In writing against the present, fashionable style of ridiculing, I wish to be well understood. I do not intend here, to dissuade writers from exposing the ridicule of man in the abstract. On the contrary; I think, for our improvements, nothing is more beneficial than the caricatures, or the faults of real life, exposed in a ridiculous light, by which the reader would correct his faults, if he has any like. But the writer should give the caricatures with such modifications, or charged colors, with which to avoid all personalities. And here, the writer, who must pen from nature, may sometimes delineate a living character, whom he had forgotten, or did never see: but, such a writer cannot be blamed for all the faults of man; and as it is not a malicious composition, he, who has like ridicules, has but to correct himself.
National faults also cannot be personalities. Besides, I may, for instance, write, or speak of persons I met in a stage, in a private house, theatre, or church, provided their names are not mentioned. If the historical fact happened, only, with the person introduced in the tale, nobody knows of whom the writer is speaking, or writing; if it happened before other persons, the truth of the fact prevents, rather, those fond of making false stories from the smallest event; the truth cannot offend either of the parties. Besides, men would conduct themselves better, were they afraid of being exposed: and if we have committed an offence towards an innocent person, we should listen, and do better for the time to come. I mean only to say here, were all writers, who can wield a pen, permitted to book all the characters they meet with, writers should be avoided as cholera: and though in this, and many other countries libeling did turn fashionable, I understood that such writers are not the most welcome, among those who do not like to see their private characters heralded; and that America can not be offended in finding american families heralded, because lords, and ladies of England are heralded also, it is the same as to wish here, the same faults, permitted in that country, for no other reason, because the lords of England cannot prevent an english editor from prying into their private houses. If I preach morals, and at the same time I act immorally, not only I wrong myself in exposing my hypocrisy; but, I turn literature into an infamous art. I repeat it again, good or bad characters may be blended in a novel, comedy, or tragedy, where the characters, though taken from nature, cannot offend any private individual; but, the names, or exact characters, should not be exposed by writers, unless the individuals are notorious, or had already become a part of history.
Like immoral writers have, now a days, become so fashionable for which, loosing all respect which man ought to have for man, we see dandies ridiculing not only private characters; they write of nations, as if their cat-like brain could judge that of an elephant. That part, or that half of a man, whose life was spent in setting his cravat without a fault, as soon as he visits a strange country, where the cravat is tied à la sans façon, such a half man calls all those people a set of fools. He who did never live in the luxury of a palace, finds that his two story house, built without knowledge of architecture, is by far more comfortable than the palace built by Michæl Angelo. The protestant finds nothing reasonable in a catholic country; and the catholic nothing reasonable in a protestant one. He whose life was spent in contending parties, cannot understand how the citizens of another country go so quietly to their own private business, without meddling with the ruling power. The subject of England calls the americans free fools; and the turk calls barbarous those nations condeming a man to a forced labor for bigamy, or polygamy. These, while they do not permit divorce, connive at a man living with another woman, as far as he does not marry in church the second, as he did the former still living. Because that country educates, and brings them up, all the children from poor parents, this other traveler, who had never read the laws of Sparta, blames all poor, who marry in his country, because his legislators did no more provide for them, than they had for the flies which pester his luxurious table.
I might blend here, and multiply the prejudices as well as the good reasons of travelers to infinity, almost: but, unless the dandy ceases from being a dandy; the religious from being a superstitious man; I mean, as far as the writer does not look at things with a charitable, and unprejudiced eye, the too many writers of our day, not only injure our literature; they degrade it. And why, instead of cavils, frivolous misrepresentations of persons and nations, writers do not place themselves as citizens of the world, correcting national faults, as a father would his beloved children? The greatest man, and the most nigh to perfection, could not, would not, should not boast of his fine qualities. If an Aristides is rare, very rare among us, how can a nation boast supremacy over another? From my own experience I always found the best the modest; and he who has no merit boasting merit. It is a pity in seeing writers finding fault with nations, because these eat with a knife and fork, or because they do not eat three eggs in a tumbler. Knifes and forks are convenient, when the meat is hot; and I, who am fond of eggs, like to crack four eggs in a tumbler, provided the present sensible american does not care of the puerile english observation. Besides, if I am pleased in looking at the fine architecture of an italian palace, I am pleased also in seeing that the small, modest, and nearly uniform houses of the United States of North America, have the blessed appearance of a nation, whose richest citizens do not outshine the poor.
What right has he, the man of talent, or the handsome man to ridicule he who has no talent, or he who is deformed? He who ridicules a nation shows his perfect ignorance of nations. Can we find a nation without faults? When the egyptians were the most civilized, all the other nations were either savage or barbarous. The egyptians went down, and the greeks rose: the old age of these, reached them too, and the romans shot forth. These, also, had their days as the formers; and civilization went progressively around the world with such propagating means, and discoveries, that the citizen of any nation now, who undertakes to ridicule an ancient nation, he is nothing else but like that bad son of Noah, who saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.
CHAPTER III.
THE AMERICAN LITERATURE IS RATHER TOO MUCH MIXED WITH THE BELIEF OF DIFFERENT RELIGIOUS FAITHS.
Six or seven years ago, I opened a book which I found on the central table of the house’s parlor in which I lodged. It was the fifth, or seventh edition of Notes, or Letters by a minister of the christian reform who went through Italy. The reverend says in his book that the pope received him kindly, and during the long conversation he had with him, that very head of the catholic religion, praised America, which is to say his country, because the american people tolerated the catholic religion. Besides, the author of those Notes says in his very book, that he was much pleased by the reception he received from the pope. Still, the language which I read in that very book, against the pope, and all the catholicism, was as much as what the preachers of the reform had said against the catholics in darker ages, for which iron, and fire did martyr so many catholic victims, and for which, even in our times, the benevolent Charles the first of England, is still calumniated, and the jealous, and tyrannic Elizabeth, is still elevated to the sky, as one of the most virtuous queens. To change the mind of such a minister of charity, who was kindly received by the pope, it is not my purpose here. The mind of such a man, whom I do not know, it might be of such materials, which turn harder the more you attempt to bring it to reason. I would only advise the benevolent man, never to visit any persons whom he cannot esteem. Had the author of those Notes given me hospitality, and received me as the pope did receive him, and afterwards, had I had the misfortune of using my spleen against him, I could not esteem myself, unless I would publicly acknowledge my inurbanity. As no pope has yet done any good to my desolate, afflicted, dear country (and I do not except here, even Ganganelli himself) I have never seen, and I have no wish to see any pope: but, as a lover of justice, I do not like to see my enemy so badly treated. If in the whole bible we can find one single passage inculcating persecution to those, who do not think as we do; nay, if among the hundred and one religions, grounded on the bible, the only true one condemns, and must exterminate all the others; as we cannot be the contending party, and the judge, let us do a good work’s day: I mean, let us make a bonfire with all the bibles, though a great wisdom be mixed in it. If the bible teaches us charity, love, tolerance, and natural understanding, let us follow, venerate, and worship it; but, at the same time, let us send into prisons those fanatics who, not minding history, arts, and sciences, preach nothing but intolerance, and persecution with the bible in their hands. The ancient romans had their censurers. In this country I would have a board of gentlemen with officers to prevent fanaticism, and persecution: and the preacher who says, that the best moral is to brand those, who have a different religion from that which he professes, should not be permitted to preach to an assembly of honest people. The drunkard injures only himself, and very seldom the few near him. The spirit of fanaticism did exterminate nations! If we are indebted to philosophy for the little religion which we have yet, the true ministers of Christ must needs join with the humane voice of philosophy, unless they have not at heart their families, life, and lawful property of this world: and then, if they find fault with the shakers, because the wish of these, is to annihilate the human race by preventing marriage; the fanatics of other denominations are doing nothing, but to administer arms to destroy those, who cannot think like them.
Not only theological discussions take the place of literature in the United States of America: there is, perhaps, no nation in the world of the present century, in which theocracy attempts to swallow up the people’s rights, though the constitution be against it. And, what power can it have, the wisest constitution, if the plurality, part by cunning, and part by ignorance, are undermining the very foundation of man’s only happiness, his sacred rights? Just, intelligent, learned, high minded clergymen are against the doctrine of Mr. Pusey: but, it is with a sorrowful mind we have witnessed the too many reformers wishing to adopt the very popish power, against the very power for which Luther, and Calvin had, and have such an influence in the mind of nations.