Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1892-12-15
LIFELONG FRIENDS.
THE STRANGE FRIENDSHIP OF Ed
ERSCN AND CARLYLE

Their Views Were Almost DiametricalIy
opposed-Dissimilar in Temperament
| and Tastes-Disliked Each Other as
Thinkers. but Loved as Men.
The friendship of Goethe and Schiller,
of Beaumont and Fletcher, of Irving
and Paulding, of Socrates and Plato,
have often been noticed as among the
friendships of literary or philosophical
minds.
But perhaps one of the strangest lit
erary friendships was the lifelong inti-
macy between Emerson and Carlyle.
This intimacy was not fostered by per-
sonal contact, for Emerson and Carlyle
met each other only upon two or three
occasions. All their lives a wide ocean
of space divided them, and a wide ocean
of tastes and temperament. 1t would
be hard to find two men who were more
totally unlike. Carlyle was fierce, tu-
multuous, the most terrific scold in all
history. Emerson was mild and bcnig-
nant as an afternoon in September. Car
| lyle frowned like thunder cloud, and
En-rson glowed like sunburst.
Carlyle seemed to despair of the fu-
| ture of the race and believe that the
crazy old world was rafting on the
down grade to destruction. Emerson
was one of the most persistent optimists
in all history. The past looked great TO
him, the present looked grand and the
| future looked grander. Carlyle's style
was jerky, explosive and smashed to-
| gether like railroad wreck. Emerson's
style was compact, smooth and epigram-
matte. Carlyle wrote long histories like
'sFrederick the Great and the French
Revolution" which read like long
drawn out series of spasms, as if their
authors pen was afflicted with the ST.
Vitus dance. Emerson wrote short, COM
pact essays, in which every thought was
packed in the smallest possible compass.
The views of these two men were al
most Numerically opposed. Carlyle, es-
pecially in his later days, seemed to
believe in an absolute monarchy. He ad-
mired the czar of Russia. His great his
torical heroes were men who had ruled
men with a hand of iron. Emerson was
a firm champion of republican institu-
tions.
Both Emerson and Carlyle were semi
invalids all their lives. But Emerson's
| invalidism only served to draw out the
| latent sunshine of his nature. The more
he was chastened by disease the sweeter
grew his disposition. Carlyle's invalid
ism made him rage like Gagged tiger.
All his life long he thundered lurid de-
nunciations at his own stomach. Emer-
son wished to be known as d lover of
men; Carlyle called the public mostly
| fools"
Yet these two men, so dissimilar in
their tastes and temperaments, main
tanned lifelong friendship, and in fact
Emerson and Edward Irving were about
the only men of this generation that
Carlyle ever spoke of with respect.
"Sartor Resartus, Carlyle's first
lengthy work and probably his master
piece, was first brought out, in book
form, in America by Emerson. The
first words of warm appreciation that
the book received came from this side
| of the Atlantic. In England it was re-
ceived with gibes and sneers and con-
tempt 1t was, and still remains, one of
the strangest books that was ever writ
ten, but it is full charged with Carlyle's
volcanic and dynamic genius. Emerson
was one of the first to appreciate this
genius and help to find it public.
All of Carlyle's successive books as
they appeared found warm admirer in
Emerson, though he must have violent
ly disagreed with many of their senti
ments.
A perpetual correspondence was kept
up between the two men. In this CORE
spondence Emerson was at his best, and
Carlyle never was more characteristic
than in his letters to Emerson. He mus
have, in his inmost heart, despised the
theories and thoughts expressed in EN-
erson's books, for his whole life was a
battle against these theories and
thoughts. But in spite of this radical
difference of ideas there was something
about the man he liked. Emerson must
have abominated many of the expressed
opinions of Carlyle, and yet he was pow
erfully impressed by Carlyle's person
ality.
They both hated each other as think
ers, but loved each other as men.
This friendship ought to demonstrate
that the strongest attachments grow up
sometimes between men of entirely di-
vergent tendencies of thought. Men
seek their opposites for friends as they
seek their opposites for wives. 1t is
easy for one man to like and respect
another man without agreeing with
him. 1t is possible, however, that if
Emerson and Carlyle had been thrown
into closer intimacy they would not
have continued their friendship so long.
Carlyle was not an easy man to live
with, as his own wife discovered to her
sorrow. He became a chronic scold.
He found fault with his food. He scold-
ed if draft of air blew too rudely upon
his cheek. He was mad if dog barked,
cat mewed or hen cackled. He hated
all his neighbors inversely as he loved
himself. And genius as he was, his
style seems to indicate that he loved
himself very intensely. Emerson, on
the other hand, may be written as one
who loved his fellow man. Humanity
had so large place in his universe that
there was no room for self.
Not pleasant man to live with for
term of years was Thomas Carlyle. 1t
is doubtful if the sunny temperament of
Emerson could have maintained its sum
Iiness if brought in constant contact
with such human Bears. Watterson
Ford in Yankee Blade.
A Lecture for Young People.
Eyes, I'm in the lecture business
said the long haired passenger, land I'm
making money. I've got a scheme,
have, and it works to charm. Big
houses wherever 60"
"a scheme?"
Eyes. l always advertise that my
lectures are especially for women under
thirty years of age and men out of debt.
You just ought to see the way the people
come troopipg n."-Exchange.