The evening times., 1900-01-23
Genius and Had Manners.

Genius and Had Manners
4 suit which a certain leading lady re-
Gently brought against the actor manager
Of the company TO which she belonged has
aroused some discussion as to the latitude
which may be allowed an undoubted genius.
The actor in question is said to have made
the plea in his own defence that his eccen-
tricities OF temper and conduct were due to
genius and would have to be understood on
that basis The lady takes the ground that
this quality does not excuse man from
being a gentleman
Whether il does or not is a matter which
is not likely ever to be settled 1t is un-
doubtedly true that a great many men
OF genius have been very faulty in
their private lives. Perhaps few of them
have been irreproachable. judged by ordi-
nary standards: but then. ordinary men
are not irrepTOachable either. Why should
a genius be required 10 be a perfect gentle
man as well as to develop his own peculiar
talent, when the perfect gentleman is rare
even among those who are not particularly
brilliant
There was Carlyle. for example. His un-
nuestionably bearish temper and oddiJy of
manner caused great GRIEF TO MS wife and
some of his friends. but .hey put up with
il because he was Carlyle. The oJtside
world blames him severely. But did those
who are so ready to judge him ever hap
pen to think OF the number Of men who
are cross and dyspeptc, and ha.d to live
with. and never wrote "Sartor Resartus?'
/ If JEANNE Welsh Carlyle thought it worth
! while to love her husband. in spite Of all
/ his peculiarities. what was the rest OF hu-
manity to do with it? II did not have to
/ live with him. and it has the benefit Of
/ his marvellous work
/ The man OF genius is sometimes the
/ product Of unique conditions. He has
/ often. perhaps always, far greater burdens
I 10 bear than other men If he happens to
/ be In opposition 20 the ideas prevalent in
his own time. he has the whole force OF
society against him IN his fight, and he
feels This far more keenly than the ordi-
nary man would, because his perceptions
are keener and his view larger. There
are certain restrictions which most men
are Obliged To observe for the general good
Of society. il they ma il difficult to keep
these rules. if the rules interfere with
their full enjoyment OF life and the ac-
complishment Of their work. there is still
an obligation resting or them to conform
TO the usual ideal But the genius has a
work 20 do which is to benefit so many
people that nothing ought 10 be allowed to
. interfere with f.
Suppose public opinion had dictated that
Shakespeare should stay in Stratford-ou-
Avon and follow a trade. and suppose he
had done it. would any good have been
accomplished comparable TO that which
has come from the writing Of his wonder
ful dramas? Is there not reason why the
man who is a genius. who knows that he
has important work 10 do should be ex-
cused from some Of the obligations felt by
ordinary members Of society? II the or
binary man accepts an invitation to a din
ner. he ought to go. even il the company
be dull and unintrresting. But suppose
Robert Browning accepted an invitation OF
that sort. and half an hour before the time
Of leaving his house had an inspiration
which led TO the writing Of saul" or
"Pippa Passes" and thereby forgot all
ADtAA us tAlAh- NllltAAI MNAtA ne NO. Da
absoIved in the eyes Of the world2 Cen
orally speaking he would.
All the same, when man gets up and
pleads that he is a genius and Therefore
has leave and license to behave In man
ner nbecomiug a gentleman. there is
some reason to object to the argument IL
does not sound so well from his own lips
as from those Of others. There is no way
OF judging of the merits Of this individual
case. but in general sensible people viii
say that even a genius ought to be a gen
tleman il he cana gentleman in the true
sense of the word. without regard 10 the
conventions associated with popular ideas
on the subject-and that there are certain
faults which he may not commit without
being in danger Of condemnation just ike
any ordinary man