Rensselaer Union, Volume 7, Number 35, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 20 May 1875 — Polite Lying. [ARTICLE]

Polite Lying.

The Tim*' correspondent in China recently gave a curious account of the ceremonial observed on the ocoasion of the Bmperor’e death. The European mind naturally regards the whole performance as pfirfely absurd. Our own ceremonial being of a simpler kind we forget to make allowances for the exuberance of the Chinese court language. The little Emperor, three or four year* old, who succeeds to the throne, declares in the official gasette that “ life-long mourning would itself be insufficient to discharge his obligation” to his predecessor. • “ He cannot bring himself to abate any portion of- the three years of mourning which are imposed by the ancient ritual.” The Princes hereupon remonstrate, and His Majesty discovers that there are precedents for yielding to their entreaties. He consents to wear the full mourning garb of white for a hundred days only, and plain robes for twentyseven months, and commands the Princes to refrain from further remonstrances. However, they remonstrate again, and His Majesty is finally induced to consent to restrain his period of mourning to the ordinary twenty-seven days. Meanwhile His Majesty’s father describes instill more thrilling'language the terrible affliction caused by the death of the late Emperor: “ Gazing upon the imperial features after decease, his vitals were rent with the agony of grief, and hia strength failed utterly.” He managed, however, to bear up until he was overwhelmed fey the news that his son was to succeedWo the throne. -‘ Stupefied by this intelligence he became entirely helpless, and, when carried to his home, he remained trembling and agitated as though bereft of reason, or as one in a dream. The complaints under «hich he has hitherto labored have been revived in consequence, and he is compelled to throw himself on the merciful consideration of their Majesties the Empresses, whom he entreats to grant the rndulgence which can alone permit him to prolong his days, and allow him, wasted and useless in his rank {though he be, to continue in existence on the face of the earth.”

When we have laughed sufficiently at this excellent piece of solemn fooling we begin to remember that after all we could produce some respectable parallels to it. The language in which Chatham described his sensations on being admitted to an interview with George 111., to go back no further, is j*dt so very much more rational than Xbat of the Chinese magnates. We remember the old story about the shipwrecked traveler who, being cast upon an unknown shore, caught sight of a gallows, and falling on his knees gave thanks that he was in a Christian land. Even so, on reading these portentous pieces of eloquence which nobody believes, or affects to believe, to have any relation to the truth, we congratulate ourselves on the discovery that wife are reading a civilized dialect. It must, we argue, have taken many cen! uries of elaborate preparation before the art of lying could be carried to such a pitch. What are our declarations that we are the most humble and obedient servants of people whom we are treating with studied contempt to these glorious specimens of Oriental magniloquence® Are we not mere things of yesterday, tyros in the art of ornamental fiction? Should we not recognize the Chinese as our masters, instead of ridiculing them as clumsy fabricators? Kings have died before now in England for whom the general public probably entertained as little respect as the Chinese for their deceased master. The genuine feeling was sufficiently summed up in the words of the epigram about poor Prince Fred, who “ was alive and is dead.” The official proclamations, the sernions and the speeches in Parliament were as wide of the truth though not as ornate in their phraseology as those which celebrate the emotions of Chinese subjects. W r hat right have we to laugh® if we are to use words without meaning why should not we use the very biggest words in the dictionary? Magniloquence is surely the cheapest of ail luxuries and seems—if we may judge from some very popular writing—to give immense satisfaction to several readers. The practice,' indeed, has an advantage which may not appear at first sight. In England there is often an uncomfortable difficulty in distinguishing between the phrases which affect to be true and those which are avowedly conventional. When a prince of three years old is made to declare that his life ought to be spent in mourning for the death of his predecessor mere can be no question as to the nature of that phrase. But moralists with a las.e for small problems have been at work ever since the days of the Spectator in settling sundry little problems of casuistry arising from the flimsiness of our ceremonies. Our modest protestations are too near the prosaic reality. A calm expression of regret on the departure of h triend may be a mere conventional formula or a sincere statement. Everybody has felt some little twinges of remorse in saying, as the door closed, Must you go so soon® and adding, as soon as it was closed, Why couldn’t you have gone an hour ago? If some tine, sweeping, hyperbolical formula on the Chinese pattern were provided—outrageously impossible on the very face of it—these uncomfortable dialogues with one’s conscience would be avoided. IF only we could say at parting from an acquaintance that “our vitals were rent with the agony of grief” we ( should be able to niu- our true feelings decently. The mask is as much wanted as ever, or perhaps m e wanted; but our miserable scanty coverings of polite equivocation scarcely se.re the purpose. Society ought not to ret rid of its fictions too fast, or we si. »uld find ourselves reduced to-the unpleasant necessity of always speaking the whole truth to each other, which would be another woed for barbarism. ..™ -JZfL In fact, ho wever, there is never likely to be any want of this useful variety of lying—if the word may be used inoffensively. We might easily evolve from our own ccisciousness a sufficient history of the Chinese system. The prehistoric monarch, we may imagine, used to cut off his courtiers’ heads if they looked happy when he® was ill, or unhappy wren he was well. For some ages the practice would answer tolerable well, and the monarch would be surrounded by people who knew how to cry and laugh at the right seasons. The result would be disagreeable to the general mass, who dislike to see talent rewarded. An understanding would gradually grow up to fix the standard pf emotion as trades-unionists fix the standard of work. Everybody would laugh and cry so energetically that the King could make no complaint, and so uniformly that he could make no distinction. The great end of politicians would thus be secured, of being able to enjoy their own sentiments without getting into trouble in

consequence. When we think of the slowness with which the Chinese, according to the high authority oi Charles Lamb, became convinced that pigs might be roasted without burning we can understand why they have not yet discovered that a moderate consumption of compliments would do as well as an extravagant one. In European societies this change lias been brought about by a further application of the same principle. The benefit of the fixed ceremonial is that it’ enables each courtier to lose himself in the crowd of his like. The ceremonial begins to be simplified when the court wishes itself in the multitude. The great object of most Englishmen and all Americans has been for many years past to become as much like the average of tlieir countrymen as possible. The more we are democratized the more we wish to escape from the tyranny of our new masters. The process is rt presented by some writers as a degrading oue. Nor ca*n it be denied that some cf the ceremonials observed verge upon the repulsive. To declare the superlative wisdom and virtue of the aggregate of human beings whom we admit to be in their individual capacity "mostly fools,” and frequently rogues, is certainly not an edifying process. The only thing to be said is that we are gradually taking tue windoutof the demagogue’s sails, as it was formerly taken out of the aourtier’s. What was once lying will become a harmless fiction; and before king the phrases used about the majesty of the people will come to mean no more than the old-fashioned sort of phrases about the superhuman excellency of kings. There was something more or less sincere about the beginnings of this, as of all other expressions of sentiment; and it gradually passes through a phase of lying to become mere conventionality. In other senses the general agreement to wear the same livery does not so much imply subserviency to public taste as a mode of evading its omnipresence. People complain of the gradual advance of monotony because everybody now dresses alike, talks the same language, and reads the same books. This merely means, however, that society is like a masked ball, where people can enjoy greater liberty of speech in proportion to their external uniformity. Etiquette, whether extravagant after the Chinese fashion or sober according to our own, is the art ot obtaining solitude in a crowd. By giving way to public opinion in externals we secure the greatest liberty in more essential matters.

The complaints so often made about the tyranny of the majority seem to be to a great extent thrown away. What a pity it is, people say, that everybody now wears clothes of the same pattern, instead of each man appearing in the costume of his class! There may be a loss of the picturesque but the practical convenience is enormous. If a rich man had to cover himself with gold lace he would simply be a walking advertisement to beggars. When he wears a black coat undistinguishable fiom his butler’s he can evade his natural persecutors. He is like those butterflies described by recent naturalists which are singularly palatable to certain birds but manage to escape their tormentors by putting on the external resemblance of other butterflies of inferior flavor. We all put on dominos of ibe same pattern, and from that secure position, in the words of the poet, smile. grimly at our baffled pursuers. What a pity it is, said Mr. Mill—and many of his disciples repeat the sentiment—that eccentricity is regarded as criminal! Why should not every man gratify his own fancy in matters which concern himself without being exposed to the laughter of his neighbors? One answer is that he cannot do so without being a social traitor. He is helping to break down that system of conventional symbolism which keeps curiosity at a distance. The eccentric person is, in fact, a man who insists upon acquainting all the world with his little oddities of taste. He refuses to use that convenient oil of conventional language and manner by which the wheels of society are lubricated and the friction diminished. So long as a general agreement is maintained that we may use certain phrases without meaning anything we can meet our friends and our enemies without provoking a disturbance. When an eccentric person arises, like Molliere’s Misanthrope, and declares against the insincerity of the customary commonplaces, he throw's discredit upon the small-change of the social currency. Like other kinds of currency, its circulation depends upon its general credit; and, therefore, anybody who persists in repudiating its use helps to throw the whole arrangement out of gear. As long as we keep to our conventions we can preserve our liberty in all essential respects. We can think what w r e like on all possible matters, devote our time to any kind of pursuit and spend our money upon any objects, on condition that we observe certain forms in social-pstfefr-course. But the advocates of individualism are anxious to abolish this convenient arrangement, and the natural results of their success would be that we should be brought into much more violent collision and, probably, in the end, have the sphere of our liberty considerably restricted. It is as well to cling to our masks, though wre may admit that the Chinese pattern is, perhaps, unnecessarily cumbrous. —London Saturday liecieus