Page:Essays Vol 1 (Ives, 1925).pdf/250
(b) I have willingly imitated this disorderliness which we see in our young men in the manner of wearing their apparel—(c) a mantle scarf-wise, the cloak over one shoulder, (b) and wrinkled hose — which denotes a proud disdain of such outer trappings and indifference to rule. But this seems to me still better employed as regards the manner in talking. (c) All affectation, especially in our French vivacity and freedom, is unbecoming to the courtier. And in a monarchy every gentleman should be trained to bear himself like a courtier; wherefore we do well to incline a little toward the artless and disdainful. (a) I do not like a stuff in which the joinings and seamings are visible; just as in a beautiful body one should not be able to count the bones and veins. (c) Quæ veritati operam dat oratio, incomposita sit et simplex.[1] Quis accurate loquitur, nisi qui vult putide loqui?[2] Eloquence which diverts our minds to itself is harmful to its subject.
Just as in habiliments it is a sign of weakness to wish to make oneself noticeable by some peculiar and unaccustomed fashion, so, in language, the quest of new-fangled phrases and little-known words comes from a puerile and pedantic ambition. Would that I could make use only of those that are used in the markets of Paris! Aristophanes the grammarian was all at sea[3] when he criticised in Epicurus the simplicity of his words and the aim of his oratorical art, which was solely perspicuity of language.[4] A whole people follows incontinently, by reason of its facility, the habit of imitating a mode of speech; not so quickly, a mode of judging or of thinking. Most readers, when they have found a like garment, think very mistakenly that they have hold of a like body. Strength and sinews can not be borrowed, but the attire and the cloak may be. Most of those who consort with me talk like the Essays, but I know not whether they think in the same way.