FOOLS!
" THERE can be no doubt that God gave us fools for our enjoyment; but we should show economy in the enjoyment of fools." The above somewhat startling sentence once fell Irom the lips of a well-known public-school master in an address to the boys. At first sight, we confess, we were puzzled rather than convinced by his words. Fools, we said to ourselves, are surely a source of exasperation, not enjoyment. In dealing with them we require to moderate our impatience, not to restrain our mirth. But on thinking the matter over we concluded that the facts were against us. In the Middle Ages, and even later, rich men kept fools for their pleasure; and though nowadays no one desires any particular right of property in any partiCular fool, yet many excellent people are still greatly amused by fools, and up to a point perhaps their enjoyment of folly is legitimate. The time is long past when physical deformity or mental aberration could amuse any decent person, and possibly even the taste for fools savours of barbarism. There may come a time when the amusement. afforded by them will seem brutal ; but the time is not come yet. There are certain actions and certain sentiments which are only defensible by reference to the good and delightful people who hold and perform them. It is not easy to defend sport by means of argument, but to condemn it is to condemn many of the most manly and humane men in the country. Perhaps it will not always be a recreation chosen by good people, but it is at present, and in matters of minor morality we must not be, as Americans say, "too previous."
We wonder how the speaker we have quoted would have defined a fool. Folly is not easy to analyse,—there are so many different kinds. There are clever fools, for instance— perhaps the most "enjoyable" sort—and silly fools, whose folly is more than half their own fault, and in whose composi- tion there is often more than a little of the knave. Then there are "fancy fools," so to speak, who appear only in fiction. And finally, there is the num whom we sometimes call a fool for want of a better word to express his entire inno- cence of the lower forms of wisdom.
Clever fools are very much the fashion nowadays. Literary society keeps quite a number for its amusement. . In mental
feature they favour their spiritual progenitors in motley. They write a great deal, and they talk a great deal, taking themselves very seriously all the while, which is no doubt part of fhe game,' and would do no harm if certain other people did not take them at their own valuation. Their métier is to say silly things in a clever way, and the chief secret of their philosophy is the deduction of rules from exceptions. A great license is allowed them in accordance with motley traditions. Current morality is an easy butt, and sometimes they say things which would not be permissible, even in an age so little strait-laced as the present, except to a professional fool. Often a keen sense of literary form gives a more legitimate piquancy to their comic casuistry. Sometimes their audience is tempted to wonder whether they are able men who are playing the fool; but this charitable sup- position is only possible when they are very young. "The fool" is a dangerous game to play ; before long a man slips from feigning to reality. Lately the world has become a little too prodigal of its flattery to such as these, who should certainly be enjoyed with economy. Grinning through a horse- collar is not a wicked, neither is it a dignified, performance ; and if a wise man enjoys now and then to see it done, he should at least show some moderation in the indulgence of his taste.
There are, of course, other and far more respectable types of clever fool. There is the fool who is apparently inspired now and then to say a really shrewd thing. He is often described by his intimates as "no fool." There is a link missing in his reasoning apparatus. He cannot take his hearer straight from one point to another ; neither can he follow an argument from end to end. Now and then, how- ever, he, or more often she, makes most astonishing leaps ; and we have known wise men who could pick tile brains of such fools as these to immense advantage, and who have been able to make quite a collection of scintillating sayings with which to adorn their own more reasonable productions. Too much admiration turns the heads of such fools. They try to manu- facture verbal gems in imitation of those which come naturally to them, and the man who makes them increase their stock will only give himself double trouble in selecting the genuine article.
Into the "clever fool" class come two very rare and superior kinds. One may live a lifetime and not encounter more than one of each. But they do exist. We mean the learned fool and the fool of culture. The learned fool is a" fact glutton," if we may be allowed the expression. He has more appetite for knowledge than power to assimilate it. Kept in his place he is useful as a kind of index to other men; but once let him get what Scotch people call "above himself," and he will begin to use his facts as missiles and become a great intel- lectual danger. The cultivated fool has lived in the hothouse atmosphere of a highly cultivated clique till he literally smells of culture; but the source of the aroma is not in his own mind, and if put out to air among philistines for a sufficient period he will lose all traces of his much-prized artificiality. It is a great bore to be obliged to observe for any length of time the antics of this type of fool; but they are amusing sometimes to tell about.
Very few "silly fools" afford any pleasure to the spectator Yet out of two types of them some dangerous entertainment may be derived. The first of these two is a pretty woman,— an inhabitant, perhaps, of the "fool-frequented fair of Vanity." But she may thrive anywhere in any station. As a rule, she is not such a fool as she looks, and her mind is capable of some expansion, at least in one direction, the direction of self-interest. The man made to match her is generally aware that folly is his most remarkable quality, and as he likes to be remarkable for anything, he exaggerates it all he can. Did he omit to act in an ineffably silly manner no one would notice his actions at all. Those who enjoy the sight of his folly are to a great extent responsible for him, and as be is an entirely useless member of society the responsibility is pretty heavy.
As to the fool of fiction, the only fear about enjoying him is that we should come to imagine that he really exists The greater number of fictitious fools are in French books. The fool of the French author is a puppet made of a mixture of saintliness, silliness, and sin. Generally he does not know right from wrong, and he seldom has any sense of duty. All his good works are works of supererogation. He is capable of self-sacrifice, and his errors proceed from defect rather than design. Not that he is deficient in the ordinary sense of the word; indeed he is usually represented as having some kind of genius.
As to the fool who never knows his own interest, he may be the most charming or the most irritating of people, but it is im- possible in either case to dislike him. In his least estimable form he is "no one's enemy but his own." In his highest he is one of the finest types which human nature produces. The early Franciscans called themselves "the fools of the world," and an epitaph on a priest of the fourteenth century (quoted by Doran in his "Court Fools ") invokes heaven for "this thy fool." We find the expression, "a fool in the Court of God," used in 1609 in a laudatory sense. Probably St. Paul's daring and eloquent expression, "We are fools for Christ's sake," threw this fanciful and beautiful side-meaning into the word. The man who realises that the highest wisdom is not to be measured by the foot-rule of prudence is perhaps the only fool whose folly may be enjoyed without economy, and who all through the ages has illustrated the old saying that "a fool may learn a wise man wit."
Previous page
