man and superman-第2章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



Philosophically；　Don　Juan　is　a　man　who；　though　gifted　enough　to
be　exceptionally　capable　of　distinguishing　between　good　and　evil；
follows　his　own　instincts　without　regard　to　the　common　statute；
or　canon　law；　and　therefore；　whilst　gaining　the　ardent　sympathy
of　our　rebellious　instincts　（which　are　flattered　by　the
brilliancies　with　which　Don　Juan　associates　them）　finds　himself
in　mortal　conflict　with　existing　institutions；　and　defends
himself　by　fraud　and　farce　as　unscrupulously　as　a　farmer　defends
his　crops　by　the　same　means　against　vermin。　The　prototypic　Don
Juan；　invented　early　in　the　XVI　century　by　a　Spanish　monk；　was
presented；　according　to　the　ideas　of　that　time；　as　the　enemy　of
God；　the　approach　of　whose　vengeance　is　felt　throughout　the
drama；　growing　in　menace　from　minute　to　minute。　No　anxiety　is
caused　on　Don　Juan's　account　by　any　minor　antagonist：　he　easily
eludes　the　police；　temporal　and　spiritual；　and　when　an　indignant
father　seeks　private　redress　with　the　sword；　Don　Juan　kills　him
without　an　effort。　Not　until　the　slain　father　returns　from　heaven
as　the　agent　of　God；　in　the　form　of　his　own　statue；　does　he
prevail　against　his　slayer　and　cast　him　into　hell。　The　moral　is　a
monkish　one：　repent　and　reform　now；　for　to…morrow　it　may　be　too
late。　This　is　really　the　only　point　on　which　Don　Juan　is
sceptical；　for　he　is　a　devout　believer　in　an　ultimate　hell；　and
risks　damnation　only　because；　as　he　is　young；　it　seems　so　far　off
that　repentance　can　be　postponed　until　he　has　amused　himself　to
his　heart's　content。

But　the　lesson　intended　by　an　author　is　hardly　ever　the　lesson
the　world　chooses　to　learn　from　his　book。　What　attracts　and
impresses　us　in　El　Burlador　de　Sevilla　is　not　the　immediate
urgency　of　repentance；　but　the　heroism　of　daring　to　be　the　enemy
of　God。　From　Prometheus　to　my　own　Devil's　Disciple；　such　enemies
have　always　been　popular。　Don　Juan　became　such　a　pet　that　the
world　could　not　bear　his　damnation。　It　reconciled　him
sentimentally　to　God　in　a　second　version；　and　clamored　for　his
canonization　for　a　whole　century；　thus　treating　him　as　English
journalism　has　treated　that　comic　foe　of　the　gods；　Punch。
Moliere's　Don　Juan　casts　back　to　the　original　in　point　of
impenitence；　but　in　piety　he　falls　off　greatly。　True；　he　also
proposes　to　repent；　but　in　what　terms？　〃Oui；　ma　foi！　il　faut
s'amender。　Encore　vingt　ou　trente　ans　de　cette　vie…ci；　et　puis
nous　songerons　a　nous。〃　After　Moliere　comes　the　artist…enchanter；
the　master　of　masters；　Mozart；　who　reveals　the　hero's　spirit　in
magical　harmonies；　elfin　tones；　and　elate　darting　rhythms　as　of
summer　lightning　made　audible。　Here　you　have　freedom　in　love　and
in　morality　mocking　exquisitely　at　slavery　to　them；　and
interesting　you；　attracting　you；　tempting　you；　inexplicably
forcing　you　to　range　the　hero　with　his　enemy　the　statue　on　a
transcendant　plane；　leaving　the　prudish　daughter　and　her　priggish
lover　on　a　crockery　shelf　below　to　live　piously　ever　after。

After　these　completed　works　Byron's　fragment　does　not　count　for
much　philosophically。　Our　vagabond　libertines　are　no　more
interesting　from　that　point　of　view　than　the　sailor　who　has　a
wife　in　every　port；　and　Byron's　hero　is；　after　all；　only　a
vagabond　libertine。　And　he　is　dumb：　he　does　not　discuss　himself
with　a　Sganarelle…Leporello　or　with　the　fathers　or　brothers　of
his　mistresses：　he　does　not　even；　like　Casanova；　tell　his　own
story。　In　fact　he　is　not　a　true　Don　Juan　at　all；　for　he　is　no
more　an　enemy　of　God　than　any　romantic　and　adventurous　young
sower　of　wild　oats。　Had　you　and　I　been　in　his　place　at　his　age；
who　knows　whether　we　might　not　have　done　as　he　did；　unless
indeed　your　fastidiousness　had　saved　you　from　the　empress
Catherine。　Byron　was　as　little　of　a　philosopher　as　Peter　the
Great：　both　were　instances　of　that　rare　and　useful；　but
unedifying　variation；　an　energetic　genius　born　without　the
prejudices　or　superstitions　of　his　contemporaries。　The　resultant
unscrupulous　freedom　of　thought　made　Byron　a　greater　poet　than
Wordsworth　just　as　it　made　Peter　a　greater　king　than　George　III；
but　as　it　was；　after　all；　only　a　negative　qualification；　it　did
not　prevent　Peter　from　being　an　appalling　blackguard　and　an
arrant　poltroon；　nor　did　it　enable　Byron　to　become　a　religious
force　like　Shelley。　Let　us；　then；　leave　Byron's　Don　Juan　out　of
account。　Mozart's　is　the　last　of　the　true　Don　Juans；　for　by　the
time　he　was　of　age；　his　cousin　Faust　had；　in　the　hands　of　Goethe；
taken　his　place　and　carried　both　his　warfare　and　his
reconciliation　with　the　gods　far　beyond　mere　lovemaking　into
politics；　high　art；　schemes　for　reclaiming　new　continents　from
the　ocean；　and　recognition　of　an　eternal　womanly　principle　in　the
universe。　Goethe's　Faust　and　Mozart's　Don　Juan　were　the　last
words　of　the　XVIII　century　on　the　subject；　and　by　the　time　the
polite　critics　of　the　XIX　century；　ignoring　William　Blake　as
superficially　as　the　XVIII　had　ignored　Hogarth　or　the　XVII
Bunyan；　had　got　past　the　Dickens…Macaulay　Dumas…Guizot　stage　and
the　Stendhal…Meredith…Turgenieff　stage；　and　were　confronted　with
philosophic　fiction　by　such　pens　as　Ibsen's　and　Tolstoy's；　Don
Juan　had　changed　his　sex　and　become　Dona　Juana；　breaking　out　of
the　Doll's　House　and　asserting　herself　as　an　individual　instead
of　a　mere　item　in　a　moral　pageant。

Now　it　is　all　very　well　for　you　at　the　beginning　of　the　XX
century　to　ask　me　for　a　Don　Juan　play；　but　you　will　see　from　the
foregoing　survey　that　Don　Juan　is　a　full　century　out　of　date　for
you　and　for　me；　and　if　there　are　millions　of　less　literate　people
who　are　still　in　the　eighteenth　century；　have　they　not　Moliere
and　Mozart；　upon　whose　art　no　human　hand　can　improve？　You　would
laugh　at　me　if　at　this　time　of　day　I　dealt　in　duels　and　ghosts
and　〃womanly〃　women。　As　to　mere　libertinism；　you　would　be　the
first　to　remind　me　that　the　Festin　de　Pierre　of　Moliere　is　not　a
play　for　amorists；　and　that　one　bar　of　the　voluptuous
sentimentality　of　Gounod　or　Bizet　would　appear　as　a　licentious
stain　on　the　score　of　Don　Giovanni。　Even　the　more　abstract　parts
of　the　Don　Juan　play　are　dilapidated　past　use：　for　instance；　Don
Juan's　supernatural　antagonist　hurled　those　who　refuse　to　repent
into　lakes　of　burning　brimstone；　there　to　be　tormented　by　devils
with　horns　and　tails。　Of　that　antagonist；　and　of　that　conception
of　repentance；　how　much　is　left　that　could　be　used　in　a　play　by
me　dedicated　to　you？　On　the　other　hand；　those　forces　of　middle
class　public　opinion　which　hardly　existed　for　a　Spanish　nobleman
in　the　days　of　the　first　Don　Juan；　are　now　triumphant　everywhere。
Civilized　society　is　one　huge　bourgeoisie：　no　nobleman　dares　now
shock　his　greengrocer。　The　women；　〃marchesane；　principesse；
cameriere；　cittadine〃　and　all；　are　become　equally　dangerous：　the
sex　is　aggressive；　powerful：　when　women　are　wronged　they　do　not
group　themselves　pathetically　to　sing　〃Protegga　il　giusto
cielo〃：　they　grasp　formidable　legal　and　social　weapons；　and
retaliate。　Political　parties　are　wrecked　and　public　careers
undone　by　a　single　indiscretion。　A　man　had　better　have　all　the
statues　in　London　to　supper　with　him；　ugly　as　they　are；　than　be
brought　to　the　bar　of　the　Nonconformist　Conscience　by　Donna
Elvira。　Excommunication　has　become　almost　as　serious　a　business
as　it　was　in　the　X　century。

As　a　result；　Man　is　no　longer；　like　Don　Juan；　victor　in　the　duel
of　sex。　Whether　he　has　ever　really　been　may　be　doubted：　at　all
events　the　enormous　superiority　of　Woman's　natural　position　in
this　matter　is　telling　with　greater　and　greater　force。　As　to
pulling　the　Nonconformist　Conscience　by　the　beard　as　Don　Juan
plucked　the　beard　of　the　Commandant's　statue　in　the　convent　of
San　Francisco；　that　is　out　of　the　question　nowadays：　prudence　and
good　manners　alike　forbid　it　to　a　hero　with　any　mind。　Besides；　it
is　Don　Juan's　own　beard　that　is　in　danger　of　plucking。　Far　from
relapsing　into　hypocrisy；　as　Sganarelle　feared；　he　has
unexpectedly　discovered　a　moral　in　his　immorality。　The　growing
recognition　of　his　new　point　of　view　is　heaping　responsibility　on
him。　His　former　jests　he　has　had　to　take　as　seriously　as　I　have
had　to　take　some　of　the　jests　of　Mr　W。　S。　Gilbert。　His
sceptici