All prosaic poets enjoy greater fame among their contemporaries than with posterity, whereas the opposite is the case with poetic poets. Prosaic poets are orators in their own way, and orators arouse but little interest, once the occasion that moved them to exercise their power of words is passed. Each generation likes to have its own epigrammatists, satirical writers, caricaturists and preachers, which does not prevent those of former times from retaining their artistic value and from exciting admiration, when we return to contemplate them in the way suitable to their work. This is the more the case, seeing that the human comedy of different times is also the human comedy of all times, and old gnomic, epigrammatical and satirical writers, are still always able to supply us with some caricature, some witty saying, efficacious when employed in the polemics of our own day.

XV

HEINE

A GOOD part of the critical literature concerning Heine is occupied with the controversy concerning the judgment to be given as to the life and character of the man and as to the meaning of his artistic work. It is asked whether he deserves the gratitude of his compatriots, to be expressed by the erection of a public monument, obstinately denied to him hitherto. It would seem that both points of the controversy are better left alone: the first, because it is of little advantage and the reverse of pitiful to torture the soul of the dead poet, rousing it from its eternal repose, in order to investigate weaknesses and errors which were paid for with long and atrocious sufferings, and as regards the second, because it is connected with political tendencies of the sort that for a long time contended or prevailed in Germany.

This however is not so, and beneath the appearance of an inquiry into the life and political intransigence, nothing less is in question than the character and value of Heine's poetry. If the poetry had shone before the eyes of all as belonging to the sphere of great and lofty poetry, the poet would have been absolved and redeemed in a far more appropriate manner than by the physical sufferings of the man; and political partisanship would be silent. Foscolo had an anything but unblemished record, and Manzoni

was among the heads of a party that wished to make of liberal Italy the faithful and favourite daughter of the Papacy; yet no moralist, no political adversary has appeared to deny to them admiration and gratitude, both human and national. If any dare do so, owing to sourness of temperament or momentary blindness, resulting from particular contingencies, he was quickly repressed and reproved by general opinion. The bitter censures of Foscolo by Tommaseo aroused reprobation and disgust as odious malignity, and the republican, anti-clerical, anti-Manzonian Carducci ended by reverently inclining himself before the statue of Alessandro Manzoni, conquered by the generosity inherent to his character.

It is possible to regard these controversies concerning Heine disinterestedly, but in another sense; by taking up and examining directly what is sought for in them indirectly, in the consequences rather than the causes, in the particulars rather than in the whole : in other words, by asking simply whether Heine were a poet, and, if so, of what sort. In our answer to this question we shall both illustrate his moral character and the unwillingness of his compatriots to place him among the great ones, for whom their heart should beat.

Undertaking such an examination, it will be best first to clear away the image of Heine as a profound thinker, all the more profound inasmuch as he concealed the depth of his thought with the mystery of a smile, and as the assertor of noble ideals, all the more powerful because armed with the powerful and terrible arm of irony. This image arose outside Germany, and culminated in Italy with the wellknown portrait of Heine contained in one of Carducci's

lyrics. Years ago a learned Frenchman wrote a book on Henri Heine penseur, which should be read in order to come to a precisely opposite opinion to that suggested by the title and the work itself, that is to say, a Heine who is a non-penseur, whose thoughts were never either coherent or original. It is not very difficult to explain that it should appear otherwise outside Germany, because Heine was born and educated at a period of extraordinarily rich German culture, rich in every sort of philosophy and criticism. Its treasures reduced to small compass were on the lips of all, so that a vivacious intelligence such as his, acute and adaptable, became to a certain degree interested in them, and made use of them to a very large extent as decoration, especially impressing in this way the ignorant and curious readers of Parisian reviews. The conversations and discussions between students in the university of Göttingen sufficed to supply him with sufficient philosophical furniture to astonish anywhere but in Germany. Something not dissimilar happened later in the case of a weak philosopher, Schopenhauer, who was everywhere known, thanks to his limpid style and to the pessimistic pose which it pleased him to assume. He seemed to be a very great philosopher, although he merely repeated the discoveries of his predecessors, combining them anew and weakening them in the process. And as Heine had decked himself in Germany with the thoughts of Kant, Schelling and Hegel, and of the romantic historians and philologists, so with an equal promptitude he availed himself in France of the political democratic writers, especially of Saint-Simon and his school. He never achieved, a serious philosophical, moral or political elaboration

of himself; nor can we rank as serious with that seriousness which stamps every thought, every emotion, every act, and makes itself felt in the style, his faith in the ideal of which he declared himself the champion.

He certainly professed something that can be called an ideal; but it often happens, when we examine its external manifestations, that a suspicion arises as to its being due to the dictates of art—an artistic necessity—for it is very vague and indefinite, adapted to his Jewish origin, his Rhenish birthplace and to his long residence as an exile in France. Indeed, it is difficult to conceive how a sociable spirit like Heine's, always intent upon joking, making fun of others and laughing at or deriding them, to caricature, to elegant buffoonery, and very exquisite in the enjoyment of such tastes, could have continued to satisfy so uncontrollable a need without something that should serve as an ideal. The very vague ideal of liberty, of brotherhood, of progress, of rationality and even of God in heaven afforded him an excellent vantage-ground from which to throw his stones with vigour and success. And what a large and handy target for a jesting spirit was provided by things that had become or were antiquated, although still sound and useful institutions, such as absolute monarchy, semi-feudal nobility, a devout and zealous middleclass, the police, corporals and barracks, and the like! But since his love for the ideal was not profound, so his hatred for its negative aspect, the counter-ideal, was also lacking in profundity. This is evident from his frequent lapses into sentimentalism for the old world, and from his incapacity to refrain from pointing out the ridiculous side of