Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1889-01-31
Chopin and George Sand.
THE LOVE OF ONE AND THE TREAcHERY OF TIL
OTHER.


THE LOVE OF ONE AND THE TREAcHERY OF THE
OTHER.
From London Truth
The truth is about to be told concerning the
famous liason between Chopin and George
Sand, or, at any rate, as near an approach to
the truth as can be arrived at. most of the
chief actors in the tragedy being dead Chopin
himself described his life as an episode
without beginning, but with a sad end. The
episode in question was Chopins meeting, in
1885,: with the famous French novelist, George
Sand. on the introduction of Liszt. Liszt was
then living with the Countess dAgoult under
conditions of free love which eventually made
him the happy father of Madame Olivier, late
wife of the French minister who was going to
Berlin with hight heart, and of Madame
Cosima. the widow of Richard Wagner. Free
love likewise entered into the relations be-
tween Chopin, the pianist and composer, and
George Sand These relations lasted in har-
plnes5 for two years, when Chopin's health
broke down. They began to be somewhat
strained during visit to Majorca. and some
time after the return of this curious pair to
Paris they were broken off altogether George
Sand. in her novel, 'Lucrezia Florani," subse-
quently held her former sweetheart up to pub
lie ridicule under the sobriquet Of Prince
karol, self-seeking simpletOn with ridicu-
lousy lofty ideas. but with sentimental affee-
ton for his bronchitis and his piano-in short.
Public opinion in France was at first on the
side of the brilliant woman. List, who knew
the truth and was Chopin's friend. did not care
TO be ungallant after the composers untimely
death, and George Sand has in the opinion of
her worshipers. since posed as an extremely
ill-used lady. who, like charity itself, suffered
long and was kind. and who was Tilted by
chicken-spirited man with a vile temper.
Two bulky volumes on Chopin as Man and
Musician. which early next week Messrs.
Novello will publish from the pen of Professor
Frederick Niecks, will raise the old controversy
over again. Herr Niecks admits frankly that
he ''entered upon the study of George Sands
character with the impression that she had
suffered much undeserved abuse. and that it
would be incumbent upon Chopin biographer
to defend her against his predecessors and the
friends of the composer. But he confesses
that he soon '.entirely changed his mind. {"
Ten years Of laborious search into records and
documents and of inquiry among friends and
acquaintance IlsZt, Ferdinand Hitler, and
Franchomme among others). some of whom
are now dead, brought to light new facts. In
about thirty pages OF the closing chapter of
the first volume he traces that which he be-
ieves to have been George Sands character,
and while doing justice to her literary genius
he paints her as something akin to a mere
courtesan. He sneers at her ''three great
words" to wit. maternity" chastity" and
''pride." used ad nauseam in her writings and
caustically declares that ''her conception of
the words differ from those generally accepted.
He accuses her of ''supercilious haughtiness
and -idolatry"-defects by the way, not in
separable from the character of others of her
sex who have escaped blame by making no
public profession of exceptional virtue. He
declares that every person that knew her and
her friends condemned her conduct most un-
equivocally;" that one who ought to know
described her as female Don Juan. and added
that people would by-and-by speak more freely
OF her adventures" while he quotes Madame
Audiey as saying that she was "a woman Of
genus, but woman with sensual appetites,
with unsuitable desires, accustomed to CRAFTY
them at any price, should she even have to
break the cup after draining it."
Prof. Niecks adopts a less logical style of
argument when he declares that George Sands
character is evidenced by her works History.
both past and contemporaneous, has taught
that some of the most licentious authors are
the kindest OF fathers and most faithful Of
husbands. Some idea of this sort seems To
strike Herr Niecks himself, for he proceeds to
argue that the moral extravagances and auda-
eious sophlstries to be met with in 81, ella" he
long not TO the author, because in her pub-
hshed letter ''she identifies herself with Leila. -
and develops views identical with those
That shocked us IN "Leoni" and elsewhere.
These letters moreover contain much that is
damaging to her claim to chastity. Indeed.
one sentence in a letter written in June, 1887.
disposes OF her claim decisively The unneces.
sarily graphic manner in which she here deals
with an indicate subject would be revolving
IN man addressing woman, but in woman
addressing nan il is simply monstrous.
Here shall quit this subject. which whar
the volumes are published. bids fair to rake mn
OLD grievances, and to excite another brisk
epistoiary warfare between any partisans of
the pair who may happen to survive.