Diotimos Reading Desk

Tap the page, move to the top or bottom edge, swipe down, or press Tab to reveal reading controls. Use the arrow keys or swipe sideways to turn pages.

← ExitThe Notebooks of Joseph Joubert, Volume II

Reading language

UNDATED

20 (Bundle 39.)

Art and pleasingness in a country’s everyday utensils prove that the fine arts exist somewhere, but not that they exist in that country. Yet, since Greece was regarded throughout antiquity as the homeland of the arts, what would prove nothing for the Hebrews proves everything in favor of the Greeks.

A beautiful poem proves something in favor of music, but not in favor of painting. Peoples who are well constituted, happy, idle, inhabitants of a beautiful country, certainly feel the need to sing, but not to paint. This art is cultivated only among powerful peoples, where depicting public events is a great means of gaining public favor; this art is cultivated only among rich peoples, where, as a part of ostentation and luxury, it is a great means of acquiring riches. Moreover, since it takes a very long time to study, it requires a man’s entire application and makes him mercenary by taking away all his means of subsistence.

A musician goes about singing and finds a welcome wherever there are people. A painter can find the means to paint and the price of his pictures only in places where there are cities. Thus painters are generally greedier for money than musicians.

It is to be observed that Virgil, in his adventures of Aeneas, places paintings everywhere. He sees himself painted at Carthage with the other illustrious Trojans. At Cumae he sees the history of Daedalus in bas-relief on the doors of the Sibyl’s temple, etc. And I do not recall Homer speaking even once of paintings in his poem. He has the adventures of Ulysses sung by Phemius. He places at Antinous’s table another singer whom he calls divine, etc. It is always music and never painting.

But since the Greeks had paintings after Homer, they must have had excellent paintings. It is not possible that men of exquisite discernment should have admired shapeless sketches. It is not possible that men accustomed to ideal beauty by their poets should have admired mediocre attempts in their painters. For in the arts, what is truly necessary in their technique is indivisibly united with the ideal. The one cannot manifest itself without the other.

21 (id.)

One always easily bears a power one hopes to be able to exercise one day.

22 (Same leaf.)

There is no authority so constantly, so entirely and so generally respected as that which arises from true and acknowledged merit..

23 (id.)

Wiser than the barbarians of our lands were, savages do not wish to admit silver, gold, or any coinage. The former were indeed as greedy for these riches as the civilized peoples they stripped of them. They were only barbarians, that is to say, peoples whom the lack of [ ] and of possessions made ferocious; moreover, they had all the vices that dependence and a soft life can give. But the latter are savages, that is to say, men who by taste love to live free, independent and in their woods, scorning for their uses the fictitious riches that serve only to give one a preeminence they do not care about. Loving, moreover, and not neglecting to procure the true goods and true pleasures that are limited for the sensible man; these will never be conquerors; they may destroy their enemies, but will not wish to subjugate them. The others, on the contrary, are by condition, that is to say, by necessity, invaders of possessions and power so long as they can be. Their misery makes them natural enemies of rich peoples; they will always wish to conquer and dominate them when they can, to put themselves in their place and have their lot, were it only for a moment.

T26.Art/pleasingness, everyday objects, somewhere/that-country distinction and nothing/everything argument remain. Would-prove versus proves preserves modality. The historical premise is translated as stated rather than independently endorsed. French retains païs with its diaeresis, Ceppendant with double p and unhyphenated beaux arts. All five paragraphs of this item are roman; only the separate Liasse 39. label is italic, inside roman parentheses, and it supplies no date.

T192.In the French source, printed item 20 owns five distinct roman paragraphs under the separate italic Liasse 39. label; no date or source annotation is present. The repeated cultivated-only propositions remain separated by one semicolon inside paragraph 2. All right endings and ordinary wraps are complete. Original-size color/native support païs and moïen/moïens with paired upper i components, poëme/poëtes with paired upper e components, and literal Ceppendant with double p. Habitans, puissans, événemens and excellens remain unmodernized. Color supplies complete word contours where the native crop clips outer edges. Paragraph 4 has literal Enée with plain capital E, Troïens and Antinoüs with paired upper marks, Sibille, Ulisse with one l and Phemius. It prints aventures in the first sentence but avantures in the later Ulisse sentence; the distinction is retained. No Homeric name or account is corrected through an external witness. The source has no comma after Homère in paragraph 5; both eussent admiré clauses and the epistemic/deontic contextual value of devoient are left literal in French. The final one/other clause remains separate. None of the poem references or names is italic.

T27.The poem/music versus painting contrast, all four descriptions, certainly, repeated only and two great-means clauses remain. Well constituted provisionally renders bien organisés without identifying a political system. Something supplies the implicit evidentiary object of prouve en faveur, while the source’s all-means-of-subsistence paradox is not softened. The two only-cultivated propositions remain in one paragraph, separated by the source semicolon. French retains poëme, païs, moïen/moïens and the forms habitans, puissans and événemens. English supplies commas before both where clauses; its comma after beautiful country corresponds to the source comma after beau païs.

T28.The musician/painter comparison, wherever versus only, means/price and generally-qualified comparison remain. Price preserves prix rather than silently replacing it with a patron; the generalization remains Joubert’s. French moïens retains its diaeresis; the body is roman.

T29.Everywhere, the shift to the narrated he, other illustrious Trojans, first-person failure to recall, even once and always/never remain. The names use conventional English forms where applicable, while French retains Enée with plain E, Troïens, Sibille, Ulisse, Phemius and Antinoüs. Antinous is not silently replaced by another Homeric name. French distinguishes aventures in the opening sentence from avantures in the Ulysses sentence; both are translated adventures. His adventures remains the source’s possessive presentation, not an independently verified book title. The names and poem references are roman. No external poem text is substituted.

T30.The inference, after-Homer relation, must, repeated impossibility and two kinds of failed attempt remain. Discernment contextually renders tact, not literal touch or social tact. Truly necessary, indivisibly and one/other dependence preserve the argument without supplying art-historical proof. Must have had gives devoient avoir its contextual inferential force; it does not assign the Greeks an obligation to possess paintings. The two eussent admiré clauses are rendered should have admired. French retains excellens and poëtes. English supplies a comma after the opening after-Homer clause and omits the comma immediately after French Car while retaining the comma after in the arts. The entire body is roman.

T31.Always/easily, hope, ability and indefinite one-day prospect remain. Power is not converted into a named office or a particular political regime.

T193.In the French source, printed item 21 has the separate italic id. relation and null date. Both indefinite on forms, always/easily, hope/ability and un jour remain. The pouvoir wrap is complete; all body text is roman.

T32.All three repeated so comparisons and the true/acknowledged pair remain. The ending preserves exactly two points after merit, corresponding to the two points collated after reconnu; it is not normalized into a three-point ellipsis and implies no settled authorial intention. French retains authorité with h and the circumflex in naît. The separate Même feuillet. relation is italic inside roman parentheses, while the body is roman. No conclusion, manuscript identity or date is supplied.

T194.In the French source, printed item 22 preserves the separate italic Même feuillet. relation and null date. Literal authorité retains h; naît has its circumflex. All three aussi and the true/recognized pair remain. The final mark consists of two baseline points in original-size color and the corrective native 452 crop. Exactly two points are transcribed after reconnu, without converting them to a conventional three-point ellipsis or asserting an authorial intention. The first native final-block crop clipped that line; its corrective crop includes it. All body text is roman.

T33.The historical categories, former/latter distinction, every restrictive only, repeated possessions/riches/goods and final momentary condition remain. Do not wish to admit makes the present volition of ne veulent point admettre explicit; the later will-not-wish and will-always-wish formulations retain future refusals and desires. May destroy contextually expresses the capacity in pourront détruire, without turning it into permission; can in when they can is idiomatic English for future pourront in that temporal clause. The empty brackets reproduce the source’s printed blank, not a reproduction gap or a measured missing-letter count; no noun is supplied. The long Loving participial opening and bounded true goods/pleasures remain deliberately uneven. For their uses provisionally retains pour leurs usages rather than inventing a claim about exchange. English replaces the source semicolon before mais les seconds with a period, supplies commas for its parenthetic phrases and retains the later two-semicolon sequence after Loving. French retains monnoyes, indépendans, conquérans and unhyphenated c’est à dire. The paragraph is roman; the separate italic id. group label does not date it. This gives Joubert’s comparison, not a new ethnographic classification.

T195.In the French source, printed item 23 retains the separate italic id. relation and null date. The source visibly prints empty square brackets after défaut; the eight stored spaces represent that printed blank, not a measured letter count and not a reproduction loss. No noun is supplied. The complete roman paragraph retains literal monnoyes, indépendans, conquérans and c’est à dire without added hyphens. Ne veulent point is present volition; pourront, voudront and pourront later remain future forms. The participial Aimant opening, two following semicolons, former/latter contrasts and imperfect subjunctive ne fût-ce remain literal. All ordinary wraps and foreground margins are readable.