St. Landry democrat., 1883-07-07
The Aristocracy of Culture. !.

we see grave reason for apprehend-
| ing that the new aristocracy of culture
which IS growing up among us. and is
asserting its right TO position with so
much energy and success that it half
appalls and half attracts the aristocracy
OF birth and wealth, will not for a long
Time to come be very liberal in senti-
menf, whether in the party sense or in
that larger sense which the word origi-
nalfy bore. 1t is getting very separate
from the mass. to begin with Moth
ing IS less explicable or more certain
than that the rapid spread Of a poor
klnd OF education has perceptiblv deep
ened the chasm between the cultivated
and uncu'tivated, and inclined the for
mer to insist little more upon their
intellectual rank. to recoil little more
from opinions held commonly or by
great masses of men. Not only are the
cultivated less moved by general opin-
ION, but they dislike it more, and are
more inclined to '.analyze'' those who
mold 1t, and to pronounce them very
stupid, very dense, and eminently disa-
greeable persons. We note that ten
dency distinctly in Mr. Matthew Ar
mold, the drift being accumulated in
his case by his habitual and instructive
kindness, while in his followers it be-
comes definite note of thought. Sepa-
ration impairs iberality of feeling by
impairing sympathy, for we never sr,,i-
pathize keenly with those for whom we |
feel an excessive distance. The warm |
est advocate of Justice to animals finds |
himself overtaSed in his effort to feel I
much for fish, unless they are highly
organized enough to writhe or to bleed I
like mammals; and the difficulty exists,
IN lesser degree, as between classes of
men. st does not do for the mind to
dwell Strongly on the stupidity of the
dim millions. Those who do so end by
ascribing their sllferings to that very
stupldlty-that is, to inherent, instead
OF removable causes.
The tendency to physical refinement.
again, or Rstheticism. so marked
among the cultivated of to-day as to
have become almost a new cult.
deepens the chasn. by introducing q
sense of disgust for dirt, dreariness.
and squalor. which, when indulged.
speedily develops into contempt. It is
difficult, though not impossible, for Nor
ris's disciples to feel for the un- /,
who do not know what q
. brutality of COLOR can mean. While
the democratic movement has undoubt-
adly produced as much recoil among
he cultivated as among the rich. the
orner are not afraid for their intel
ectuai treasures, which no demagopue,.
loWever powerful, can take awav from
hem; but they are afraid for their in
inpnfp which 1r,c nfyr4 90
Zee very weak among the vast almost
,osmic, semi bland political forces now
n motion. 1t is very disagreeable 10 \
nan who knows, say, much of all j
ranches OF Egyptology, ancient and
modern, to see that the fate of Egypt
viii be settled by millions of voters
Who, but that Egypt is "a Bible coun- G
ry.' would not know where Egypt
vas. and even when they know that, a
ancy the minute delta a broad.
rand land, as important as France.
lie does not love the voters more for
heir new power, but less. and is in
lined to repudiate' their demands, 4
rhich, being instructive, are often !
lght. because of the limits of their 4
The tendency of cultivated !,
americans to sneer at philanthropy as :
huge g ism is very noticeable. and
repeating itself both here and upon
ne continent. Philanthropists are
herals by instinct, for they detest the
asst, with its history of wrong and suf-
ering; and we should say that, while
npatience of visible cruelty increases,
Tie philanthropy does not. London
peetator.