Joseph Joubert on the Arts

The Beautiful! ’Tis but beauty seen through the eyes of the soul.

Common or plainly genuine truths cannot be the object of art. Illusion upon a true foundation: that is the secret of the fine arts.

There are many beauties which would not be natural were it not for the efforts of art.

The object of art is to unite matter with forms, which are the truest, fairest and purest things in nature.

Beautiful lines are the foundation of all beauty. There are arts in which they must be visible, such as architecture, which is happy to flaunt them. There are others, such as sculpture, in which one ought to disguise them with care. In painting, they are always sufficiently veiled by colour. Nature hides them, buries and covers them, in living beings. The latter, if they are to be beautiful, must show their lines but little: for the skeleton is in the line and life in the contour.

An English Moralist: “Tom Brown of Facetious Memory”

Tom Brown (1662–1704) is interesting for all sorts of reasons. “T*m Br*wn of facetious memory,” as Addison called him in The Spectator, 567 (14 July 1717), is almost exclusively remembered for his imitation of Martial, 1.13; but I like to remember him for his maxims (or “Laconics,” as he called them).

Is he the earliest conscious English imitator of La Rochefoucauld? He has certainly left us an extensive and interesting body of “short amusements” and “maxims of state and conversation,” which, though, of course, of a lower quality than La Rochefoucauld’s, are by no means of low quality. And yet they have hardly been noticed.

Here follows a list gathering what I have found of his maxims so far, and which I will augment if I find more.

Rivarol on the Nobility and the People

On the Nobility

The nobility is an instrument polished by time.

The nobility, in the eyes of the people, is a sort of religion of which gentlemen are the priests and towards which, among the bourgeois, more are impious than are unbelieving.

The nobles are more or less ancient coins which time has turned into medals.

 

On the People

Sovereigns ought never to forget that, the people being a permanent child, the government must always be a father.

Remy de Gourmont, “Nietzsche and Princess Bovary” (1903/05)

Draft translation of “Nietzsche et la princesse Bovary,” Épilogues: Réflexions sur la vie: 1902–1904 (Paris: Mercure de France, 1905), p. 131, dated February 1903. A caustic portrait of pretension to Nietzschean worldliness.

PDF of this translation at academia.edu.

 

It was said she read Nietzsche, that lamentable little princess whose ideal was to resemble those unhinged and idiotically perverse little bourgeois girls; and that her husband deplored her frequenting a stupefying moralist. These words were written; had they been said, Prince Bovary would be a fool. But there is no doubt that he has not read Nietzsche himself; and certainly if his wife has read him, she has understood nothing of him. Otherwise she would have stayed at home, would have disguised her vices, presented her people with at least the appearance of an aristocratic superiority. Nietzsche never counselled anyone with weakness; but to princes and to masters he preached hardness, towards themselves first of all. Had she read her Nietzsche, she would have learnt that the search for happiness (the happiness of romance and roman) is the blatant sign of a slave-sensibility, and that, of all lapses, the worst is that of the privileged who abdicate their power or merely renounce its outermost expressions. Nietzsche’s power is not stupefying; but, like alcohol, it may be too stiff a brew for stupefied organisms.

Remy de Gourmont, “Nietzsche’s Death” (1900/04)

Draft translation of “La Mort de Nietzsche,” Épilogues: Réflexions sur la vie: 1899–1901 (Paris: Mercure de France, 1904), pp. 185–91, dated October 1900. A eulogy of the recently-departed Nietzsche. As in “Nietzsche on the Mountain,” Gourmont is convinced of Nietzsche’s world-historical importance as early as 1900: so before Fascism, psychoanalysis or postmodernism.

PDF of this translation at academia.edu.

 

It is a non-event, since the man of the highest and freest intelligence of the century fell, ten years ago, into the deep shadows of unintelligence. A contrast that would enliven the discourse of a rhetorician: the very same by whom the mind was liberated has died the prisoner of stupidity, whether an unfortunate heredity is to blame, or whether Nietzsche abused his own intellectual energy. To endeavour to understand everything, to feel everything, to judge everything—and not according to the common principles of everyday philosophy, but according to personal and quite new ideas and methods—is not without its dangers. And it also happens that the bravest is seized by fear upon finding himself alone in his opinion. But what do causes matter, when that is a matter of an unending chain; when all is determined; when the genius of a Nietzsche, no less than the stupidity of the man in the street, are bound to a psychological state? And what does even that madness or that ultimate stupor matter if, throughout his years of activity, Nietzsche unleashed a superior intellectual force? Ought sickness lead us to disregard the forerunning years of health and vigour; or ought the smith’s wrist that softens and flops keep us from the fact that he, in the fulness of his virility, melted and mastered iron?

Remy de Gourmont, “Nietzsche and the Affair” (1899/1904)

Draft translation of “Nietzsche et l’affaire,” Épilogues: Réflexions sur la vie: 1899–1901 (Paris: Mercure de France, 1904), pp. 90–2, dated October 1899. Gourmont advances an ironically antidreyfusard position: Dreyfus’ guilty verdict is “favourable to civilization,” to the “mechanism of social conventions” understood as “forces”; “Right” or “Justice” do not enter into it.

PDF of this translation at academia.edu.

 

I do not know if we can say that, in the present Affair, Force has triumphed over Right, even if we retain the common senses of these words, such as Mr. Havet might understand, on a good day; but if we suppose as much, the spectacle would be salutary and opportune. Every right being founded upon force, it would be no bad thing if this mechanism of social conventions were sometimes set in motion before the astounded populace, and if we were to witness the brutal motion of causes in the open air. But there is no Right opposed to Force. There are forces; and in this case it is the force of cohesion that has prevailed over the force of disaggregation. The Dreyfus Affair is a problem of mechanics; it has been provisionally resolved in a manner extremely favourable to civilization [1].

Han Ryner contra Nietzsche: Four Texts (1904, 1922, 1928)

Draft translations of:

1. From “Quelques philosophes,” Prostitués: études critiques sur les gens de lettres d’aujourd’hui (Paris: Société Parisienne d’édition, 1904), pp. 325–34.

2. From “Suite de l’Histoire de la Sagesse,” La Sagesse qui rit (Paris: Monde Moderne, 1928), pp. 153–4.

3. From Des diverses sortes d’individualisme (Paris: Fauconnier, 1922), pp. 18–21.

4. From ibid., pp. 29–30.

Han Ryner critiques Nietzsche from an individualist-anarchist perspective. His characterization of Nietzsche as a “Hegelian” is strikingly odd; perhaps he means what we would by “idealist.” In the first text, Ryner argues for the incoherence of the Overman-ideal in light of the “eternal return.” In the third, he suggests that the master is slave to his slaves’ image of himself. In the fourth, he offers a pacifistic sort of self-mastery as an alternative reading of Nietzsche.

Remy de Gourmont, “Nietzsche and Love” (1904/13)

Draft translation. “Nietzsche et l’amour,” Promenades littéraires, second ed. (Paris: Mercure de France, 1922) pp. 89–95, dated 1904. Gourmont critiques the shallowness and meanness of Nietzsche’s view of women; though his own perspective could by no means be called feminist. Rather, the text expresses a certain psycho-sexual attitude I like to think of as “Gourmontism” (by analogy with Sadism, Masochism, Retifism, etc.): that is, sexual attraction to intelligent women.

PDF of this translation at academia.edu.

 

Nietzsche had little experience of love. One might even say that he never had more than friendly relations with a woman. He wrote on love and on woman nonetheless, like every good philosopher. One day, at Sorrento, he confided Malwida von Meysenbug with a handwritten notebook containing the aphorisms on woman later published in the first part of Human, All-too-human. Malwida took the notebook, read it, and returned it to Nietzsche, smiling. He demanded an explanation for the smile. “Do not publish this,” said Mrs. von Meysenbug. Nietzsche seemed ruffled. He added the notebook to the rest of the manuscript and sent the lot to his publisher.

Remy de Gourmont, “Nietzsche on the Mountain” (1902/13)

Draft translation. “Nietzsche sur le montagne,” Promenades philosophiques, tenth ed. (Paris: Mercure de France, 1913), pp. 176–7, dated 1902. Gourmont was far- and deep-sighted to have seen, already in 1902, the extent to which Nietzsche would determine the twentieth century.

PDF at academia.edu.

 

The last century, if one admit this slice of time, began with the literary Catholicism of Chateaubriand; it ends with the mystic Protestantism of Tolstoy. This was a placidly religious century; wise like a wise child, it never slipped its hand from the hand of its grandmother, Religion. This dame, truth be told, old, tired, but always the coquette, very often changed her costume and jewellery. She was Romantic, philosophical, humanitarian, socialist, nationalist, bellicose or pacific, ironical or lachrymose, moralistic, mystic or sensual, and even literary, and even scientific—and even arty: under all her hats and all her wigs, her eyeshadow and her blusher, she remained the same; and her grip did not ease for a second from the bruised wrist of the little child, even grown into a sad old man.

“Tribune des Militaires” from Active Servicemen

Much of the significance of the initial “generals’ letter” or “tribune des militaires” depended on the relation, or lack of it, of retired officers’ sentiments to active servicemen’s intentions. But Valeurs actuelles have just this evening (9 May 2021) published a text that the editors describe, in their prefatory note, as coming from active servicemen. An English translation follows.

For some days a rumour has been circulating that a new tribune des militaires would be unveiled. Coming from active servicemen, it offered support to that previously published on the site of Valeurs actuelles. [English translation here.] This evening we have decided to publish this text, which has already circulated a good deal, and which was echoed in the media. And also to open it, below the article, to the signatures of French citizens who judge it to be up to the challenges that face us. All the while continuing, with a rigorous methodology, to put ourselves at the disposal of the professionals of the armed forces who desire to take part. Like its predecessor, the purpose of this article is not to damage our institutions, but to warn of the gravity of the situation.

The Response to Le Pen's Response

The following is a response, written I would guess by Jean-Pierre Fabre-Bernadac, to Marine Le Pen’s response (in English here) to the “Generals’ letter” (in English here). As blatant as Le Pen’s electoral preoccupation was in her letter, this response may seem harsh. But the redactors and signatories of the initial letter are clearly eager that their project not become too closely associated in the public mind with any particular political force.

We were surprised to read Marine Le Pen’s open letter in Valeurs actuelles, a letter written following the article “‘Pour un retour de l’honneur de nos gouvernants’: 20 généraux appellent Macron à défendre le patriotisme.” It seemed important to us to make a clarification and two remarks in reference to the words of the President of the Rassemblement National.

Marine Le Pen's Response to the "Generals' Letter"

Marine Le Pen’s response to “the Generals’ letter,” Valeurs actuelles (23 April). English translation of the initial letter available here. The republication of the letter in V.A. on 21 April seems to have been largely responsible for the scandal: it had been up on Place d’armes for a week by then, but to less effect. “The Generals” were to respond to Le Pen on 24 April.

Representatives of every army and every specialism, you have signed an open letter, “For a Return to Honour for Our Leaders.”

Your initiative, rare in the military machine, testifies to the degree of disquiet that you feel faced with the worrying deterioration of our country’s situation. The observations that you present, uncompromising but fair, and the strength of the terms you use amount to a public intervention that, given your status as signatories, nobody can ignore.

The "Generals' Letter"

The “Tribune des Militaires” has got a little attention in the English-language press. The papers began to cover it a little on Monday and Tuesday; but Philippe-Emmanuel Gobry did as much as anyone else to get the word out. The following open letter was drafted by Captain Jean-Pierre Fabre-Bernadac, officer (retired) of both the Territorial Army and the Gendarmerie, and has been signed by over twenty generals and over a thousand soldiers of every rank. It was first published on a site called Place d’armes (14 April), and seemed to receive relatively little attention. Then Valeurs actuelles republished it (21 April); Marine Le Pen responded to it (23 April; I will translate and post her response presently); and then people, including the Minister for the Armed Forces, took note.

Durrell, Geopolitics, Idealizing the Beloved

1. A paragraph on Durrell from Robert Steuckers, “Pour donner des fondements philosophiques à la ‘N.D.,’” c.5, Vouloir, 146–8 (Autumn 1999), translated by me:

Lawrence Durrell, born in India, living in the eastern basin of the Mediterranean, his great homeland of choice, sings the Greek and Cypriot landscapes, sketches ironical and comical rustics who are true men of flesh and blood, develops an almost Joycean vision of the real formed of superimposed strata communicating vaguely amongst one another and implying the extreme relativity of all facts of the matter: for there is simultaneously imbrication and juxtaposition, general mixture and hermetic contingency, so that each phenomenon is unique in itself, the product of a fusion or of an unparalleled originality; no schematic thought can succeed in grasping the essence of all these phenomena; no dry and prescriptive morality can succeed in taming them, submitting them, choking their influence. They escape the classifications of the schematisers. Ultimately, for Durrell, as for [D. H.] Lawrence and his friend [Henry] Miller, sexual experiences are veritable initiations into earthly pleasures.

Charles Maurras, “On the Classical Spirit” (1922)

“De l’esprit classique,” note 1 to “Trois idées politiques,” Romantisme et Révolution (Paris: Nouvelle Libraire Nationale, 1922), pp. 269–70. My translation. A short, lapidary exposition of Maurras’ conception of the classicism–romanticism dichotomy. His analysis owes much to Pierre Lasserre. Here Maurras represents the more straightforwardly political side of the classicist current within conservative-revolutionary thought, Lasserre and T. E. Hulme representing the middle term, and T. S. Eliot giving probably the most influential and most straightforwardly aesthetic formulation.

PDF: https://www.academia.edu/45025240/Charles_Maurras_On_the_Classical_Spirit_1922_

A deplorable error, due perhaps to the prejudices of the professor or the former student, led our master Taine to designate as classical the spirit that prepared the way for Revolution. On reflection, classical Antiquity played but a minute part in it. As far as classical books are concerned, the Revolutionary bibliography includes hardly more than Plato’s Republic and Plutarch’s Parallel Lives; nor would these be present had not the Father and Doctor of revolutionary ideas, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, borrowed from them more language than substance.

André Breton, Surrealism and René Guénon

A little on André Breton, Surrealism and René Guénon from Patrick Lepetit, “Surréalisme et ésotérisme,” Mélusine (23 February 2020). Breton cites Guénon favourably in “Du surréalisme en ses oeuvres vives,” Manifestes du surréalisme (Gallimard, 1979), pp. 187–8, n. 1. For an English version, see Breton, Manifestoes of Surrealism, transl. Richard Seaver and Helen R. Lane (U. Michigan Press), p. 304.

After the Second World War, a whole group of discreet surrealists, among them Bernard Roger, René Alleau, Roger Van Hecke, Guy-René Doumayrou, Elie-Charles Flamand and Jean Palou belonged, under the leadership of another medical man, Dr. Hunwald, to the Thebah Lodge of the Grande Loge de France, which had briefly been the lodge of René Guénon. All of them except Jean Palou—who, passing from the Grand Loge to the Grand Orient via the Grande Loge Nationale Française, saw a glittering career, and would go on to found lodges and chapters in the Shah’s Iran, before dying prematurely—remained members until the end. Regarding René Guénon, a French esotericist who needs no introduction, it should be known that, in 1925, Breton, who admired him as did Artaud and Queneau, sent Pierre Naville to suggest that he join the surrealist movement; which the author of The Crisis of the Modern World refused, considering it the perfect expression of that counter-initiation that he condemned in all European esoteric societies. Still, in 1953, in an article entitled “René Guénon jugé par le surréalisme,” and though there is no longer any doubt as to the reactionary nature of Guénonian thought, Breton said: