UNLUCKY MEN.
MR. HERMANN VEZIN, the well-known actor, publishes a letter in this week's Era which revives two rather worn but still interesting subjects of speculation. One is whether there can be such a thing as an unlucky man—that is, a man whom ill-luck dogs through the whole or the greater part of life—and the other is whether to say of a man that be is unlucky ought to be considered slander. Mr. Vezin says that his career as an actor has been spoiled by the super- stition of managers that he is an unlucky man, a superstition which, as he . proves by evidence, really exists ; and he earnestly entreats all men in future to avoid this particular "slander," because when it has once fastened itself it is absolutely ruinous. The two questions, therefore, require answer before his letter can be judged upon its merits. be reply to the first would be that a man can certainly be un-
lucky in the proper sense of the word,—that is, frequently visited by misfortune for which he is entirely irresponsible.
Of course, in the majority of cases the ill-luck is only apparent, the true explanation being some deficiency in the man himself of which he is totally unconscious. He knows his powers and he is aware of his weaknesses, but he is not aware of his causes of failure. He may, for example, be a really able man, with every capacity for success, except a certain inability to understand the character of other men or women. That has been' often the deficiency which has ruined Kings; it spoiled the career of Louis XIY., whose latest adviser, Madame de Maintenon, was a good woman of the Catholic devotee type, with a decidedly inferior brain ; and it was one cause of the fall of Napoleon, whose sub-Kings and Marshals were, with the possible exception of Eugene Beau- harnais, never men of first-rate powers. That is usually attributed to his jealousy of rivals ; but he chose inferior men in civil life, and never through his whole career had a private secretary or a controller of his household who was worth his salt ; while of his two wives one was a vain and extravagant person without a brain, and the other an Arch- duchess who had not an idea beyond her claim to be con. sidered on account of her birth, and who married her chamberlain. In private life the same defect is probably of all others the commonest cause of ruin, very able men, and still oftener, able women, being led away in pecuniary affairs by persons of imperfect intelligence and positively untrust- worthy character. Or the able man has a habit of procrasti- nation of which he is wholly unaware, which leads him always to miss the moment of opportunity, the commonest of defects in able yet unsuccessful Generals ; or he is liable to what the French call entrainements and the English "rashes," which lead him into blunders that all his intimates declare to be "positively inexplicable." The ablest human being we ever knew had a way of dressing himself, always in unconsciousness, which twice coat him a great career ; while another singularly competent man spoilt every chance by a temper which was ha reality nothing but whimsical, bat which caused all employers to pronounce him hopelessly " unreliable." We should say, indeed, that the really able were specially liable to one of the most ruinous of all vices or foibles, incurable indolence, while every one knows a few quite competent men who never succeeded because they lost opportunities through an indifference of which they were totally unaware. Still, though we recognise all these, and many more, causes of failure, we cannot but admit that there are men who are genuinely " unlucky," with whom, that is, the current of events for some inexplicable reason always collides, who are always injured in an accident from which others escape, whose cabs break down when driving to im- portant appointments, whose investments which seem most reasonable are always swept away, whose relatives are blisters, and whose friends causes of expense. The writer had once an intimate friend who firmly believed of himself that the offchance of misfortune always happened to him, and always would happen, and it was exceedingly difficult for any one who knew his history to doubt that he had reason for his superstition. And the writer knew well another man —indeed, he published an account of his adventures—who passed some eight times in life through accidents which would infallibly have killed any one else, without a scratch, and who had, therefore, Clive's belief that he was destined to something,—which turned out an illusion. We know that there are laws which regulate chance, and we know that there are long intervals when they seem to be defied, and there is no perceptible reason why a man's life should not be lived within the influence of one of the intervals, favourable or the reverse. If he can throw aces or deuces ten times running, why should he not come to grief in ten consecutive incidents of life ? There is no reason perceptible why in the great Providential scheme chance should be allowed to enter, but then there is no reason why insanity should, insanity involv- ing that hardest of all things to conceive, irresponsibility ; yet both do enter. We may humbly wait for explanation, but we see no use in denying the common experience of mankind.
Then as to the second question, whether an accusation of unluckiness is a Islander, surely that must depend upon its accuracy or falsehood. Mr. Hermann Vezin says it is false as regards himself, and we entirely believe him ; but he seems to imply that it is always false, and why should that be so when, as we all know, there are unlucky people P It may
always be ungenerous, just as it is ungenerous to say of a man that he is able but a cripple, or competent but squints ; but why is it a slander to say of a man that he is unlucky if only that is the fact? We can conceive of many cases in private life in which it would be a duty to say it—for example, in advising a friend about a partnership—and in public life it would be simple folly not to take it into account. We would not as a shipowner condemn a man who bad lost many ships but had always been acquitted by Courts of Inquiry of any responsibility, but undoubtedly in comparing claims to the command of a new ship we should take the recurrent losses into reasonable account. It is a misfortune, not a fault, like a physical defect, but who with naval commands to distribute would not reckon the myopia of an appli- cant to his debit side P Mr. Hermann Vezin suggests that that is shameful; but why is it shameful unless, indeed, one disbelieves that there is such a thing as unluckiness, which is, as we are contending, an excess of incredulity ? Would Mr. Hermann Vezin have sent Esau to found a new colony knowing nothing of him but the Bible narrative ? As a matter of fact, Esau was a lucky man in the end, for be was the progenitor of a race more numerous than Jacob's children, with a much more prosperous history ; but before he was thirty, would Mr. Vezin have appointed him ? If a captain innocently but repeatedly loses ships, or a general battles, or a merchant money, surely the dispenser of patronage may take that into account without being con- demned as unreasonably superstitious. One should give the unlucky a fresh chance ? We entirely agree, but not with other people's lives, or careers, or money, unless you think his qualities so great that a considerable defect must be over- looked. We should entirely admit that in private life, in which evidence on the point must always be scanty, men should be very chary of saying that any one was unlucky; but is it really slander to say of a Bourbon pleading for a throne, " That house has exhausted its luck "? We cannot see it. The present writer has the deepest consideration for Captain Dreyfus, and would gladly help him to the fullest compensation, whether in rank or money ; but if he were a Frenchman, he would hesitate to give him an active com- mand. At least, if he did it, he would feel that he was running a special risk. He has been so markedly unlucky.
Previous page
