The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1894-10-08

critics knew ~ too well all ct onc~ A
round OF social dinners, and they were
equipped to dissect us. They got at the
kernel Of our existence, the salt and
SAVIOR Of our life, with suoh rapid facility
that We were ~ an open book, printed
on plea type, to them.
1t has not been so with Mr.. PAUL
BouRaEr. He has seen but little
OF us, and, though he gives no
sign OF such conscious intent, he writes
only with his pen what his eyes have
seen. That his eyes did not see all is,
we feel rsgretfully sure, our misfortune
much more than his, since 1t would
have rounded out most extraordinary
literary performances. besides giving us
an idea Of our own<women such as We
should, doubtless, never have had the
wit to formulate for ourselves.
Our women-our girls-are very dear
to us, as is quite natural. We do not
differentiate when we think of them;
therefore it is perhaps not quite possible
for us to justly estimate the perform
ance of M. BoURGET, as we should
certainly believe him incapable OF
thoroughly entering into the merits and
appreciating the flavor of an impression
ist critique of French women few
weeks in Paris might inspire US to
make.
This dilletante from Paris says great
many true things about our women, and
says the disagreeable ones much gentler
than our own critics are in the habit Of
saying them. He perceives several of
their traits with the inclusive compre-
hension OF true artist, and his record
ing of these golden things fills our heart
with loving pride toward the dear girls,
and grateful thoughts of the amiable
Partisan. =,
But M. BoURGET really notes but the
very fringe of our social fabric, and
more often the fringe not entirely kAr-
monious with the generally excellent
body OF the fabric. The women, aud
the classes OF women, he describes are
such as his hulnming- bird-like visit
among us, whirled about from sum-
mer-residence pillar to city
mansion post, and put about a
few cities by persons whose motive
would not be to acquaint him with them
so much as to merely display them to
him. He got very excellent notion of
our "smart set," and has shown us his
conclusions in most delicious portraiture;
and he got a not unfair, but far less
comprehensive, idea of the scattered in
tellectual strata that runs their erratic
courses through our womankind.
But-there is always but--M. BoUR-
gETs series of exquisite literary etchings
can only be regarded as first impress
sions, unproven suggestions, received by
contact with fringe of the great and
intricate fabric of American social life.
1t is not altogether apparent from the
revelations of the writing whether OF
not the author considers his findings
absolute and inclusive.
They are not SO. 1t is, perhaps, wiser
as it certainly is more charitable, TO
assume that he simply throws his i'm
pressions into conclusive form frequently
enough to lead naturally to the supposi-
tion that he means TO arrogate to him.
self the Office Of >chronicler of American
women.
Withal, he must be literary dyspep-
tic who could read this delightful chat
about our women without keen enjoy
ment, and considerable profit. 1t is not
infrequently that we gain "a knowledge
of ourselves of the greatest utility to us
through the view some critics oblige us
to take. While M. BoURGET reveals moth
ing that we were not conscious OF, the
thought his writing forces upon us is
that our knowledge is shared by foreign
observers, who accentuate what we
know to be incidental into permanent
a,d upivarsal conditio