of　the　farm；　and　the　source　of　the　vigor　with　which　he　describes
  these　rude　figures。　The　robustness　of　his　animalism　permits　him
  fully　to　imagine　all　the　simple　sensations　of　these　beings；　while
  his　pessimism；　which　tinges　these　sketches　of　brutal　customs　with
  an　element　of　delicate　scorn；　preserves　him　from　coarseness。　It
  is　this　constant　and　involuntary　antithesis　which　gives　unique
  value　to　those　Norman　scenes　which　have　contributed　so　much　to
  his　glory。　It　corresponds　to；　those　two　contradictory　tendencies
  in　literary　art；　which　seek　always　to　render　life　in　motion　with
  the　most　intense　coloring；　and　still　to　make　more　and　more　subtle
  the　impression　of　this　life。　How　is　one　ambition　to　be　satisfied
  at　the　same　time　as　the　other；　since　all　gain　in　color　and
  movement　brings　about　a　diminution　of　sensibility；　and
  conversely？　The　paradox　of　his　constitution　permitted　to
  Maupassant　this　seemingly　impossible　accord；　aided　as　he　was　by
  an　intellect　whose　influence　was　all　powerful　upon　his
  developmentthe　writer　I　mention　above；　Gustave　Flaubert。
  These　meetings　of　a　pupil　and　a　master；　both　great；　are　indeed
  rare。　They　present；　in　fact；　some　troublesome　conditions；　the
  first　of　which　is　a　profound　analogy　between　two　types　of
  thought。　There　must　have　been；　besides；　a　reciprocity　of
  affection；　which　does　not　often　obtain　between　a　renowned　senior
  who　is　growing　old　and　an　obscure　junior；　whose　renown　is
  increasing。　From　generation　to　generation；　envy　reascends　no　less
  than　she　redescends。　For　the　honor　of　French　men　of　letters；　let
  us　add　that　this　exceptional　phenomenon　has　manifested　itself
  twice　in　the　nineteenth　century。　Merimee；　whom　I　have　also　named；
  received　from　Stendhal；　at　twenty；　the　same　benefits　that
  Maupassant　received　from　Flaubert。
  The　author　of　〃Une　Vie〃　and　the　writer　of　〃Clara　Jozul〃　resemble
  each　other；　besides；　in　a　singular　and　analogous　circumstance。
  Both　achieved　renown　at　the　first　blow；　and　by　a　masterpiece
  which　they　were　able　to　equal　but　never　surpass。　Both　were
  misanthropes　early　in　life；　and　practised　to　the　end　the　ancient
  advice　that　the　disciple　of　Beyle　carried　upon　his　seal：　〃Remember　to　distrust。〃　And；　at　the　same　time；
  both　had　delicate；　tender　hearts　under　this　affectation　of
  cynicism；　both　were　excellent　sons；　irreproachable　friends；
  indulgent　masters；　and　both　were　idolized　by　their　inferiors。
  Both　were　worldly；　yet　still　loved　a　wanderer's　life；　both　joined
  to　a　constant　taste　for　luxury　an　irresistible　desire　for
  solitude。　Both　belonged　to　the　extreme　left　of　the　literature　of
  their　epoch；　but　kept　themselves　from　excess　and　used　with　a
  judgment　marvelously　sure　the　sounder　principles　of　their　school。
  They　knew　how　to　remain　lucid　and　classic；　in　taste　as　much　as　in
  formMerimee　through　all　the　audacity　of　a　fancy　most　exotic；
  and　Maupassant　in　the　realism　of　the　most　varied　and　exact
  observation。　At　a　little　distance　they　appear　to　be　two　patterns；
  identical　in　certain　traits；　of　the　same　family　of　minds；　and
  Tourgenief；　who　knew　and　loved　the　one　and　the　other；　never
  failed　to　class　them　as　brethren。
  They　are　separated；　however；　by　profound　differences；　which
  perhaps　belong　less　to　their　nature　than　to　that　of　the　masters
  from　whom　they　received　their　impulses：　Stendhal；　so　alert；　so
  mobile；　after　a　youth　passed　in　war　and　a　ripe　age　spent　in
  vagabond　journeys；　rich　in　experiences；　immediate　and　personal；
  Flaubert　so　poor　in　direct　impressions；　so　paralyzed　by　his
  health；　by　his　family；　by　his　theories　even；　and　so　rich　in
  reflections；　for　the　most　part　solitary。
  Among　the　theories　of　the　anatomist　of　〃Madame　Bovary；〃　there　are
  two　which　appear　without　ceasing　in　his　Correspondence；　under　one
  form　or　another；　and　these　are　the　ones　which　are　most　strongly
  evident　in　the　art　of　De　Maupassant。　We　now　see　the　consequences
  which　were　inevitable　by　reason　of　them；　endowed　as　Maupassant
  was　with　a　double　power　of　feeling　life　bitterly；　and　at　the　same
  time　with　so　much　of　animal　force。　The　first　theory　bears　upon
  the　choice　of　personages　and　the　story　of　the　romance；　the　second
  upon　the　character　of　the　style。　The　son　of　a　physician；　and
  brought　up　in　the　rigors　of　scientific　method；　Flaubert　believed
  this　method　to　be　efficacious　in　art　as　in　science。　For　instance；
  in　the　writing　of　a　romance；　he　seemed　to　be　as　scientific　as　in
  the　development　of　a　history　of　customs；　in　which　the　essential
  is　absolute　exactness　and　local　color。　He　therefore　naturally
  wished　to　make　the　most　scrupulous　and　detailed　observation　of
  the　environment。
  Thus　is　explained　the　immense　labor　in　preparation　which　his
  stories　cost　himthe　story　of　〃Madame　Bovary；〃　of　〃The
  Sentimental　Education；〃　and　〃Bouvard　and　Pecuchet；〃　documents
  containing　as　much　minutiae　as　his　historical　stories。　Beyond
  everything　he　tried　to　select　details　that　were　eminently
  significant。　Consequently　he　was　of　the　opinion　that　the　romance
  writer　should　discard　all　that　lessened　this　significance；　that
  is；　extraordinary　events　and　singular　heroes。　The　exceptional
  personage；　it　seemed　to　him；　should　be　suppressed；　as　should　also
  high　dramatic　incident；　since；　produced　by　causes　less　general；
  these　have　a　range　more　restricted。　The　truly　scientific　romance
  writer；　proposing　to　paint　a　certain　class；　will　attain　his　end
  more　effectively　if　he　incarnate　personages　of　the　middle　order；
  and；　consequently；　paint　traits　common　to　that　class。　And　not
  only　middle…class　traits；　but　middle…class　adventures。
  From　this　point　of　view；　examine　the　three　great　romances　of　the
  Master　from　Rouen；　and　you　will　see　that　he　has　not　lost　sight　of
  this　first　and　greatest　principle　of　his　art；　any　more　than　he
  has　of　the　second；　which　was　that　these　documents　should　be　drawn
  up　in　prose　of　absolutely　perfect　technique。　We　know　with　what
  passionate　care　he　worked　at　his　phrases；　and　how　indefatigably
  he　changed　them　over　and　over　again。　Thus　he　satisfied　that
  instinct　of　beauty　which　was　born　of　his　romantic　soul；　while　he
  gratified　the　demand　of　truth　which　inhered　from　his　scientific
  training　by　his　minute　and　scrupulous　exactness。
  The　theory　of　the　mean　of　truth　on　one　side；　as　the　foundation　of
  the　subject；〃the　humble　truth；〃　as　he　termed　it　at　the
  beginning　of　〃Une　Vie；〃and　of　the　agonizing　of　beauty　on　the
  other　side；　in　composition；　determines　the　whole　use　that
  Maupassant　made　of　his　literary　gifts。　It　helped　to　make　more
  intense　and　more　systematic　that　dainty　yet　dangerous　pessimism
  which　in　him　was　innate。　The　mid…　dle…class　personage；　in
  wearisome　society　like　ours；　is　always　a　caricature；　and　the
  happenings　are　nearly　always　vulgar。　When　one　studies　a　great
  number　of　them；　one　finishes　by　looking　at　humanity　from　the
  angle　of　disgust　and　despair。　The　philosophy　of　the　romances　and
  novels　of　De　Maupassant　is　so　continuously　and　profoundly
  surprising　that　one　becomes　overwhelmed　by　it。　It　reaches
  limitation；　it　seems　to　deny　that　man　is　susceptible　to　grandeur；
  or　that　motives　of　a　superior　order　can　uplift　and　ennoble　the
  soul；　but　it　does　so　with　a　sorrow　that　is　profound。　All　that
  portion　of　the　sentimental　and　moral　world　which　in　itself　is　the
  highest　remains　closed　to　it。
  In　revenge；　this　philosophy　finds　itself　in　a　relation　cruelly
  exact　with　the　half…civilization　of　our　day。　By　that　I　mean　the
  poorly　educated　individual　who　has　rubbed　against　knowledge
  enough　to　justify　a　certain　egoism；　but　who　is　too　poor　in
  faculty　to　conceive　an　ideal；　and　whose　native　grossness　is
  corrupted　beyond　redemption。　Under　his　blouse；　or　under　his
  coatwhether　he　calls　himself　Renardet；　as　does　the　foul
  assassin　in　〃Petite　Roque；〃　or　Duroy；　as　does　the　sly　hero　of
  〃Bel…Ami；〃　or　Bretigny；　as　does　the　vile　seducer　of　〃Mont　Oriol；〃
  or　Cesaire；　the　son　of　Old　Amable　in　the　novel　of　that　name；
  this　degraded　type　abounds　in　Maupassant's　stories；　evoked　with
  a　ferocity　almost　jovial　where　it　meets　the　robustness　of
  temperament　which　I　have　pointed　out；　a　ferocity　which　gives　them
  a　reality　more　exact　still　because　the　half…civilized　person　is
  often　impulsive　and；　in　consequence；　the　physical　easily
  predominates。　There；　as　elsewhere；　the　degenerate　is　everywhere　a
  degenerate　who　gives　the　impression　of　being　an　ordinary　man。
  There　are　quantities　of　men　of　this　stamp　in　large　cities。　No
  writer　has　felt　and　expressed　this　complex　temperament　with　more
  justice　than　De　Maupassant；　and；　as　he　was　an　infinitely　careful
  observer　of　milieu　and　landscape　and　all　that　constitutes　a
  precise　middle　distance；　his　novels　can　be　considered　an
  irrefutable　record　of　the　social　classes　which　he　studied　at　a
  certain　time　and　along　certain　lines。　The　Norman　peasant　and　the
  Provencal　peasant；　for　example；　also　the　small　officeholder；　the
  gentleman　of　the　provinces；　the　country　squire；　the　clubman　of
  Paris；　the　journalist　of　the　bou