2 Prosser Hall Frye 



in this particular suit much better with the English ideal than he 

 does with the French; for the former in its regard 'for spon- 

 taneity does at least imply a respect for naturalness. 



The fact is, the English have formed their written upon the 

 model of their spoken style. They seem, as it were, to assume 

 that their literature is written offhand, and must be judged, 

 even a little indulged, it may be, with this circumstance in mind ; 

 as though it were to be expected of an author, not that he should 

 necessarily give long time and thought to his expression, but 

 that he should write quickly and fluently, above all naturally — 

 in short, as though his best possession were the pen of the ready 

 writer. What he has accomplished, then, is to be criticised in 

 accordance with these conditions, not as aiming at perfection, 

 at the expense of unlimited pains and patience, at any cost! On 

 the contrary, the main requirement made of himself by the 

 French writer is that he attain this perfection, which the former 

 has left as unattainable or inconvenient or impertinent — a per- 

 fection absolute and final, which he has always before his eyes 

 as the goal of his aspirations and towards which he strives 

 relentlessly. Time and labor are no object; only that when the 

 work leaves his pen-cramped hand it shall be the best that can 

 be made out of words, the very best without reserve or abate- 

 ment. Ease, or at least the appearance of ease, may be desir- 

 able; not, however, because it is the main purpose of writing to 

 write easily, but because it is a property of elegance that what- 

 ever is done, no matter with what difficulty, should be done too 

 well to show the effort. But diffuseness, approximation, confu- 

 sion, and the like unavoidable accompaniments of conversation- 

 alism and improvisation are forever unpardonable equally with 

 the appearance of stress and strain. While the English write 

 prose with something of the carelessness of talk, the French 

 write prose with the same care that we give to poetry. 



It is impossible to describe this state of mind better than Mau- 

 passant has done in speaking of an author who stands in every 

 respect in the most striking contrast with George Sand and who 

 represents most characteristically the literary tendencies and 

 ideals, if not the actual performance, of his countrymen — Gus- 

 tave Flaubert. 



200 



