wrongheaded and unskilful is each of the
debaters to his own affair. Great men or men of great gifts you shall
easily find, but symmetrical men never. When I meet a pure intellectual
force or a generosity of affection, I believe here then is man; and am
presently mortified by the discovery that this individual is no more
available to his own or to the general ends than his companions; because
the power which drew my respect is not supported by the total symphony of
his talents. All persons exist to society by some shining trait of beauty
or utility which they have. We borrow the proportions of the man from that
one fine feature, and finish the portrait symmetrically; which is false,
for the rest of his body is small or deformed. I observe a person who
makes a good public appearance, and conclude thence the perfection of his
private character, on which this is based; but he has no private
character. He is a graceful cloak or lay-figure for holidays. All our
poets, heroes, and saints, fail utterly in some one or in many parts to
satisfy our idea, fail to draw our spontaneous interest, and so leave us
without any hope of realization but in our own future. Our exaggeration of
all fine characters arises from the fact that we identify each in turn
with the soul. But there are no such men as we fable; no Jesus, nor
Pericles, nor Caesar, nor Angelo, nor Washington, such as we have made. We
consecrate a great deal of nonsense because it was allowed by great men.
There is none without his foible. I verily believe if an angel should come
to chant the chorus of the moral law, he would eat too much gingerbread,
or take liberties with private letters, or do some precious atrocity. It
is bad enough that our geniuses cannot do anything useful, but it is worse
that no man is fit for society who has fine traits. He is admired at a
distance, but he cannot come near without appearing a cripple. The men of
fine parts protect themselves by solitude, or by courtesy, or by satire,
or by an acid worldly manner, each concealing as he best can his
incapacity for useful association, but they want either love or
self-reliance.</p>
<p>Our native love of reality joins with this experience to teach us a little
reserve, and to dissuade a too sudden surrender to the brilliant qualities
of persons. Young people admire talents or particular excellences; as we
grow older we value total powers and effects, as the impression, the
quality, the spirit of men and things. The genius is all. The man,—it
is his system: we do not try a solitary word or act, but his habit. The
acts which you praise, I praise not, since they are departures from his
faith, and are mere compliances. The magnetism which arranges tribes and
races in one polarity is alone to be respected; the men are steel-filings.
Yet we unjustly select a particle, and say, 'O steel-filing number one!
what heart-drawings I feel to thee! what prodigious virtues are these of
thine! how constitutional to thee, and incommunicable.' Whilst we speak
the loadstone is withdrawn; down falls our filing in a heap with the rest,
and we continue our mummery to the wretched shaving. Let us go for
universals; for the magnetism, not for the needles. Human life and its
persons are poor empirical pretensions. A personal influence is an ignis
fatuus. If they say it is great, it is great; if they say it is small, it
is small; you see it, and you see it not, by turns; it borrows all its
size from the momentary estimation of the speakers: the Will-of-the-wisp
vanishes if you go too near, vanishes if you go too far, and only blazes
at one angle. Who can tell if Washington be a great man or no? Who can
tell if Franklin be? Yes, or any but the twelve, or six, or three great
gods of fame? And they too loom and fade before the eternal.</p>
<p>We are amphibious creatures, weaponed for two elements, having two sets of
faculties, the particular and the catholic. We adjust our instrument for
general observation, and sweep the heavens as easily as we pick out a
single figure in the terrestrial landscape. We are practically skilful in
detecting elements for which we have no place in our theory, and no name.
Thus we are very sensible of an atmospheric influence in men and in bodies
of men, not accounted for in an arithmetical addition of all their
measurable properties. There is a genius of a nation, which is not to be
found in the numerical citizens, but which characterizes the society.
England, strong, punctual, practical, well-spoken England I should not
find if I should go to the island to seek it. In the parliament, in the
play-house, at dinner-tables, I might see a great number of rich,
ignorant, book-read, conventional, proud men,—many old women,—and
not anywhere the Englishman who made the good speeches, combined the
accurate engines, and did the bold and nervous deeds. It is even worse in
America, where, from the intellectual quickness of the race, the genius of
the country is more splendid in its promise and more slight in its
performance. Webster cannot do the work of Webster. We conceive distinctly
enough the French, the Spanish, the German genius, and it is not the less
real that perhaps we should not meet in either of those nations a single
individual who corresponded with the type. We infer the spirit of the
nation in great measure from the language, which is a sort of monument to
which each forcible individual in a course of many hundred years has
contributed a stone. And, universally, a good example of this social force
is the veracity of language, which cannot be debauched. In any controversy
concerning morals, an appeal may be made with safety to the sentiments
which the language of the people expresses. Proverbs, words, and
grammar-inflections convey the public sense with more purity and precision
than the wisest individual.</p>
<p>In the famous dispute with the Nominalists, the Realists had a good deal
of reason. General ideas are essences. They are our gods: they round and
ennoble the most partial and sordid way of living. Our proclivity to
details cannot quite degrade our life and divest it of poetry. The
day-laborer is reckoned as standing at the foot of the social scale, yet
he is saturated with the laws of the world. His measures are the hours;
morning and night, solstice and equinox, geometry, astronomy and all the
lovely accidents of nature play through his mind. Money, which represents
the prose of life, and which is hardly spoken of in parlors without an
apology, is, in its effects and laws, as beautiful as roses. Property
keeps the accounts of the world, and is always moral. The property will be
found where the labor, the wisdom, and the virtue have been in nations, in
classes, and (the whole life-time considered, with the compensations) in
the individual also. How wise the world appears, when the laws and usages
of nations are largely detailed, and the completeness of the municipal
system is considered! Nothing is left out. If you go into the markets and
the custom-houses, the insurers' and notaries' offices, the offices of
sealers of weights and measures, of inspection of provisions,—it
will appear as if one man had made it all. Wherever you go, a wit like
your own has been before you, and has realized its thought. The Eleusinian
mysteries, the Egyptian architecture, the Indian astronomy, the Greek
sculpture, show that there always were seeing and knowing men in the
planet. The world is full of masonic ties, of guilds, of secret and public
legions of honor; that of scholars, for example; and that of gentlemen,
fraternizing with the upper class of every country and every culture.</p>
<p>I am very much struck in literature by the appearance that one person
wrote all the books; as if the editor of a journal planted his body of
reporters in different parts of the field of action, and relieved some by
others from time to time; but there is such equality and identity both of
judgment and point of view in the narrative that it is plainly the work of
one all-seeing, all-hearing gentleman. I looked into Pope's Odyssey
yesterday: it is as correct and elegant after our canon of to-day as if it
were newly written. The modernness of all good books seems to give me an
existence as wide as man. What is well done I feel as if I did; what is
ill done I reck not of. Shakspeare's passages of passion (for example, in
Lear and Hamlet) are in the very dialect of the present year. I am
faithful again to the whole over the members in my use of books. I find
the most pleasure in reading a book in a manner least flattering to the
author. I read Proclus, and sometimes Plato, as I might read a dictionary,
for a mechanical help to the fancy and the imagination. I read for the
lustres, as if one should use a fine picture in a chromatic experiment,
for its rich colors. 'Tis not Proclus, but a piece of nature and fate that
I explore. It is a greater joy to see the author's author, than himself. A
higher pleasure of the same kind I found lately at a concert, where I went
to hear Handel's Messiah. As the master overpowered the littleness and
incapableness of the performers and made them conductors of his
electricity, so it was easy to observe what efforts nature was making,
through so many hoarse, wooden, and imperfect persons, to produce
beautiful voices, fluid and soul-guided men and women. The genius of
nature was paramount at the oratorio.</p>
<p>This preference of the genius to the parts is the secret of that
deification of art, which is found in all superior minds. Art, in the
artist, is proportion, or a habitual respect to the whole by an eye loving
beauty in details. And the wonder and charm of it is the sanity in
insanity which it denotes. Proportion is almost impossible to human
beings. There is no one who does not exaggerate. In conversation, men are
encumbered with personality, and talk too much. In modern sculpture,
picture, and poetry, the beauty is miscellaneous; the artist works here
and there and at all points, adding and adding, instead of unfolding the
unit of his thought. Beautiful details we must have, or no artist; but
they must be means and never other. The eye must not lose sight for a
moment of the purpose. Lively boys write to their ear and eye, and the
cool reader finds nothing but sweet jingles in it. When they grow older,
they respect the argument.</p>
<p>We obey the same intellectual integrity when we study in exceptions the
law of the world. Anomalous facts, as the never quite obsolete rumors of
magic and demonology, and the new allegations of phrenologists and
neurologists, are of ideal use. They are good indications. Homoeopathy is
insignificant as an art of healing, but of great value as criticism on the
hygeia or medical practice of the time. So with Mesmerism, Swedenborgism,
Fourierism, and the Millennial Church; they are poor pretensions enough,
but good criticism on the science, philosophy, and preaching of the day.
For these abnormal insights of the adepts ought to be normal, and things
of course.</p>
<p>All things show us that on every side we are very near to the best. It
seems not worth while to execute with too much pains some one
intellectual, or aesthetical, or civil feat, when presently the dream will
scatter, and we shall burst into universal power. The reason of idleness
and of crime is the deferring of our hopes. Whilst we are waiting we
beguile the time with jokes, with sleep, with eating, and with crimes.</p>
<p>Thus we settle it in our cool libraries, that all the agents with which we
deal are subalterns, which we can well afford to let pass, and life will
be simpler when we live at the centre and flout the surfaces. I wish to
speak with all respect of persons, but sometimes I must pinch myself to
keep awake and preserve the due decorum. They melt so fast into each other
that they are like grass and trees, and it needs an effort to treat them
as individuals. Though the uninspired man certainly finds persons a
conveniency in household matters, the divine man does not respect them; he
sees them as a rack of clouds, or a fleet of ripples which the wind drives
over the surface of the water. But this is flat rebellion. Nature will not
be Buddhist: she resents generalizing, and insults the philosopher in
every moment with a million of fresh particulars. It is all idle talking:
as much as a man is a whole, so is he also a part; and it were partial not
to see it. What you say in your pompous distribution only distributes you
into your class and section. You have not got rid of parts by denying
them, but are the more partial. You are one thing, but Nature is one thing
and the other thing, in the same moment. She will not remain orbed in a
thought, but rushes into persons; and when each person, inflamed to a fury
of personality, would conquer all things to his poor crotchet, she raises
up against him another person, and by many persons incarnates again a sort
of whole. She will have all. Nick Bottom cannot play all the parts, work
it how he may; there will be somebody else, and the world will be round.
Everything must have its flower or effort at the beautiful, coarser or
finer according to its stuff. They relieve and recommend each other, and
the sanity of society is a balance of a thousand insanities. She punishes
abstractionists, and will only forgive an induction which is rare and
casual. We like to come to a height of land and see the landscape, just as
we value a general remark in conversation. But it is not the intention of
Nature that we should live by general views. We fetch fire and water, run
about all day among the shops and markets, and get our clothes and shoes
made and mended, and are the victims of these details; and once in a
fortnight we arrive perhaps at a rational moment. If we were not thus
infatuated, if we saw the real from hour to hour, we should not be here to
write and to read, but should have been burned or frozen long ago. She
would never get anything done, if she suffered admirable Crichtons and
universal geniuses. She loves better a wheelwright who dreams all night of
wheels, and a groom who is part of his horse; for she is full of work, and
these are her hands. As the frugal farmer takes care that his cattle shall
eat down the rowen, and swine shall eat the waste of his house, and
poultry shall pick the crumbs,—so our economical mother dispatches a
new genius and habit of mind into every district and condition of
existence, plants an eye wherever a new ray of light can fall, and
gathering up into some man every property in the universe, establishes
thousandfold occult mutual attractions among her offspring, that all this
wash and waste of power may be imparted and exchanged.</p>
<p>Great dangers undoubtedly accrue from this incarnation and distribution of
the godhead, and hence Nature has her maligners, as if she were Circe; and
Alphonso of Castille fancied he could have given useful advice. But she
does not go unprovided; she has hellebore at the bottom of the cup.
Solitude would ripen a plentiful crop of despots. The recluse thinks of
men as having his manner, or as not having his manner; and as having
degrees of it, more and less. But when he comes into a public assembly he
sees that men have very different manners from his own, and in their way
admirable. In his childhood and youth he has had many checks and censures,
and thinks modestly enough of his own endowment. When afterwards he comes
to unfold it in propitious circumstance, it seems the only talent; he is
delighted with his success, and accounts himself already the fellow of the
great. But he goes into a mob, into a banking house, into a mechanic's
shop, into a mill, into a laboratory, into a ship, into a camp, and in
each new place he is no better than an idiot; other talents take place,
and rule the hour. The rotation which whirls every leaf and pebble to the
meridian, reaches to every gift of man, and we all take turns at the top.</p>
<p>For Nature, who abhors mannerism, has set her heart on breaking up all
styles and tricks, and it is so much easier to do what one has done before
than to do a new thing, that there is a perpetual tendency to a set mode.
In every conversation, even the highest, there is a certain trick, which
may be soon learned by an acute person and then that particular style
continued indefinitely. Each man too is a tyrant in tendency, because he
would impose his idea on others; and their trick is their natural defence.
Jesus would absorb the race; but Tom Paine or the coarsest blasphemer
helps humanity by resisting this exuberance of power. Hence the immense
benefit of party in politics, as it reveals faults of character in a
chief, which the intellectual force of the persons, with ordinary
opportunity and not hurled into aphelion by hatred, could not have seen.
Since we are all so stupid, what benefit that there should be two
stupidities! It is like that brute advantage so essential to astronomy, of
having the diameter of the earth's orbit for a base of its triangles.
Democracy is morose, and runs to anarchy, but in the State and in the
schools it is indispensable to resist the consolidation of all men into a
few men. If John was perfect, why are you and I alive? As long as any man
exists, there is some need of him; let him fight for his own. A new poet
has appeared; a new character approached us; why should we refuse to eat
bread until we have found his regiment and section in our old army-files?
Why not a new man? Here is a new enterprise of Brook Farm, of Skeneateles,
of Northampton: why so impatient to baptize them Essenes, or
Port-Royalists, or Shakers, or by any known and effete name? Let it be a
new way of living. Why have only two or three ways of life, and not
thousands? Every man is wanted, and no man is wanted much. We came this
time for condiments, not for corn. We want the great genius only for joy;
for one star more in our constellation, for one tree more in our grove.
But he thinks we wish to belong to him, as he wishes to occupy us. He
greatly mistakes us. I think I have done well if I have acquired a new
word from a good author; and my business with him is to find my own,
though it were only to melt him down into an epithet or an image for daily
use:—</p>
<p>"Into paint will I grind thee, my bride!"<br/></p>
<p>To embroil the confusion, and make it impossible to arrive at any general
statement,—when we have insisted on the imperfection of individuals,
our affections and our experience urge that every individual is entitled
to honor, and a very generous treatment is sure to be repaid. A recluse
sees only two or three persons, and allows them all their room; they
spread themselves at large. The statesman looks at many, and compares the
few habitually with others, and these look less. Yet are they not entitled
to this generosity of reception? and is not munificence the means of
insight? For though gamesters say that the cards beat all the players,
though they were never so skilful, yet in the contest we are now
considering, the players are also the game, and share the power of the
cards. If you criticise a fine genius, the odds are that you are out of
your reckoning, and instead of the poet, are censuring your own caricature
of him. For there is somewhat spheral and infinite in every man,
especially in every genius, which, if you can come very near him, sports
with all your limitations. For rightly every man is a channel through
which heaven floweth, and whilst I fancied I was criticising him, I was
censuring or rather terminating my own soul. After taxing Goethe as a
courtier, artificial, unbelieving, worldly,—I took up this book of
Helena, and found him an Indian of the wilderness, a piece of pure nature
like an apple or an oak, large as morning or night, and virtuous as a
brier-rose.</p>
<p>But care is taken that the whole tune shall be played. If we were not kept
among surfaces, every thing would be large and universal; now the excluded
attributes burst in on us with the more brightness that they have been
excluded. "Your turn now, my turn next," is the rule of the game. The
universality being hindered in its primary form, comes in the secondary
form of all sides; the points come in succession to the meridian, and by
the speed of rotation a new whole is formed. Nature keeps herself whole
and her representation complete in the experience of each mind. She
suffers no seat to be vacant in her college. It is the secret of the world
that all things subsist and do not die but only retire a little from sight
and afterwards return again. Whatever does not concern us is concealed
from us. As soon as a person is no longer related to our present
well-being, he is concealed, or dies, as we say. Really, all things and
persons are related to us, but according to our nature they act on us not
at once but in succession, and we are made aware of their presence one at
a time. All persons, all things which we have known, are here present, and
many more than we see; the world is full. As the ancient said, the world
is a plenum or solid; and if we saw all things that really surround us we
should be imprisoned and unable to move. For though nothing is impassable
to the soul, but all things are pervious to it and like highways, yet this
is only whilst the soul does not see them. As soon as the soul sees any
object, it stops before that object. Therefore, the divine Providence
which keeps the universe open in every direction to the soul, conceals all
the furniture and all the persons that do not concern a particular soul,
from the senses of that individual. Through solidest eternal things the
man finds his road as if they did not subsist, and does not once suspect
their being. As soon as he needs a new object, suddenly he beholds it, and
no longer attempts to pass through it, but takes another way. When he has
exhausted for the time the nourishment to be drawn from any one person or
thing, that object is withdrawn from his observation, and though still in
his immediate neighborhood, he does not suspect its presence. Nothing is
dead: men feign themselves dead, and endure mock funerals and mournful
obituaries, and there they stand looking out of the window, sound and
well, in some new and strange disguise. Jesus is not dead; he is very well
alive: nor John, nor Paul, nor Mahomet, nor Aristotle; at times we believe
we have seen them all, and could easily tell the names under which they
go.</p>
<p>If we cannot make voluntary and conscious steps in the admirable science
of universals, let us see the parts wisely, and infer the genius of nature
from the best particulars with a becoming charity. What is best in each
kind is an index of what should be the average of that thing. Love shows
me the opulence of nature, by disclosing to me in my friend a hidden
wealth, and I infer an equal depth of good in every other direction. It is
commonly said by farmers that a good pear or apple costs no more time or
pains to rear than a poor one; so I would have no work of art, no speech,
or action, or thought, or friend, but the best.</p>
<p>The end and the means, the gamester and the game,—life is made up of
the intermixture and reaction of these two amicable powers, whose marriage
appears beforehand monstrous, as each denies and tends to abolish the
other. We must reconcile the contradictions as we can, but their discord
and their concord introduce wild absurdities into our thinking and speech.
No sentence will hold the whole truth, and the only way in which we can be
just, is by giving ourselves the lie; Speech is better than silence;
silence is better than speech;—All things are in contact; every atom
has a sphere of repulsion;—Things are, and are not, at the same
time;—and the like. All the universe over, there is but one thing,
this old Two-Face, creator-creature, mind-matter, right-wrong, of which
any proposition may be affirmed or denied. Very fitly therefore I assert
that every man is a partialist, that nature secures him as an instrument
by self-conceit, preventing the tendencies to religion and science; and
now further assert, that, each man's genius being nearly and
affectionately explored, he is justified in his individuality, as his
nature is found to be immense; and now I add that every man is a
universalist also, and, as our earth, whilst it spins on its own axis,
spins all the time around the sun through the celestial spaces, so the
least of its rational children, the most dedicated to his private affair,
works out, though as it were under a disguise, the universal problem. We
fancy men are individuals; so are pumpkins; but every pumpkin in the field
goes through every point of pumpkin history. The rabid democrat, as soon
as he is senator and rich man, has ripened beyond possibility of sincere
radicalism, and unless he can resist the sun, he must be conservative the
remainder of his days. Lord Eldon said in his old age that "if he were to
begin life again, he would be damned but he would begin as agitator."</p>
<p>We hide this universality if we can, but it appears at all points. We are
as ungrateful as children. There is nothing we cherish and strive to draw
to us but in some hour we turn and rend it. We keep a running fire of
sarcasm at ignorance and the life of the senses; then goes by, perchance,
a fair girl, a piece of life, gay and happy, and making the commonest
offices beautiful by the energy and heart with which she does them; and
seeing this we admire and love her and them, and say, 'Lo! a genuine
creature of the fair earth, not dissipated or too early ripened by books,
philosophy, religion, society, or care!' insinuating a treachery and
contempt for all we had so long loved and wrought in ourselves and others.</p>
<p>If we could have any security against moods! If the profoundest prophet
could be holden to his words, and the hearer who is ready to sell all and
join the crusade could have any certificate that tomorrow his prophet
shall not unsay his testimony! But the Truth sits veiled there on the
Bench, and never interposes an adamantine syllable; and the most sincere
and revolutionary doctrine, put as if the ark of God were carried forward
some furlongs, and planted there for the succor of the world, shall in a
few weeks be coldly set aside by the same speaker, as morbid; "I thought I
was right, but I was not,"—and the same immeasurable credulity
demanded for new audacities. If we were not of all opinions! if we did not
in any moment shift the platform on which we stand, and look and speak
from another! if there could be any regulation, any 'one-hour-rule,' that
a man should never leave his point of view without sound of trumpet. I am
always insincere, as always knowing there are other moods.</p>
<p>How sincere and confidential we can be, saying all that lies in the mind,
and yet go away feeling that all is yet unsaid, from the incapacity of the
parties to know each other, although they use the same words! My companion
assumes to know my mood and habit of thought, and we go on from
explanation to explanation until all is said which words can, and we leave
matters just as they were at first, because of that vicious assumption. Is
it that every man believes every other to be an incurable partialist, and
himself a universalist? I talked yesterday with a pair of philosophers; I
endeavored to show my good men that I love everything by turns and nothing
long; that I loved the centre, but doated on the superficies; that I loved
man, if men seemed to me mice and rats; that I revered saints, but woke up
glad that the old pagan world stood its ground and died hard; that I was
glad of men of every gift and nobility, but would not live in their arms.
Could they but once understand that I loved to know that they existed, and
heartily wished them God-speed, yet, out of my poverty of life and
thought, had no word or welcome for them when they came to see me, and
could well consent to their living in Oregon, for any claim I felt on
them,—it would be a great satisfaction.</p>
<p><br/></p>
<hr />
<p><br/><br/><br/></p>
<p>NEW ENGLAND REFORMERS.<br/>
<br/>
In the suburb, in the town,<br/>
On the railway, in the square,<br/>
Came a beam of goodness down<br/>
Doubling daylight everywhere:<br/>
Peace now each for malice takes,<br/>
Beauty for his sinful weeks,<br/>
For the angel Hope aye makes<br/>
Him an angel whom she leads.<br/></p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />