Tolstoy: What is Art? & Wherein is Truth in Art (Essays on Aesthetics and Literature). Leo Tolstoy

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ l'étreinte des brises,

      C'est, vers les ramures grises,

       Le chœur des petites voix.

      O le frêle et frais murmure!

       Cela gazouille et susurre,

       Cela ressemble au cri doux

      Que l'herbe agitée expire....

      Tu dirais, sous l'eau qui vire,

       Le roulis sourd des cailloux.

       Cette âme qui se lamente

       En cette plainte dormante

       C'est la nôtre, n'est-ce pas?

      La mienne, dis, et la tienne,

       Dont s'exhale l'humble antienne

       Par ce tiède soir, tout bas? [110]

      What "chœur des petites voix"? and what "cri doux que l'herbe agitée expire"? and what it all means, remains altogether unintelligible to me.

      And here is another "Ariette":—

      VIII

       Dans l'interminable

      Ennui de la plaine,

       La neige incertaine

       Luit comme du sable.

      Le ciel est de cuivre,

      Sans lueur aucune.

       On croirait voir vivre

       Et mourir la lune.

       Comme des nuées

       Flottent gris les chênes

       Des forêts prochaines

       Parmi les buées.

      Le ciel est de cuivre,

       Sans lueur aucune.

       On croirait voir vivre

       Et mourir la lune.

       Corneille poussive

      Et vous, les loups maigres,

       Par ces bises aigres

       Quoi donc vous arrive?

       Dans l'interminable

       Ennui de la plaine,

       La neige incertaine

       Luit comme du sable. [111]

      How does the moon seem to live and die in a copper heaven? And how can snow shine like sand? The whole thing is not merely unintelligible, but, under pretense of conveying an impression, it passes off a string of incorrect comparisons and words.

      Besides these artificial and obscure poems there are others which are intelligible, but which make up for it by being altogether bad, both in form and in subject. Such are all the poems under the heading "La Sagesse." The chief place in these verses is occupied by a very poor expression of the most commonplace Roman Catholic and patriotic sentiments. For instance, one meets with verses such as this:—

      Je ne veux plus penser qu'à ma mère Marie,

      Siège de la sagesse et source de pardons,

      Mère de France aussi de qui nous attendons

      Inébranlablement l'honneur de la patrie.[112]

      Before citing examples from other poets, I must pause to note the amazing celebrity of these two versifiers, Baudelaire and Verlaine, who are now accepted as being great poets. How the French, who had Chénier, Musset, Lamartine, and, above all, Hugo,—and among whom quite recently flourished the so-called Parnassiens: Leconte de Lisle, Sully-Prudhomme, etc.,—could attribute such importance to these two versifiers, who were far from skilful in form and most contemptible and commonplace in subject-matter, is to me incomprehensible. The conception of life of one of them, Baudelaire, consisted in elevating gross egotism into a theory, and replacing morality by a cloudy conception of beauty, and especially artificial beauty. Baudelaire had a preference, which he expressed, for a woman's face painted rather than showing its natural color, and for metal trees and a theatrical imitation of water rather than real trees and real water.

      The life-conception of the other, Verlaine, consisted in weak profligacy, confession of his moral impotence, and, as an antidote to that impotence, in the grossest Roman Catholic idolatry. Both, moreover, were quite lacking in naïveté, sincerity, and simplicity, and both overflowed with artificiality, forced originality and self-assurance. So that in their least bad productions one sees more of M. Baudelaire or M. Verlaine than of what they were describing. But these two indifferent versifiers form a school, and lead hundreds of followers after them.

      There is only one explanation of this fact: it is that the art of the society in which these versifiers lived is not a serious, important matter of life, but is a mere amusement. And all amusements grow wearisome by repetition. And, in order to make wearisome amusement again tolerable, it is necessary to find some means to freshen it up. When, at cards, ombre grows stale, whist is introduced; when whist grows stale, écarté is substituted; when écarté grows stale, some other novelty is invented, and so on. The substance of the matter remains the same, only its form is changed. And so it is with this kind of art. The subject-matter of the art of the upper classes growing continually more and more limited, it has come at last to this, that to the artists of these exclusive classes it seems as if everything has already been said, and that to find anything new to say is impossible. And therefore, to freshen up this art, they look out for fresh forms.

      Baudelaire and Verlaine invent such a new form, furbish it up, moreover, with hitherto unused pornographic details, and—the critics and the public of the upper classes hail them as great writers.

      This is the only explanation of the success, not of Baudelaire and Verlaine only, but of all the Decadents.

      For instance, there are poems by Mallarmé and Maeterlinck which have no meaning, and yet for all that, or perhaps on that very account, are printed by tens of thousands, not only in various publications, but even in collections of the best works of the younger poets.

      This, for example, is a sonnet by Mallarmé:—

       A la nue accablante tu

       Basse de basalte et de laves

       A même les échos esclaves

       СКАЧАТЬ