LITERATURE AND SCIENCE 



it — our interpretation of it, or huraanization of it. 

 Literature is plastic, flowing, suggestive; science is 

 exact, uncompromising, inflexible. If you want to 

 know the exact condition of the weather, consult the 

 thermometer and the barometer and the hygrome- 

 ter, but if you want to know the quality of the day, 

 or the subtle difference between spring and fall, and 

 the morning and the evening, or between one day 

 and another, consult your senses. The body will tell 

 you what the instruments will not — the character 

 of the day — its balminess, softness, sweetness; but 

 it will not tell you the exact temperature, or the 

 amount of moisture in the air, or the degree of pres- 

 sure. The result of our sense impressions gives us 

 the material of literature; the thermometer and the 

 barometer give us science, exact knowledge, knowl- 

 edge shorn of its fringe of poetry. The body and the 

 mind sympathize with surrounding conditions; im- 

 plements of precision do not. 



Science reveals things as they are in and of them- 

 selves; literature, as they stand related to our men- 

 tal and emotional condition and edification. One is 

 not true and the other false; both are true in their 

 own sphere, true as fact, and true as emotion and 

 idea. Science explains the rainbow, but literature 

 sees it as a symbol and a promise. So with the 

 sunset or the sunrise. Science knows all about the 

 diamond, but knows not why it is so prized by us. 

 It explains the pearl, but not the pearl necklace. 



179 



