FICTION: SHORT STORIES

«« Previous page · Mark Twain: Amended Obituaries · Virginia Woolf: The Mark on the Wall · J.-K. Huysmans: 13 – Ballade en l’honneur de ma tant douce tourmente (Le Drageoir aux épices) · Multatuli: Idee Nr. 632 · Mark Twain: A Telephonic Conversation · FRANZ KAFKA: Ein Bericht für eine Akademie · MULTATULI: Idee Nr. 78 · J.-K. Huysmans: 12 – L’Extase (Le Drageoir aux épices) · Franz Kafka: Ein Traum · Mark Twain: The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County · Virginia Woolf: A Letter to a Young Poet · Gedicht Ton van Reen: De straat is van de mannen

»» there is more...

Mark Twain: Amended Obituaries

Mark Twain

(1835-1910)

Amended Obituaries

To the Editor:

Sir,—I am approaching seventy; it is in sight; it is only three years away. Necessarily, I must go soon. It is but matter-of-course wisdom, then, that I should begin to set my worldly house in order now, so that it may be done calmly and with thoroughness, in place of waiting until the last day, when, as we have often seen, the attempt to set both houses in order at the same time has been marred by the necessity for haste and by the confusion and waste of time arising from the inability of the notary and the ecclesiastic to work together harmoniously, taking turn about and giving each other friendly assistance—not perhaps in fielding, which could hardly be expected, but at least in the minor offices of keeping game and umpiring; by consequence of which conflict of interests and absence of harmonious action a draw has frequently resulted where this ill-fortune could not have happened if houses had been set in order one at a time and hurry avoided by beginning in season, and giving to each the amount of time fairly and justly proper to it.

In setting my earthly house in order I find it of moment that I should attend in person to one or two matters which men in my position have long had the habit of leaving wholly to others, with consequences often most regrettable. I wish to speak of only one of these matters at this time: Obituaries. Of necessity, an Obituary is a thing which cannot be so judiciously edited by any hand as by that of the subject of it. In such a work it is not the Facts that are of chief importance, but the light which the obituarist shall throw upon them, the meanings which he shall dress them in, the conclusions which he shall draw from them, and the judgments which he shall deliver upon them. The Verdicts, you understand: that is danger-line.

In considering this matter, in view of my approaching change, it has seemed to me wise to take such measures as may be feasible, to acquire, by courtesy of the press, access to my standing obituaries, with the privilege—if this is not asking too much—of editing, not their Facts, but their Verdicts. This, not for present profit, further than as concerns my family, but as a favorable influence usable on the Other Side, where there are some who are not friendly to me.

With this explanation of my motives, I will now ask you of your courtesy to make an appeal for me to the public press. It is my desire that such journals and periodicals as have obituaries of me lying in their pigeon-holes, with a view to sudden use some day, will not wait longer, but will publish them now, and kindly send me a marked copy. My address is simply New York city—I have no other that is permanent and not transient.

I will correct them—not the Facts, but the Verdicts—striking out such clauses as could have a deleterious influence on the Other Side, and replacing them with clauses of a more judicious character. I should, of course, expect to pay double rates for both the omissions and the substitutions; and I should also expect to pay quadruple rates for all obituaries which proved to be rightly and wisely worded in the originals, thus requiring no emendations at all.

It is my desire to leave these Amended Obituaries neatly bound behind me as a perennial consolation and entertainment to my family, and as an heirloom which shall have a mournful but definite commercial value for my remote posterity.

I beg, sir, that you will insert this Advertisement (it-eow, agate, inside), and send the bill to

Yours very respectfully,
Mark Twain.

P. S.—For the best Obituary—one suitable for me to read in public, and calculated to inspire regret—I desire to offer a Prize, consisting of a Portrait of me done entirely by myself in pen and ink without previous instructions. The ink warranted to be the kind used by the very best artists.

Mark Twain short stories
kempis.nl poetry magazine

Virginia Woolf: The Mark on the Wall

Virginia Woolf

(1882-1941)

The Mark on the Wall

Perhaps it was the middle of January in the present that I first looked up and saw the mark on the wall. In order to fix a date it is necessary to remember what one saw. So now I think of the fire; the steady film of yellow light upon the page of my book; the three chrysanthemums in the round glass bowl on the mantelpiece. Yes, it must have been the winter time, and we had just finished our tea, for I remember that I was smoking a cigarette when I looked up and saw the mark on the wall for the first time. I looked up through the smoke of my cigarette and my eye lodged for a moment upon the burning coals, and that old fancy of the crimson flag flapping from the castle tower came into my mind, and I thought of the cavalcade of red knights riding up the side of the black rock. Rather to my relief the sight of the mark interrupted the fancy, for it is an old fancy, an automatic fancy, made as a child perhaps. The mark was a small round mark, black upon the white wall, about six or seven inches above the mantelpiece.

How readily our thoughts swarm upon a new object, lifting it a little way, as ants carry a blade of straw so feverishly, and then leave it. . . If that mark was made by a nail, it can’t have been for a picture, it must have been for a miniature—the miniature of a lady with white powdered curls, powder–dusted cheeks, and lips like red carnations. A fraud of course, for the people who had this house before us would have chosen pictures in that way—an old picture for an old room. That is the sort of people they were—very interesting people, and I think of them so often, in such queer places, because one will never see them again, never know what happened next. They wanted to leave this house because they wanted to change their style of furniture, so he said, and he was in process of saying that in his opinion art should have ideas behind it when we were torn asunder, as one is torn from the old lady about to pour out tea and the young man about to hit the tennis ball in the back garden of the suburban villa as one rushes past in the train.

But as for that mark, I’m not sure about it; I don’t believe it was made by a nail after all; it’s too big, too round, for that. I might get up, but if I got up and looked at it, ten to one I shouldn’t be able to say for certain; because once a thing’s done, no one ever knows how it happened. Oh! dear me, the mystery of life; The inaccuracy of thought! The ignorance of humanity! To show how very little control of our possessions we have—what an accidental affair this living is after all our civilization—let me just count over a few of the things lost in one lifetime, beginning, for that seems always the most mysterious of losses—what cat would gnaw, what rat would nibble—three pale blue canisters of book–binding tools? Then there were the bird cages, the iron hoops, the steel skates, the Queen Anne coal–scuttle, the bagatelle board, the hand organ—all gone, and jewels, too. Opals and emeralds, they lie about the roots of turnips. What a scraping paring affair it is to be sure! The wonder is that I’ve any clothes on my back, that I sit surrounded by solid furniture at this moment. Why, if one wants to compare life to anything, one must liken it to being blown through the Tube at fifty miles an hour—landing at the other end without a single hairpin in one’s hair! Shot out at the feet of God entirely naked! Tumbling head over heels in the asphodel meadows like brown paper parcels pitched down a shoot in the post office! With one’s hair flying back like the tail of a race–horse. Yes, that seems to express the rapidity of life, the perpetual waste and repair; all so casual, all so haphazard. . .

But after life. The slow pulling down of thick green stalks so that the cup of the flower, as it turns over, deluges one with purple and red light. Why, after all, should one not be born there as one is born here, helpless, speechless, unable to focus one’s eyesight, groping at the roots of the grass, at the toes of the Giants? As for saying which are trees, and which are men and women, or whether there are such things, that one won’t be in a condition to do for fifty years or so. There will be nothing but spaces of light and dark, intersected by thick stalks, and rather higher up perhaps, rose–shaped blots of an indistinct colour—dim pinks and blues—which will, as time goes on, become more definite, become—I don’t know what. . .

And yet that mark on the wall is not a hole at all. It may even be caused by some round black substance, such as a small rose leaf, left over from the summer, and I, not being a very vigilant housekeeper—look at the dust on the mantelpiece, for example, the dust which, so they say, buried Troy three times over, only fragments of pots utterly refusing annihilation, as one can believe.

The tree outside the window taps very gently on the pane. . . I want to think quietly, calmly, spaciously, never to be interrupted, never to have to rise from my chair, to slip easily from one thing to another, without any sense of hostility, or obstacle. I want to sink deeper and deeper, away from the surface, with its hard separate facts. To steady myself, let me catch hold of the first idea that passes. . . Shakespeare. . . Well, he will do as well as another. A man who sat himself solidly in an arm–chair, and looked into the fire, so—A shower of ideas fell perpetually from some very high Heaven down through his mind. He leant his forehead on his hand, and people, looking in through the open door,—for this scene is supposed to take place on a summer’s evening—But how dull this is, this historical fiction! It doesn’t interest me at all. I wish I could hit upon a pleasant track of thought, a track indirectly reflecting credit upon myself, for those are the pleasantest thoughts, and very frequent even in the minds of modest mouse–coloured people, who believe genuinely that they dislike to hear their own praises. They are not thoughts directly praising oneself; that is the beauty of them; they are thoughts like this:

“And then I came into the room. They were discussing botany. I said how I’d seen a flower growing on a dust heap on the site of an old house in Kingsway. The seed, I said, must have been sown in the reign of Charles the First. What flowers grew in the reign of Charles the First?” I asked—(but, I don’t remember the answer). Tall flowers with purple tassels to them perhaps. And so it goes on. All the time I’m dressing up the figure of myself in my own mind, lovingly, stealthily, not openly adoring it, for if I did that, I should catch myself out, and stretch my hand at once for a book in self–protection. Indeed, it is curious how instinctively one protects the image of oneself from idolatry or any other handling that could make it ridiculous, or too unlike the original to be believed in any longer. Or is it not so very curious after all? It is a matter of great importance. Suppose the looking glass smashes, the image disappears, and the romantic figure with the green of forest depths all about it is there no longer, but only that shell of a person which is seen by other people—what an airless, shallow, bald, prominent world it becomes! A world not to be lived in. As we face each other in omnibuses and underground railways we are looking into the mirror that accounts for the vagueness, the gleam of glassiness, in our eyes. And the novelists in future will realize more and more the importance of these reflections, for of course there is not one reflection but an almost infinite number; those are the depths they will explore, those the phantoms they will pursue, leaving the description of reality more and more out of their stories, taking a knowledge of it for granted, as the Greeks did and Shakespeare perhaps—but these generalizations are very worthless. The military sound of the word is enough. It recalls leading articles, cabinet ministers—a whole class of things indeed which as a child one thought the thing itself, the standard thing, the real thing, from which one could not depart save at the risk of nameless damnation. Generalizations bring back somehow Sunday in London, Sunday afternoon walks, Sunday luncheons, and also ways of speaking of the dead, clothes, and habits—like the habit of sitting all together in one room until a certain hour, although nobody liked it. There was a rule for everything. The rule for tablecloths at that particular period was that they should be made of tapestry with little yellow compartments marked upon them, such as you may see in photographs of the carpets in the corridors of the royal palaces. Tablecloths of a different kind were not real tablecloths. How shocking, and yet how wonderful it was to discover that these real things, Sunday luncheons, Sunday walks, country houses, and tablecloths were not entirely real, were indeed half phantoms, and the damnation which visited the disbeliever in them was only a sense of illegitimate freedom. What now takes the place of those things I wonder, those real standard things? Men perhaps, should you be a woman; the masculine point of view which governs our lives, which sets the standard, which establishes Whitaker’s Table of Precedency, which has become, I suppose, since the war half a phantom to many men and women, which soon—one may hope, will be laughed into the dustbin where the phantoms go, the mahogany sideboards and the Landseer prints, Gods and Devils, Hell and so forth, leaving us all with an intoxicating sense of illegitimate freedom—if freedom exists. . .

In certain lights that mark on the wall seems actually to project from the wall. Nor is it entirely circular. I cannot be sure, but it seems to cast a perceptible shadow, suggesting that if I ran my finger down that strip of the wall it would, at a certain point, mount and descend a small tumulus, a smooth tumulus like those barrows on the South Downs which are, they say, either tombs or camps. Of the two I should prefer them to be tombs, desiring melancholy like most English people, and finding it natural at the end of a walk to think of the bones stretched beneath the turf. . . There must be some book about it. Some antiquary must have dug up those bones and given them a name. . . What sort of a man is an antiquary, I wonder? Retired Colonels for the most part, I daresay, leading parties of aged labourers to the top here, examining clods of earth and stone, and getting into correspondence with the neighbouring clergy, which, being opened at breakfast time, gives them a feeling of importance, and the comparison of arrow–heads necessitates cross–country journeys to the county towns, an agreeable necessity both to them and to their elderly wives, who wish to make plum jam or to clean out the study, and have every reason for keeping that great question of the camp or the tomb in perpetual suspension, while the Colonel himself feels agreeably philosophic in accumulating evidence on both sides of the question. It is true that he does finally incline to believe in the camp; and, being opposed, indites a pamphlet which he is about to read at the quarterly meeting of the local society when a stroke lays him low, and his last conscious thoughts are not of wife or child, but of the camp and that arrowhead there, which is now in the case at the local museum, together with the foot of a Chinese murderess, a handful of Elizabethan nails, a great many Tudor clay pipes, a piece of Roman pottery, and the wine–glass that Nelson drank out of—proving I really don’t know what.

No, no, nothing is proved, nothing is known. And if I were to get up at this very moment and ascertain that the mark on the wall is really—what shall we say?—the head of a gigantic old nail, driven in two hundred years ago, which has now, owing to the patient attrition of many generations of housemaids, revealed its head above the coat of paint, and is taking its first view of modern life in the sight of a white–walled fire–lit room, what should I gain?—Knowledge? Matter for further speculation? I can think sitting still as well as standing up. And what is knowledge? What are our learned men save the descendants of witches and hermits who crouched in caves and in woods brewing herbs, interrogating shrew–mice and writing down the language of the stars? And the less we honour them as our superstitions dwindle and our respect for beauty and health of mind increases. . . Yes, one could imagine a very pleasant world. A quiet, spacious world, with the flowers so red and blue in the open fields. A world without professors or specialists or house–keepers with the profiles of policemen, a world which one could slice with one’s thought as a fish slices the water with his fin, grazing the stems of the water–lilies, hanging suspended over nests of white sea eggs. . . How peaceful it is drown here, rooted in the centre of the world and gazing up through the grey waters, with their sudden gleams of light, and their reflections—if it were not for Whitaker’s Almanack—if it were not for the Table of Precedency!

I must jump up and see for myself what that mark on the wall really is—a nail, a rose–leaf, a crack in the wood?

Here is nature once more at her old game of self–preservation. This train of thought, she perceives, is threatening mere waste of energy, even some collision with reality, for who will ever be able to lift a finger against Whitaker’s Table of Precedency? The Archbishop of Canterbury is followed by the Lord High Chancellor; the Lord High Chancellor is followed by the Archbishop of York. Everybody follows somebody, such is the philosophy of Whitaker; and the great thing is to know who follows whom. Whitaker knows, and let that, so Nature counsels, comfort you, instead of enraging you; and if you can’t be comforted, if you must shatter this hour of peace, think of the mark on the wall.\

I understand Nature’s game—her prompting to take action as a way of ending any thought that threatens to excite or to pain. Hence, I suppose, comes our slight contempt for men of action—men, we assume, who don’t think. Still, there’s no harm in putting a full stop to one’s disagreeable thoughts by looking at a mark on the wall.

Indeed, now that I have fixed my eyes upon it, I feel that I have grasped a plank in the sea; I feel a satisfying sense of reality which at once turns the two Archbishops and the Lord High Chancellor to the shadows of shades. Here is something definite, something real. Thus, waking from a midnight dream of horror, one hastily turns on the light and lies quiescent, worshipping the chest of drawers, worshipping solidity, worshipping reality, worshipping the impersonal world which is a proof of some existence other than ours. That is what one wants to be sure of. . . Wood is a pleasant thing to think about. It comes from a tree; and trees grow, and we don’t know how they grow. For years and years they grow, without paying any attention to us, in meadows, in forests, and by the side of rivers—all things one likes to think about. The cows swish their tails beneath them on hot afternoons; they paint rivers so green that when a moorhen dives one expects to see its feathers all green when it comes up again. I like to think of the fish balanced against the stream like flags blown out; and of water–beetles slowly raiding domes of mud upon the bed of the river. I like to think of the tree itself:—first the close dry sensation of being wood; then the grinding of the storm; then the slow, delicious ooze of sap. I like to think of it, too, on winter’s nights standing in the empty field with all leaves close–furled, nothing tender exposed to the iron bullets of the moon, a naked mast upon an earth that goes tumbling, tumbling, all night long. The song of birds must sound very loud and strange in June; and how cold the feet of insects must feel upon it, as they make laborious progresses up the creases of the bark, or sun themselves upon the thin green awning of the leaves, and look straight in front of them with diamond–cut red eyes. . . One by one the fibres snap beneath the immense cold pressure of the earth, then the last storm comes and, falling, the highest branches drive deep into the ground again. Even so, life isn’t done with; there are a million patient, watchful lives still for a tree, all over the world, in bedrooms, in ships, on the pavement, lining rooms, where men and women sit after tea, smoking cigarettes. It is full of peaceful thoughts, happy thoughts, this tree. I should like to take each one separately—but something is getting in the way. . . Where was I? What has it all been about? A tree? A river? The Downs? Whitaker’s Almanack? The fields of asphodel? I can’t remember a thing. Everything’s moving, falling, slipping, vanishing. . . There is a vast upheaval of matter. Someone is standing over me and saying—

“I’m going out to buy a newspaper.”

“Yes?”

“Though it’s no good buying newspapers. . . Nothing ever happens. Curse this war; God damn this war! . . . All the same, I don’t see why we should have a snail on our wall.”

Ah, the mark on the wall! It was a snail.

Virginia Woolf: A Haunted House and other short stories

fleursdumal.nl magazine

J.-K. Huysmans: 13 – Ballade en l’honneur de ma tant douce tourmente (Le Drageoir aux épices)

Joris-Karl Huysmans

(1849-1907)

Le Drageoir aux épices (1874)

XIII. Ballade en l’honneur de ma tant douce tourmente

Joaillier, choisis dans ta coupe tes pierres les plus précieuses, fais-les ruisseler entre tes doigts, embrase en gerbes multicolores les flammes des diamants et des rubis, des émeraudes et des topazes; jamais leurs folles étincelles ne pétilleront comme les yeux de ma brune madone, comme les yeux de ma tant douce tourmente!

Les yeux de ma mie versent de morbides pâmoisons, de câlines stupeurs! Ils flamboient comme des vesprées et reflètent, au déduit, les tons phosphorescents de la mer houleuse, le féerique scintillement des mouvantes lucioles dans les nuits d’orage.

Les yeux de ma mie rompent les plus fermes volontés: c’est le vin capiteux qui coule à plein bord, c’est le philtre qui charrie le vertige, c’est la vapeur de chanvre qui affole, c’est l’opium qui fait vaciller l’âme et la traîne, éperdue, dans d’inquiétantes hallucinations, dans de paradisiaques béatitudes.

Et qu’importe! ivresse, vertige, enchantement, délire, je veux les boire jusqu’à l’extase dans ces coupes alléchantes, je veux assoupir mes angoisses, je veux étouffer mes rancoeurs dans les chaudes fumées de ton haleine, dans l’inaltérable splendeur de tes grands yeux, ô brune charmeresse!

Je veux boire l’oubli, l’irrémissible oubli, sur tes lèvres veloutées, sur ces fleurs turbulentes de ton sang! Je veux entr’ouvrir leurs rouges corolles et en faire jaillir, dans un rehaut de lumière, tes dents, tes dents qui provoquent aux luttes libertines, tes dents qui mordent cruellement les coeurs, tes dents qui sonnent furieusement la charge des baisers!

Joaillier, choisis dans ta coupe tes pierres les plus précieuses, fais-les ruisseler entre tes doigts, embrase en gerbes multicolores les flammes des grenats et des améthystes, des saphirs et des chrysoprases; jamais leurs folles étincelles ne pétilleront comme les yeux de ma bonne madone, comme les yeux de ma tant douce tourmente!

kempis.nl # kempis poetry magazine

More in: -Le Drageoir aux épices, Huysmans, J.-K.

Multatuli: Idee Nr. 632

Multatuli

(1820-1887)

Ideën (7 delen, 1862-1877)

Idee Nr. 632

De artist bespiedt, beloert, beluistert de Natuur. Zy is de geliefde die hy wil bezitten. Zy is ‘t koninkryk dat-i veroveren wil.

Vóór alles wil hy verstaan wat ze zegt.

Daarna – liefhebben is: goed-zyn – wil hy anderen deelgenoot maken van wat hy gehoord heeft.

Na veel vergeefsche pogingen – ze is geen courtisane! – na lang en moeielyk hof-maken, meent hy eindelyk ‘n glimlach te hebben opgevangen…

Helaas, ze meesmuilde slechts!

Daar klinkt iets! Zou ‘t ‘n aanmoedigend woord zyn?

Nog niet!

Ze boudeert…

Wàt toch heeft de vurige minnaar misdaan?

Ik zal ‘t u zeggen! Meent ge dat zy, de heerlyke, de machtige… meent ge, dat zy zich overgeeft na zoo korte verdediging? Na zoo lichten stryd? Na zoo weinig offer?

Ze werpt haar handschoen in ‘t dierenperk der maatschappy, en wyst daarop, als vragend: durft ge myn pand terughalen uit die arena?

En hy schrikt!

Want ze eischt veel, de trotsche gebiedster van z’n hart! Maar… indien ze minder eischte, hy zou haar minder liefhebben.

Was ‘t niet reeds ‘n eer, dat ze hem hoop gunde haar ridder te worden, wanneer hy zal hebben blyk gegeven van den moed die noodig wezen zal om ‘r schildknaap te zyn? Is niet z’n liefde zelf – onbekroond ook – reeds ‘n gave van hààr hand? Ligt er niet reeds genot in de smart van ‘t vruchteloos pogen?

O gewis!

Met ‘n sprong waagt hy zich onder ‘t gediert, dat van den muil ‘t bloed lekt der slachtoffers die ‘m voorgingen. Ze verslonden al wat liefhad, al wat dacht, al wat streefde, al wat offerde, al wat gebonden werd weggeleid van Jeruzalem’s poorte naar Calvarië. Hyenen en jakhalzen…

Ik spreek van u, Publiek! Luister, en betaal wat ge leest – al is ‘t dan op z’n hollandsch! – en krimp in-een, en wees dankbaar toe, en bluf er op tegen den vreemdeling, dat er zoo’n mooischryver werd geboren in uw land, en maak uw geld gereed voor ‘n standbeeld, uw rhetoriek voor posthume apologie!

…jakhalzen en hyenen vergasten zich voorbatig op den nieuwen buit… den nieuwen dwaas die ‘t waagt zich te geven tot middagmaal, nadat ‘t ontbyt wat schraal was. * Op den dwaas die moed had…

Uw klauwen en slagtanden te trotseeren, meent ge?

Och neen! Indien hy bevreesd was of is, hy die zich wapende met schoonheidsgevoel, en dus pyn weet te dragen maar walging schuwt, geloof me ‘Publiek’ hy is of was bevreesd voor uw stank.

En de eer was te groot, u te vergelyken met jakhals en hyena – vergeving, o woudrekels! – uw naam is: weegluis.

kempis.nl # kempis poetry magazine

More in: DICTIONARY OF IDEAS, Multatuli, Multatuli

Mark Twain: A Telephonic Conversation

Mark Twain

(1835-1910)

A Telephonic Conversation

Consider that a conversation by telephone—when you are simply sitting by and not taking any part in that conversation—is one of the solemnest curiosities of this modern life. Yesterday I was writing a deep article on a sublime philosophical subject while such a conversation was going on in the room. I notice that one can always write best when somebody is talking through a telephone close by. Well, the thing began in this way. A member of our household came in and asked me to have our house put into communication with Mr. Bagley’s, down-town. I have observed, in many cities, that the sex always shrink from calling up the central office themselves. I don’t know why, but they do. So I touched the bell, and this talk ensued:

Central Office. (Gruffly.) Hello!

I. Is it the Central Office?

C. O. Of course it is. What do you want?

I. Will you switch me on to the Bagleys, please?

C. O. All right. Just keep your ear to the telephone. Then I heard, k-look, k-look, k’look—klook-klook- klook-look-look! then a horrible “gritting” of teeth, and finally a piping female voice: Y-e-s? (Rising inflection.) Did you wish to speak to me?

Without answering, I handed the telephone to the applicant, and sat down. Then followed that queerest of all the queer things in this world—a conversation with only one end to it. You hear questions asked; you don’t hear the answer. You hear invitations given; you hear no thanks in return. You have listening pauses of dead silence, followed by apparently irrelevant and unjustifiable exclamations of glad surprise or sorrow or dismay. You can’t make head or tail of the talk, because you never hear anything that the person at the other end of the wire says. Well, I heard the following remarkable series of observations, all from the one tongue, and all shouted—for you can’t ever persuade the sex to speak gently into a telephone:

Yes? Why, how did that happen?

Pause.

What did you say?

Pause.

Oh no, I don’t think it was.

Pause.

No! Oh no, I didn’t mean that. I meant, put it in while it is still boiling—or just before it comes to a boil.

Pause.

What?

Pause.

I turned it over with a backstitch on the selvage edge.

Pause.

Yes, I like that way, too; but I think it’s better to baste it on with Valenciennes or bombazine, or something of that sort. It gives it such an air—and attracts so much notice.

Pause.

It’s forty-ninth Deuteronomy, sixty-fourth to ninety-seventh inclusive. I think we ought all to read it often.

Pause.

Perhaps so; I generally use a hair-pin.

Pause.

What did you say? (Aside.) Children, do be quiet!

Pause.

Oh! B flat! Dear me, I thought you said it was the cat!

Pause.

Since when?

Pause.

Why, I never heard of it.

Pause.

You astound me! It seems utterly impossible!

Pause.

Who did?

Pause.

Good-ness gracious!

Pause.

Well, what is this world coming to? Was it right in church?

Pause.

And was her mother there?

Pause.

Why, Mrs. Bagley, I should have died of humiliation! What did they do?

Long pause.

I can’t be perfectly sure, because I haven’t the notes by me; but I think it goes something like this: te-rolly- loll-loll, loll lolly-loll-loll, O tolly-loll-loll-lee-ly-li-i-do! And then repeat, you know.

Pause.

Yes, I think it is very sweet—and very solemn and impressive, if you get the andantino and the pianissimo right.

Pause.

Oh, gum-drops, gum-drops! But I never allow them to eat striped candy. And of course they can’t, till they get their teeth, anyway.

Pause.

What?

Pause.

Oh, not in the least—go right on. He’s here writing—it doesn’t bother him.

Pause.

Very well, I’ll come if I can. (Aside.) Dear me, how it does tire a person’s arm to hold this thing up so long! I wish she’d—

Pause.

Oh no, not at all; I like to talk—but I’m afraid I’m keeping you from your affairs.

Pause.

Visitors?

Pause.

No, we never use butter on them.

Pause.

Yes, that is a very good way; but all the cookbooks say they are very unhealthy when they are out of season. And he doesn’t like them, anyway—especially canned.

Pause.

Oh, I think that is too high for them; we have never paid over fifty cents a bunch.

Pause.

Must you go? Well, good-bye.

Pause.

Yes, I think so. Good-bye.

Pause.

Four o’clock, then—I’ll be ready. Good-bye.

Pause.

Thank you ever so much. Good-bye.

Pause.

Oh, not at all!—just as fresh—Which? Oh, I’m glad to hear you say that. Good-bye.

(Hangs up the telephone and says, “Oh, it does tire a person’s arm so!”)
A man delivers a single brutal “Good-bye,” and that is the end of it. Not so with the gentle sex—I say it in their praise; they cannot abide abruptness.

Mark Twain short stories
kempis.nl # kempis poetry magazine

FRANZ KAFKA: Ein Bericht für eine Akademie

Ein Bericht für eine Akademie

Franz Kafka (1883-1924)

Hohe Herren von der Akademie!

Sie erweisen mir die Ehre, mich aufzufordern, der Akademie einen Bericht über mein äffisches Vorleben einzureichen.

In diesem Sinne kann ich leider der Aufforderung nicht nachkommen. Nahezu fünf Jahre trennen mich vom Affentum, eine Zeit, kurz vielleicht am Kalender gemessen, unendlich lang aber durchzugaloppieren, so wie ich es getan habe, streckenweise begleitet von vortrefflichen Menschen, Ratschlägen, Beifall und Orchestralmusik, aber im Grunde allein, denn alle Begleitung hielt sich, um im Bilde zu bleiben, weit vor der Barriere. Diese Leistung wäre unmöglich gewesen, wenn ich eigensinnig hätte an meinem Ursprung, an den Erinnerungen der Jugend festhalten wollen. Gerade Verzicht auf jeden Eigensinn war das oberste Gebot, das ich mir auferlegt hatte; ich, freier Affe, fügte mich diesem Joch. Dadurch verschlossen sich mir aber ihrerseits die Erinnerungen immer mehr. War mir zuerst die Rückkehr, wenn die Menschen gewollt hätten, freigestellt durch das ganze Tor, das der Himmel über der Erde bildet, wurde es gleichzeitig mit meiner vorwärts gepeitschten Entwicklung immer niedriger und enger; wohler und eingeschlossener fühlte ich mich in der Menschenwelt; der Sturm, der mir aus meiner Vergangenheit nachblies, sänftigte sich; heute ist es nur ein Luftzug, der mir die Fersen kühlt; und das Loch in der Ferne, durch das er kommt und durch das ich einstmals kam, ist so klein geworden, daß ich, wenn überhaupt die Kräfte und der Wille hinreichen würden, um bis dorthin zurückzulaufen, das Fell vom Leib mir schinden müßte, um durchzukommen. Offen gesprochen, so gerne ich auch Bilder wähle für diese Dinge, offen gesprochen: Ihr Affentum, meine Herren, soferne Sie etwas Derartiges hinter sich haben, kann Ihnen nicht ferner sein als mir das meine. An der Ferse aber kitzelt es jeden, der hier auf Erden geht: den kleinen Schimpansen wie den großen Achilles.

In eingeschränktestem Sinn aber kann ich doch vielleicht Ihre Anfrage beantworten und ich tue es sogar mit großer Freude. Das erste, was ich lernte, war: den Handschlag geben; Handschlag bezeugt Offenheit; mag nun heute, wo ich auf dem Höhepunkte meiner Laufbahn stehe, zu jenem ersten Handschlag auch das offene Wort hinzukommen. Es wird für die Akademie nichts wesentlich Neues beibringen und weit hinter dem zurückbleiben, was man von mir verlangt hat und was ich beim besten Willen nicht sagen kann – immerhin, es soll die Richtlinie zeigen, auf welcher ein gewesener Affe in die Menschenwelt eingedrungen ist und sich dort festgesetzt hat. Doch dürfte ich selbst das Geringfügige, was folgt, gewiß nicht sagen, wenn ich meiner nicht völlig sicher wäre und meine Stellung auf allen großen Varietébühnen der zivilisierten Welt sich nicht bis zur Unerschütterlichkeit gefestigt hätte:

Ich stamme von der Goldküste. Darüber, wie ich eingefangen wurde, bin ich auf fremde Berichte angewiesen. Eine Jagdexpedition der Firma Hagenbeck – mit dem Führer habe ich übrigens seither schon manche gute Flasche Rotwein geleert – lag im Ufergebüsch auf dem Anstand, als ich am Abend inmitten eines Rudels zur Tränke lief. Man schoß; ich war der einzige, der getroffen wurde; ich bekam zwei Schüsse.

Einen in die Wange; der war leicht; hinterließ aber eine große ausrasierte rote Narbe, die mir den widerlichen, ganz und gar unzutreffenden, förmlich von einem Affen erfundenen Namen Rotpeter eingetragen hat, so als unterschiede ich mich von dem unlängst krepierten, hie und da bekannten, dressierten Affentier Peter nur durch den roten Fleck auf der Wange. Dies nebenbei.

Der zweite Schuß traf mich unterhalb der Hüfte. Er war schwer, er hat es verschuldet, daß ich noch heute ein wenig hinke. Letzthin las ich in einem Aufsatz irgendeines der zehntausend Windhunde, die sich in den Zeitungen über mich auslassen: meine Affennatur sei noch nicht ganz unterdrückt; Beweis dessen sei, daß ich, wenn Besucher kommen, mit Vorliebe die Hosen ausziehe, um die Einlaufstelle jenes Schusses zu zeigen. Dem Kerl sollte jedes Fingerchen seiner schreibenden Hand einzeln weggeknallt werden. Ich, ich darf meine Hosen ausziehen, vor wem es mir beliebt; man wird dort nichts finden als einen wohlgepflegten Pelz und die Narbe nach einem – wählen wir hier zu einem bestimmten Zwecke ein bestimmtes Wort, das aber nicht mißverstanden werden wolle – die Narbe nach einem frevelhaften Schuß. Alles liegt offen zutage; nichts ist zu verbergen; kommt es auf Wahrheit an, wirft jeder Großgesinnte die allerfeinsten Manieren ab. Würde dagegen jener Schreiber die Hosen ausziehen, wenn Besuch kommt, so hätte dies allerdings ein anderes Ansehen und ich will es als Zeichen der Vernunft gelten lassen, daß er es nicht tut. Aber dann mag er mir auch mit seinem Zartsinn vom Halse bleiben!

Nach jenen Schüssen erwachte ich – und hier beginnt allmählich meine eigene Erinnerung – in einem Käfig im Zwischendeck des Hagenbeckschen Dampfers. Es war kein vierwandiger Gitterkäfig; vielmehr waren nur drei Wände an einer Kiste festgemacht; die Kiste also bildete die vierte Wand. Das Ganze war zu niedrig zum Aufrechtstehen und zu schmal zum Niedersitzen. Ich hockte deshalb mit eingebogenen, ewig zitternden Knien, und zwar, da ich zunächst wahrscheinlich niemanden sehen und immer nur im Dunkel sein wollte, zur Kiste gewendet, während sich mir hinten die Gitterstäbe ins Fleisch einschnitten. Man hält eine solche Verwahrung wilder Tiere in der allerersten Zeit für vorteilhaft, und ich kann heute nach meiner Erfahrung nicht leugnen, daß dies im menschlichen Sinn tatsächlich der Fall ist.

Daran dachte ich aber damals nicht. Ich war zum erstenmal in meinem Leben ohne Ausweg; zumindest geradeaus ging es nicht; geradeaus vor mir war die Kiste, Brett fest an Brett gefügt. Zwar war zwischen den Brettern eine durchlaufende Lücke, die ich, als ich sie zuerst entdeckte, mit dem glückseligen Heulen des Unverstandes begrüßte, aber diese Lücke reichte bei weitem nicht einmal zum Durchstecken des Schwanzes aus und war mit aller Affenkraft nicht zu verbreitern.

Ich soll, wie man mir später sagte, ungewöhnlich wenig Lärm gemacht haben, woraus man schloß, daß ich entweder bald eingehen müsse oder daß ich, falls es mir gelingt, die erste kritische Zeit zu überleben, sehr dressurfähig sein werde. Ich überlebte diese Zeit. Dumpfes Schluchzen, schmerzhaftes Flöhesuchen, müdes Lecken einer Kokosnuß, Beklopfen der Kistenwand mit dem Schädel, Zungen-Blecken, wenn mir jemand nahekam, – das waren die ersten Beschäftigungen in dem neuen Leben. In alledem aber doch nur das eine Gefühl: kein Ausweg. Ich kann natürlich das damals affenmäßig Gefühlte heute nur mit Menschenworten nachzeichnen und verzeichne es infolgedessen, aber wenn ich auch die alte Affenwahrheit nicht mehr erreichen kann, wenigstens in der Richtung meiner Schilderung liegt sie, daran ist kein Zweifel.

Ich hatte doch so viele Auswege bisher gehabt und nun keinen mehr. Ich war festgerannt. Hätte man mich angenagelt, meine Freizügigkeit wäre dadurch nicht kleiner geworden. Warum das? Kratz dir das Fleisch zwischen den Fußzehen auf, du wirst den Grund nicht finden. Drück dich hinten gegen die Gitterstange, bis sie dich fast zweiteilt, du wirst den Grund nicht finden. Ich hatte keinen Ausweg, mußte mir ihn aber verschaffen, denn ohne ihn konnte ich nicht leben. Immer an dieser Kistenwand – ich wäre unweigerlich verreckt. Aber Affen gehören bei Hagenbeck an die Kistenwand – nun, so hörte ich auf, Affe zu sein. Ein klarer, schöner Gedankengang, den ich irgendwie mit dem Bauch ausgeheckt haben muß, denn Affen denken mit dem Bauch.

Ich habe Angst, daß man nicht genau versteht, was ich unter Ausweg verstehe. Ich gebrauche das Wort in seinem gewöhnlichsten und vollsten Sinn. Ich sage absichtlich nicht Freiheit. Ich meine nicht dieses große Gefühl der Freiheit nach allen Seiten. Als Affe kannte ich es vielleicht und ich habe Menschen kennen gelernt, die sich danach sehnen. Was mich aber anlangt, verlangte ich Freiheit weder damals noch heute. Nebenbei: mit Freiheit betrügt man sich unter Menschen allzuoft. Und so wie die Freiheit zu den erhabensten Gefühlen zählt, so auch die entsprechende Täuschung zu den erhabensten. Oft habe ich in den Varietés vor meinem Auftreten irgendein Künstlerpaar oben an der Decke an Trapezen hantieren sehen. Sie schwangen sich, sie schaukelten, sie sprangen, sie schwebten einander in die Arme, einer trug den anderen an den Haaren mit dem Gebiß. »Auch das ist Menschenfreiheit«, dachte ich, »selbstherrliche Bewegung«. Du Verspottung der heiligen Natur! Kein Bau würde standhalten vor dem Gelächter des Affentums bei diesem Anblick.

Nein, Freiheit wollte ich nicht. Nur einen Ausweg; rechts, links, wohin immer; ich stellte keine anderen Forderungen; sollte der Ausweg auch nur eine Täuschung sein; die Forderung war klein, die Täuschung würde nicht größer sein. Weiterkommen, weiterkommen! Nur nicht mit aufgehobenen Armen stillestehn, angedrückt an eine Kistenwand.

Heute sehe ich klar: ohne größte innere Ruhe hätte ich nie entkommen können. Und tatsächlich verdanke ich vielleicht alles, was ich geworden bin, der Ruhe, die mich nach den ersten Tagen dort im Schiff überkam. Die Ruhe wiederum aber verdankte ich wohl den Leuten vom Schiff.

Es sind gute Menschen, trotz allem. Gerne erinnere ich mich noch heute an den Klang ihrer schweren Schritte, der damals in meinem Halbschlaf widerhallte. Sie hatten die Gewohnheit, alles äußerst langsam in Angriff zu nehmen. Wollte sich einer die Augen reiben, so hob er die Hand wie ein Hängegewicht. Ihre Scherze waren grob, aber herzlich. Ihr Lachen war immer mit einem gefährlich klingenden aber nichts bedeutenden Husten gemischt. Immer hatten sie im Mund etwas zum Ausspeien und wohin sie ausspieen war ihnen gleichgültig. Immer klagten sie, daß meine Flöhe auf sie überspringen; aber doch waren sie mir deshalb niemals ernstlich böse; sie wußten eben, daß in meinem Fell Flöhe gedeihen und daß Flöhe Springer sind; damit fanden sie sich ab. Wenn sie dienstfrei waren, setzten sich manchmal einige im Halbkreis um mich nieder; sprachen kaum, sondern gurrten einander nur zu; rauchten, auf Kisten ausgestreckt, die Pfeife; schlugen sich aufs Knie, sobald ich die geringste Bewegung machte; und hie und da nahm einer einen Stecken und kitzelte mich dort, wo es mir angenehm war. Sollte ich heute eingeladen werden, eine Fahrt auf diesem Schiffe mitzumachen, ich würde die Einladung gewiß ablehnen, aber ebenso gewiß ist, daß es nicht nur häßliche Erinnerungen sind, denen ich dort im Zwischendeck nachhängen könnte.

Die Ruhe, die ich mir im Kreise dieser Leute erwarb, hielt mich vor allem von jedem Fluchtversuch ab. Von heute aus gesehen scheint es mir, als hätte ich zumindest geahnt, daß ich einen Ausweg finden müsse, wenn ich leben wolle, daß dieser Ausweg aber nicht durch Flucht zu erreichen sei. Ich weiß nicht mehr, ob Flucht möglich war, aber ich glaube es; einem Affen sollte Flucht immer möglich sein. Mit meinen heutigen Zähnen muß ich schon beim gewöhnlichen Nüsseknacken vorsichtig sein, damals aber hätte es mir wohl im Lauf der Zeit gelingen müssen, das Türschloß durchzubeißen. Ich tat es nicht. Was wäre damit auch gewonnen gewesen?

Man hätte mich, kaum war der Kopf hinausgesteckt, wieder eingefangen und in einen noch schlimmeren Käfig gesperrt; oder ich hätte mich unbemerkt zu anderen Tieren, etwa zu den Riesenschlangen mir gegenüber flüchten können und mich in ihren Umarmungen ausgehaucht; oder es wäre mir gar gelungen, mich bis aufs Deck zu stehlen und über Bord zu springen, dann hätte ich ein Weilchen auf dem Weltmeer geschaukelt und wäre ersoffen. Verzweiflungstaten. Ich rechnete nicht so menschlich, aber unter dem Einfluß meiner Umgebung verhielt ich mich so, wie wenn ich gerechnet hätte.

Ich rechnete nicht, wohl aber beobachtete ich in aller Ruhe. Ich sah diese Menschen auf und ab gehen, immer die gleichen Gesichter, die gleichen Bewegungen, oft schien es mir, als wäre es nur einer. Dieser Mensch oder diese Menschen gingen also unbehelligt. Ein hohes Ziel dämmerte mir auf. Niemand versprach mir, daß, wenn ich so wie sie werden würde, das Gitter aufgezogen werde. Solche Versprechungen für scheinbar unmögliche Erfüllungen werden nicht gegeben. Löst man aber die Erfüllungen ein, erscheinen nachträglich auch die Versprechungen genau dort, wo man sie früher vergeblich gesucht hat. Nun war an diesen Menschen an sich nichts, was mich sehr verlockte. Wäre ich ein Anhänger jener erwähnten Freiheit, ich hätte gewiß das Weltmeer dem Ausweg vorgezogen, der sich mir im trüben Blick dieser Menschen zeigte. Jedenfalls aber beobachtete ich sie schon lange vorher, ehe ich an solche Dinge dachte, ja die angehäuften Beobachtungen drängten mich erst in die bestimmte Richtung.

Es war so leicht, die Leute nachzuahmen. Spucken konnte ich schon in den ersten Tagen. Wir spuckten einander dann gegenseitig ins Gesicht; der Unterschied war nur, daß ich mein Gesicht nachher reinleckte, sie ihres nicht. Die Pfeife rauchte ich bald wie ein Alter; drückte ich dann auch noch den Daumen in den Pfeifenkopf, jauchzte das ganze Zwischendeck; nur den Unterschied zwischen der leeren und der gestopften Pfeife verstand ich lange nicht.

Die meiste Mühe machte mir die Schnapsflasche. Der Geruch peinigte mich; ich zwang mich mit allen Kräften; aber es vergingen Wochen, ehe ich mich überwand. Diese inneren Kämpfe nahmen die Leute merkwürdigerweise ernster als irgend etwas sonst an mir. Ich unterscheide die Leute auch in meiner Erinnerung nicht, aber da war einer, der kam immer wieder, allein oder mit Kameraden, bei Tag, bei Nacht, zu den verschiedensten Stunden; stellte sich mit der Flasche vor mich hin und gab mir Unterricht. Er begriff mich nicht, er wollte das Rätsel meines Seins lösen. Er entkorkte langsam die Flasche und blickte mich dann an, um zu prüfen, ob ich verstanden habe; ich gestehe, ich sah ihm immer mit wilder, mit überstürzter Aufmerksamkeit zu; einen solchen Menschenschüler findet kein Menschenlehrer auf dem ganzen Erdenrund; nachdem die Flasche entkorkt war, hob er sie zum Mund; ich mit meinen Blicken ihm nach bis in die Gurgel; er nickt, zufrieden mit mir, und setzt die Flasche an die Lippen; ich, entzückt von allmählicher Erkenntnis, kratze mich quietschend der Länge und Breite nach, wo es sich trifft; er freut sich, setzt die Flasche an und macht einen Schluck; ich, ungeduldig und verzweifelt, ihm nachzueifern, verunreinige mich in meinem Käfig, was wieder ihm große Genugtuung macht; und nun weit die Flasche von sich streckend und im Schwung sie wieder hinaufführend, trinkt er sie, übertrieben lehrhaft zurückgebeugt, mit einem Zuge leer. Ich, ermattet von allzugroßem Verlangen, kann nicht mehr folgen und hänge schwach am Gitter, während er den theoretischen Unterricht damit beendet, daß er sich den Bauch streicht und grinst.

Nun erst beginnt die praktische Übung. Bin ich nicht schon allzu erschöpft durch das Theoretische? Wohl, allzu erschöpft. Das gehört zu meinem Schicksal. Trotzdem greife ich, so gut ich kann, nach der hingereichten Flasche; entkorke sie zitternd; mit dem Gelingen stellen sich allmählich neue Kräfte ein; ich hebe die Flasche, vom Original schon kaum zu unterscheiden; setze sie an und – und werfe sie mit Abscheu, mit Abscheu, trotzdem sie leer ist und nur noch der Geruch sie füllt, werfe sie mit Abscheu auf den Boden. Zur Trauer meines Lehrers, zur größeren Trauer meiner selbst; weder ihn, noch mich versöhne ich dadurch, daß ich auch nach dem Wegwerfen der Flasche nicht vergesse, ausgezeichnet meinen Bauch zu streichen und dabei zu grinsen.

Allzuoft nur verlief so der Unterricht. Und zur Ehre meines Lehrers: er war mir nicht böse; wohl hielt er mir manchmal die brennende Pfeife ans Fell, bis es irgendwo, wo ich nur schwer hinreichte, zu glimmen anfing, aber dann löschte er es selbst wieder mit seiner riesigen guten Hand; er war mir nicht böse, er sah ein, daß wir auf der gleichen Seite gegen die Affennatur kämpften und daß ich den schwereren Teil hatte.

Was für ein Sieg dann allerdings für ihn wie für mich, als ich eines Abends vor großem Zuschauerkreis – vielleicht war ein Fest, ein Grammophon spielte, ein Offizier erging sich zwischen den Leuten – als ich an diesem Abend, gerade unbeachtet, eine vor meinem Käfig versehentlich stehen gelassene Schnapsflasche ergriff, unter steigender Aufmerksamkeit der Gesellschaft sie schulgerecht entkorkte, an den Mund setzte und ohne Zögern, ohne Mundverziehen, als Trinker von Fach, mit rund gewälzten Augen, schwappender Kehle, wirklich und wahrhaftig leer trank; nicht mehr als Verzweifelter, sondern als Künstler die Flasche hinwarf; zwar vergaß den Bauch zu streichen; dafür aber, weil ich nicht anders konnte, weil es mich drängte, weil mir die Sinne rauschten, kurz und gut »Hallo!« ausrief, in Menschenlaut ausbrach, mit diesem Ruf in die Menschengemeinschaft sprang und ihr Echo: »Hört nur, er spricht!« wie einen Kuß auf meinem ganzen schweißtriefenden Körper fühlte.

Ich wiederhole: es verlockte mich nicht, die Menschen nachzuahmen; ich ahmte nach, weil ich einen Ausweg suchte, aus keinem anderen Grund. Auch war mit jenem Sieg noch wenig getan. Die Stimme versagte mir sofort wieder; stellte sich erst nach Monaten ein; der Widerwille gegen die Schnapsflasche kam sogar noch verstärkter. Aber meine Richtung allerdings war mir ein für allemal gegeben.

Als ich in Hamburg dem ersten Dresseur übergeben wurde, erkannte ich bald die zwei Möglichkeiten, die mir offen standen: Zoologischer Garten oder Varieté. Ich zögerte nicht. Ich sagte mir: setze alle Kraft an, um ins Varieté zu kommen; das ist der Ausweg; Zoologischer Garten ist nur ein neuer Gitterkäfig; kommst du in ihn, bist du verloren.

Und ich lernte, meine Herren. Ach, man lernt, wenn man muß; man lernt, wenn man einen Ausweg will; man lernt rücksichtslos. Man beaufsichtigt sich selbst mit der Peitsche; man zerfleischt sich beim geringsten Widerstand. Die Affennatur raste, sich überkugelnd, aus mir hinaus und weg, so daß mein erster Lehrer selbst davon fast äffisch wurde, bald den Unterricht aufgeben und in eine Heilanstalt gebracht werden mußte. Glücklicherweise kam er wieder bald hervor.

Aber ich verbrauchte viele Lehrer, ja sogar einige Lehrer gleichzeitig. Als ich meiner Fähigkeiten schon sicherer geworden war, die Öffentlichkeit meinen Fortschritten folgte, meine Zukunft zu leuchten begann, nahm ich selbst Lehrer auf, ließ sie in fünf aufeinanderfolgenden Zimmern niedersetzen und lernte bei allen zugleich, indem ich ununterbrochen aus einem Zimmer ins andere sprang.

Diese Fortschritte! Dieses Eindringen der Wissensstrahlen von allen Seiten ins erwachende Hirn! Ich leugne nicht: es beglückte mich. Ich gestehe aber auch ein: ich überschätzte es nicht, schon damals nicht, wieviel weniger heute. Durch eine Anstrengung, die sich bisher auf der Erde nicht wiederholt hat, habe ich die Durchschnittsbildung eines Europäers erreicht. Das wäre an sich vielleicht gar nichts, ist aber insofern doch etwas, als es mir aus dem Käfig half und mir diesen besonderen Ausweg, diesen Menschenausweg verschaffte. Es gibt eine ausgezeichnete deutsche Redensart: sich in die Büsche schlagen; das habe ich getan, ich habe mich in die Büsche geschlagen. Ich hatte keinen anderen Weg, immer vorausgesetzt, daß nicht die Freiheit zu wählen war.

Überblicke ich meine Entwicklung und ihr bisheriges Ziel, so klage ich weder, noch bin ich zufrieden. Die Hände in den Hosentaschen, die Weinflasche auf dem Tisch, liege ich halb, halb sitze ich im Schaukelstuhl und schaue aus dem Fenster. Kommt Besuch, empfange ich ihn, wie es sich gebührt. Mein Impresario sitzt im Vorzimmer; läute ich, kommt er und hört, was ich zu sagen habe. Am Abend ist fast immer Vorstellung, und ich habe wohl kaum mehr zu steigernde Erfolge. Komme ich spät nachts von Banketten, aus wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaften, aus gemütlichem Beisammensein nach Hause, erwartet mich eine kleine halbdressierte Schimpansin und ich lasse es mir nach Affenart bei ihr wohlgehen. Bei Tag will ich sie nicht sehen; sie hat nämlich den Irrsinn des verwirrten dressierten Tieres im Blick; das erkenne nur ich und ich kann es nicht ertragen.

Im Ganzen habe ich jedenfalls erreicht, was ich erreichen wollte. Man sage nicht, es wäre der Mühe nicht wert gewesen. Im übrigen will ich keines Menschen Urteil, ich will nur Kenntnisse verbreiten, ich berichte nur, auch Ihnen, hohe Herren von der Akademie, habe ich nur berichtet.

Franz Kafka : Ein Landarzt. Kleine Erzählungen (1919)

kempis poetry magazine

More in: Archive K-L, Franz Kafka, Kafka, Franz, Kafka, Franz

MULTATULI: Idee Nr. 78

Multatuli

(1820-1887)

Ideën (7 delen, 1862-1877)

Idee Nr. 78

Twee personen die pas gestorven waren, ontmoetten elkaar. Voor hun sterven hadden ze veel getwist over “zyn” of “niet zyn”.
De wyze — de weter — zei: ‘Welnu, had ik niet gelyk? Ge ziet, we zyn er. Dat vervelende citaat uit Hamlet heeft afgedaan.’
De onwetende, die generaal geweest was, scheen geen lust te hebben in diskussie. Althans hy antwoordde niet op de uitnodiging tot voortzetten van de stryd die afgebroken was door de dood. Ik gis dat hy ‘t doelloos vond, en beneden de waardigheid van onsterfelyken, vooral nu ‘t niet langer te doen was om waarheid — dit was tot weerzyds genoegen uitgewezen in z’n nadeel — maar over de prioriteit van het vinden dier waarheid. Hierin scheen de gewezen generaal geen belang te stellen.
Maar wél was hy verdrietig over ‘t verlies van z’n laatste veldslag.

‘Verbeeld u, vriend onsterfelyke, ik was gewond. Men bracht me in een kamer en te bed. Ik lag de ganse dag te ylen, en kon geen bevelen geven.
Maar ‘s avends werd m’n geest helder. Ik liet my de kaarten van de situatie voorleggen, bestudeerde positiën, sterkte, snelheid van beweging. Ik gaf orders, en zond m’n adjudanten rechts en links. Dát korps moest hierlangs…’t andere daarheen… men zou de vyand aantreffen op dát punt… zie!’
En met onsterflyke vinger wees hy ‘n punt aan op de kleine aarde.
‘Welnu, werden uw bevelen niet goed uitgevoerd?’
‘Ja… maar… luister! Na alles te hebben geregeld, sliep ik in. ‘s Nachts werd ik wakker. Myn wakers hadden my alleen gelaten, vertrouwende op m’n gerusten slaap. Ik hoorde niets dan ‘t eentonig stappen van de schildwacht, onder m’n venster…’
‘Wat is dat… ‘n schildwacht?’
‘Definitiën zyn moeielyk. Nadenkende over myn bevelen, bedacht ik dat er iets verzuimd was. De kolonel P… kent ge die?
‘Is-i dood?’
‘Ik weet niet…’
‘Levenden ken ik niet.’
‘Dat ‘s waar… ik vergat dat we dood zyn. Ik ken hem ook niet meer. Maar toen scheen ik hem te kennen.
Welnu, ik bedacht dat P. misschien te laat zou komen met z’n kolonne, als ik niet spoedig… “Hoe laat is ‘t?” riep ik met schrik.
‘Hoe laat? … Schrik?… wat is dat?’
‘Definitiën zyn moeielyk. Laat of vroeg is iets van tyd…’
‘Wat is dat… tyd?’
‘Dat weet ik niet meer, maar val me niet telkens in de rede. Ik wil u vertellen, waarom ik zo
verdrietig hier ben aangekomen. Ik riep “Hoe laat is ‘t?”
Niemand antwoordde.
Ik hoorde maar altyd door dat eentonige stappen van den schildwacht, en riep nog eens: ”Hoe laat is ‘t?” zo luid ik kon.
Maar opstaan kon ik niet. Ik was zwaar gewond, en kon ‘t hoofd niet keren naar de pendule. Die wond aan de hals…’
‘Ik zie uw wond niet, en uw hals niet.’
‘ ‘t Is waar, we hebben geen hals hier, en geen wonden. Dat moet wennen. Maar toen had ik een hals, en aan die hals een wond die me belette te zien hoe laat het was. Ik riep weer: “Hoe laat is ‘t?” Geen antwoord.
Maar ik hoorde altyd de tred van die schildwacht.
En ik hoorde hem hoesten, ja, ik hoorde z’n ademhaling Maar als ik riep: ”hoe laat is ‘t?” hoorde hy my niet. Dit ergerde my, maar ik begreep het wel. Die schildwacht was pas rekruut geweest, en had de stiptheid van iemand die iets weet, maar die ‘t nog niet lang weet: hy mocht niet spreken op z’n post. Wist ge dat? ‘
‘Neen, ik was spreker van beroep, en heb dus wel eens gezwegen op myn post, waar ‘t spreken plicht was. En toch ben ik hier!’
‘Nu, myn schildwacht komt zéker hier. Hy deed zyn plicht met rekrutige domheid. Ik riep… ik riep!
Ach, altyd te vergeefs !
Ik kreeg de koorts van ergernis. De volgende morgen kwam men my berichten dat de slag verloren was, omdat kolonel P. te laat was gekomen.
“En, zeiden velen — die nooit ‘n slag verloren, omdat ze nooit slag leverden — ‘t zou anders afgelopen zyn, als Generaal X heden nacht vóór vier uren een estafette had gezonden.”
De domme kwaadaardigheid…’
‘Wat is dat?’
‘Definitiën zyn moeielyk. Val me niet in de rede. De kwaadaardige domheid redeneerde ditmaal juist. Het was wáár! Inderdaad, als ik die nacht een estafette had gezonden…!
Begryp eens hoe verdrietig ik was

Terstond na ‘t bericht van de verloren slag, liet een der manschappen verzoeken by my toegelaten te worden. Men liet hem binnen:
“Generaal, ik ben de schildwacht die op post stond onder uw venster, deze nacht van twee tot vier.”
“Hm!…” zei ik.
“Generaal, ‘t was half drie.”
“O God, riep ik, waarom dat niet eerder gezegd toen ‘t weten my nodig was! “

Daarop ben ik gestorven.

Multatuli Ideën

kempis poetry magazine

More in: Archive M-N, DICTIONARY OF IDEAS, Multatuli, Multatuli

J.-K. Huysmans: 12 – L’Extase (Le Drageoir aux épices)

Joris-Karl Huysmans

(1849-1907)

Le Drageoir aux épices (1874)

XII. L’Extase

La nuit était venue, la lune émergeait de l’horizon, étalant sur le pavé bleu du ciel sa robe couleur soufre.

J’étais assis près de ma bien-aimée, oh! bien près! Je serrais ses mains, j’aspirais la tiède senteur de son cou, le souffle enivrant de sa bouche, je me serrais contre son épaule, j’avais envie de pleurer; l’extase me tenait palpitant, éperdu, mon âme volait à tire d’aile sur la mer de l’infini.

Tout à coup elle se leva, dégagea sa main, disparut dans la charmoie, et j’entendis comme un crépitement de pluie dans la feuillée.

Le rêve délicieux s’évanouit… je retombais sur la terre, sur l’ignoble terre. O mon Dieu! c’était donc vrai, elle, la divine aimée, elle était, comme les autres, l’esclave de vulgaires besoins!

kempis poetry magazine

More in: -Le Drageoir aux épices, Huysmans, J.-K.

Franz Kafka: Ein Traum

Ein Traum

Franz Kafka (1883-1924)

Josef K. träumte:

Es war ein schöner Tag und K. wollte spazieren gehen. Kaum aber hatte er zwei Schritte gemacht, war er schon auf dem Friedhof. Es waren dort sehr künstliche, unpraktisch gewundene Wege, aber er glitt über einen solchen Weg wie auf einem reißenden Wasser in unerschütterlich schwebender Haltung. Schon von der Ferne faßte er einen frisch aufgeworfenen Grabhügel ins Auge, bei dem er Halt machen wollte. Dieser Grabhügel übte fast eine Verlockung auf ihn aus und er glaubte, gar nicht eilig genug hinkommen zu können. Manchmal aber sah er den Grabhügel kaum, er wurde ihm verdeckt durch Fahnen, deren Tücher sich wanden und mit großer Kraft aneinanderschlugen; man sah die Fahnenträger nicht, aber es war, als herrsche dort viel Jubel.

Während er den Blick noch in die Ferne gerichtet hatte, sah er plötzlich den gleichen Grabhügel neben sich am Weg, ja fast schon hinter sich. Er sprang eilig ins Gras. Da der Weg unter seinem abspringenden Fuß weiter raste, schwankte er und fiel gerade vor dem Grabhügel ins Knie. Zwei Männer standen hinter dem Grab und hielten zwischen sich einen Grabstein in der Luft; kaum war K. erschienen, stießen sie den Stein in die Erde und er stand wie festgemauert. Sofort trat aus einem Gebüsch ein dritter Mann hervor, den K. gleich als einen Künstler erkannte. Er war nur mit Hosen und einem schlecht zugeknöpften Hemd bekleidet; auf dem Kopf hatte er eine Samtkappe; in der Hand hielt er einen gewöhnlichen Bleistift, mit dem er schon beim Näherkommen Figuren in der Luft beschrieb.

Mit diesem Bleistift setzte er nun oben auf dem Stein an; der Stein war sehr hoch, er mußte sich gar nicht bücken, wohl aber mußte er sich vorbeugen, denn der Grabhügel, auf den er nicht treten wollte, trennte ihn von dem Stein. Er stand also auf den Fußspitzen und stützte sich mit der linken Hand auf die Fläche des Steines. Durch eine besonders geschickte Hantierung gelang es ihm, mit dem gewöhnlichen Bleistift Goldbuchstaben zu erzielen; er schrieb: »Hier ruht –« Jeder Buchstabe erschien rein und schön, tief geritzt und in vollkommenem Gold. Als er die zwei Worte geschrieben hatte, sah er nach K. zurück; K., der sehr begierig auf das Fortschreiten der Inschrift war, kümmerte sich kaum um den Mann, sondern blickte nur auf den Stein. Tatsächlich setzte der Mann wieder zum Weiterschreiben an, aber er konnte nicht, es bestand irgendein Hindernis, er ließ den Bleistift sinken und drehte sich wieder nach K. um. Nun sah auch K. den Künstler an und merkte, daß dieser in großer Verlegenheit war, aber die Ursache dessen nicht sagen konnte. Alle seine frühere Lebhaftigkeit war verschwunden. Auch K. geriet dadurch in Verlegenheit; sie wechselten hilflose Blicke; es lag ein häßliches Mißverständnis vor, das keiner auflösen konnte. Zur Unzeit begann nun auch eine kleine Glocke von der Grabkapelle zu läuten, aber der Künstler fuchtelte mit der erhobenen Hand und sie hörte auf. Nach einem Weilchen begann sie wieder; diesmal ganz leise und, ohne besondere Aufforderung, gleich abbrechend; es war, als wolle sie nur ihren Klang prüfen. K. war untröstlich über die Lage des Künstlers, er begann zu weinen und schluchzte lange in die vorgehaltenen Hände. Der Künstler wartete, bis K. sich beruhigt hatte, und entschloß sich dann, da er keinen andern Ausweg fand, dennoch zum Weiterschreiben. Der erste kleine Strich, den er machte, war für K. eine Erlösung, der Künstler brachte ihn aber offenbar nur mit dem äußersten Widerstreben zustande; die Schrift war auch nicht mehr so schön, vor allem schien es an Gold zu fehlen, blaß und unsicher zog sich der Strich hin, nur sehr groß wurde der Buchstabe. Es war ein J, fast war es schon beendet, da stampfte der Künstler wütend mit einem Fuß in den Grabhügel hinein, daß die Erde ringsum in die Höhe flog. Endlich verstand ihn K.; ihn abzubitten war keine Zeit mehr; mit allen Fingern grub er in die Erde, die fast keinen Widerstand leistete; alles schien vorbereitet; nur zum Schein war eine dünne Erdkruste aufgerichtet; gleich hinter ihr öffnete sich mit abschüssigen Wänden ein großes Loch, in das K., von einer sanften Strömung auf den Rücken gedreht, versank. Während er aber unten, den Kopf im Genick noch aufgerichtet, schon von der undurchdringlichen Tiefe aufgenommen wurde, jagte oben sein Name mit mächtigen Zieraten über den Stein.

Entzückt von diesem Anblick erwachte er.

Franz Kafka : Ein Landarzt. Kleine Erzählungen (1919)

fleursdumal.nl magazine

More in: Archive K-L, Franz Kafka, Kafka, Franz, Kafka, Franz

Mark Twain: The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County

Mark Twain

(1835-1910)

The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County

In compliance with the request of a friend of mine, who wrote me from the East, I called on good-natured, garrulous old Simon Wheeler, and inquired after my friend’s friend, Leonidas W. Smiley, as requested to do, and I hereunto append the result. I have a lurking suspicion that Leonidas W. Smiley is a myth; that my friend never knew such a personage; and that he only conjectured that, if I asked old Wheeler about him, it would remind him of his infamous Jim Smiley, and he would go to work and bore me nearly to death with some infernal reminiscence of him as long and tedious as it should be useless for me. If that was the design, it certainly succeeded.

I found Simon Wheeler dozing comfortably by the bar-room stove of the old, dilapidated tavern in the ancient mining camp of Angel’s, and I noticed that he was fat and bald-headed, and had an expression of winning gentleness and simplicity upon his tranquil countenance. He roused up and gave me good- day. I told him a friend of mine had commissioned me to make some inquiries about a cherished companion of his boyhood named Leonidas W. Smiley—Rev. Leonidas W. Smiley—a young minister of the Gospel, who he had heard was at one time a resident of Angel’s Camp. I added that, if Mr. Wheeler could tell me anything about this Rev. Leonidas W. Smiley, I would feel under many obligations to him.

Simon Wheeler backed me into a corner and blockaded me there with his chair, and then sat me down and reeled off the monotonous narrative which follows this paragraph. He never smiled, he never frowned, he never changed his voice from the gentle-flowing key to which he tuned the initial sentence, he never betrayed the slightest suspicion of enthusiasm; but all through the interminable narrative there ran a vein of impressive earnestness and sincerity, which showed me plainly that, so far from his imagining that there was anything ridiculous or funny about his story, he regarded it as a really important matter, and admired its two heroes as men of transcendent genius in finesse. To me the spectacle of a man drifting serenely along through such a queer yarn without ever smiling was exquisitely absurd. As I said before, I asked him to tell me what he knew of Rev. Leonidas W. Smiley, and he replied as follows. I let him go on in his own way, and never interrupted him once:

There was a feller here once by the name of Jim Smiley, in the winter of ’49—or may be it was the spring of ’50—I don’t recollect exactly, somehow, though what makes me think it was one or the other is because I remember the big flume wasn’t finished when he first came to the camp; but any way he was the curiosest man about, always betting on anything that turned up you ever see, if he could get anybody to bet on the other side; and if he couldn’t, he’d change sides. Any way that suited the other man would suit him—any way just so’s he got a bet, he was satisfied. But still he was lucky, uncommon lucky; he most always come out winner. He was always ready and laying for a chance; there couldn’t be no solitry thing mentioned but that feller’d offer to bet on it, and take any side you please, as I was just telling you. If there was a horse-race, you’d find him flush, or you’d find him busted at the end of it; if there was a dog-fight, he’d bet on it; if there was a cat-fight, he’d bet on it; if there was a chicken- fight, he’d bet on it; why, if there was two birds sitting on a fence, he would bet you which one would fly first; or if there was a camp-meeting, he would be there reg’lar, to bet on Parson Walker, which he judged to be the best exhorter about here, and so he was, too, and a good man. If he even seen a straddle-bug start to go anywheres, he would bet you how long it would take him to get wherever he was going to, and if you took him up, he would foller that straddle-bug to Mexico but what he would find out where he was bound for and how long he was on the road. Lots of the boys here has seen that Smiley, and can tell you about him. Why, it never made no difference to him—he would bet on any thing—the dangdest feller. Parson Walker’s wife laid very sick once, for a good while, and it seemed as if they warn’t going to save her; but one morning he come in, and Smiley asked how she was, and he said she was considerable better— thank the Lord for His inf’nit mercy—and coming on so smart that, with the blessing of Prov’dence, she’d get well yet; and Smiley, before he thought, says, “Well, I’ll risk two-and-a-half that she don’t, anyway.”

This-yer Smiley had a mare—the boys called her the fifteen-minute nag, but that was only in fun, you know, because, of course, she was faster than that—and he used to win money on that horse, for all she was so slow and always had the asthma, or the distemper, or the consumption, or something of that kind. They used to give her two or three hundred yards’ start, and then pass her under way; but always at the fag-end of the race she’d get excited and desperate-like, and come cavorting and straddling up, and scattering her legs around limber, sometimes in the air, and sometimes out to one side amongst the fences, and kicking up m-o-r-e dust, and raising m-o-r-e racket with her coughing and sneezing and blowing her nose—and always fetch up at the stand just about a neck ahead, as near as you could cipher it down.

And he had a little small bull pup, that to look at him you’d think he wan’t worth a cent, but to set around and look ornery, and lay for a chance to steal something. But as soon as the money was up on him, he was a different dog; his under-jaw’d begin to stick out like the fo’castle of a steamboat, and his teeth would uncover, and shine savage like the furnaces. And a dog might tackle him, and bully-rag him, and bite him, and throw him over his shoulder two or three times, and Andrew Jackson—which was the name of the pup— Andrew Jackson would never let on but what he was satisfied, and hadn’t expected nothing else—and the bets being doubled and doubled on the other side all the time, till the money was all up; and then all of a sudden he would grab that other dog jest by the j’int of his hind leg and freeze to it—not chaw, you understand, but only jest grip and hang on till they throwed up the sponge, if it was a year. Smiley always come out winner on that pup, till he harnessed a dog once that didn’t have no hind legs, because they’d been sawed off by a circular saw, and when the thing had gone along far enough, and the money was all up, and he come to make a snatch for his pet holt, he saw in a minute how he’d been imposed on, and how the other dog had him in the door, so to speak, and he ’peared surprised, and then he looked sorter discouraged-like, and didn’t try no more to win the fight, and so he got shucked out bad. He give Smiley a look, as much as to say his heart was broke, and it was his fault, for putting up a dog that hadn’t no hind legs for him to take holt of, which was his main dependence in a fight, and then he limped off a piece and laid down and died. It was a good pup, was that Andrew Jackson, and would have made a name for hisself if he’d lived, for the stuff was in him, and he had genius—I know it, because he hadn’t had no opportunities to speak of, and it don’t stand to reason that a dog could make such a fight as he could under them circumstances, if he hadn’t to talent. It always makes me feel sorry when I think of that last fight of his’n, and the way it turned out.

Well, this-yer Smiley had rat-tarriers, and chicken cocks, and tomcats, and all them kind of things, till you couldn’t rest, and you couldn’t fetch nothing for him to bet on but he’d match you. He ketched a frog one day, and took him home, and said he cal’klated to edercate him; and so he never done nothing for three months but set in his back yard and learn that frog to jump. And you bet you he did learn him, too. He’d give him a little punch behind, and the next minute you’d see that frog whirling in the air like a doughnut—see him turn one somerset, or may be a couple, if he got a good start, and come down flat- footed and all right, like a cat. He got him up so in the matter of catching flies, and kept him in practice so constant, that he’d nail a fly every time as far as he could see him. Smiley said all a frog wanted was education, and he could do most anything—and I believe him. Why, I’ve seen him set Dan’l Webster down here on this floor—Dan’l Webster was the name of the frog—and sing out, “Flies, Dan’l, flies!” and quicker’n you could wink, he’s spring straight up, and snake a fly off’n the counter there, and flop down on the floor again as solid as a gob of mud, and fall to scratching the side of his head with his hind foot as indifferent as if he hadn’t no idea he’d been doin’ any more’n any frog might do. You never see a frog so modest and straight for’ard as he was, for all he was so gifted. And when it come to fair and square jumping on a dead level, he could get over more ground at one straddle than any animal of his breed you ever see. Jumping on a dead level was his strong suit, you understand; and when it come to that, Smiley would ante up money on him as long as he had a red. Smiley was monstrous proud of his frog, and well he might be, for fellers that had travelled and been everywheres, all said he laid over any frog that ever they see.

Well, Smiley kept the beast in a little lattice box, and he used to fetch him down town sometimes and lay for a bet. One day a feller—a stranger in the camp, he was—come across him with his box, and says:

“What might it be that you’ve got in the box?”

And Smiley says, sorter indifferent like, “It might be a parrot, or it might be a canary, may be, but it ain’t—it’s only just a frog.”

And the feller took it, and looked at it careful, and turned it round this way and that, and says, “H’m, so ’tis. Well, what’s he good for?”

“Well,” Smiley says, easy and careless, “he’s good enough for one thing, I should judge—he can out- jump ary frog in Calaveras county.”

The feller took the box again, and took another long, particular look, and give it back to Smiley, and says, very deliberate, “Well, I don’t see no p’ints about that frog that’s any better’n any other frog.”

“May be you don’t,” Smiley says. “May be you understand frogs, and may be you don’t understand ’em; may be you’ve had experience, and may be you ain’t, only a amature, as it were. Any ways, I’ve got my opinion, and I’ll risk forty dollars that he can out-jump any frog in Calaveras county.”

And the feller studied a minute, and then says, kinder sad like, “Well, I’m only a stranger here, and I ain’t got no frog; but if I had a frog, I’d bet you.”

And then Smiley says, “That’s all right—that’s all right—if you’ll hold my box a minute, I’ll go and get you a frog.” And so the feller took the box, and put up his forty dollars along with Smiley’s and set down to wait.

So he set there a good while thinking and thinking to hisself, and then he got the frog out and prized his mouth open and took a tea-spoon and filled him full of quail shot—filled him pretty near up to his chin—and set him on the floor. Smiley he went to the swamp and slopped around in the mud for a long time, and finally be ketched a frog, and fetched him in, and give him to this feller, and says:

“Now, if you’re ready, set him alongside of Dan’l, with his fore-paws just even with Dan’l, and I’ll give the word.” Then he says, “One—two—three—jump!” and him and the feller touched up the frogs from behind, and the new frog hopped off, but Dan’l give a heave, and hysted up his shoulders—so—like a Frenchman, but it wan’t no use—he couldn’t budge; he was planted as solid as an anvil, and he couldn’t no more stir than if he was anchored out. Smiley was a good deal surprised, and he was disgusted too, but he didn’t have no idea what the matter was, of course.

The feller took the money and started away; and when he was going out at the door, he sorter jerked his thumb over his shoulders— this way—at Dan’l, and says again, very deliberate, “Well, I don’t see no p’ints about that frog that’s any better’n any other frog.”

Smiley he stood scratching his head and looking down at Dan’l a long time, and at last he says, “I do wonder what in the nation that frog throw’d off for—I wonder if there ain’t something the matter with him—he ’pears to look mightly baggy, somehow.” And he ketched Dan’l by the nap of the neck, and lifted him up and says, “Why, blame my cats, if he don’t weigh five pound!” and turned him upside down, and he belched out a double handful of shot. And then he see how it was, and he was the maddest man—he set the frog down and took out after that feller, but he never ketched him. And—

(Here Simon Wheeler heard his name called from the front yard, and got up to see what was wanted.) And turning to me as he moved away, he said: “Just set where you are, stranger, and rest easy—I an’t going to be gone a second.”

But, by your leave, I did not think that a continuation of the history of the enterprising vagabond Jim Smiley would be likely to afford me much information concerning the Rev. Leonidas W. Smiley, and so I started away.

At the door I met the sociable Wheeler returning, and he button-holed me and recommenced: “Well, this-yer Smiley had a yaller one-eyed cow that didn’t have no tail, only just a short stump like a bannanner, and—”

“Oh, hang Smiley and his afflicted cow!” I muttered good-naturedly, and bidding the old gentleman good- day, I departed.

Mark Twain short stories

kempis poetry magazine

Virginia Woolf: A Letter to a Young Poet

Virginia Woolf

(1882-1941)

A Letter to a Young Poet

My Dear John,

Did you ever meet, or was he before your day, that old gentleman—I forget his name—who used to enliven conversation, especially at breakfast when the post came in, by saying that the art of letter–writing is dead? The penny post, the old gentleman used to say, has killed the art of letter–writing. Nobody, he continued, examining an envelope through his eye–glasses, has the time even to cross their t’s. We rush, he went on, spreading his toast with marmalade, to the telephone. We commit our half–formed thoughts in ungrammatical phrases to the post card. Gray is dead, he continued; Horace Walpole is dead; Madame de Sévigné—she is dead too, I suppose he was about to add, but a fit of choking cut him short, and he had to leave the room before he had time to condemn all the arts, as his pleasure was, to the cemetery. But when the post came in this morning and I opened your letter stuffed with little blue sheets written all over in a cramped but not illegible hand—I regret to say, however, that several t’s were uncrossed and the grammar of one sentence seems to me dubious—I replied after all these years to that elderly necrophilist—Nonsense. The art of letter–writing has only just come into existence. It is the child of the penny post. And there is some truth in that remark, I think. Naturally when a letter cost half a crown to send, it had to prove itself a document of some importance; it was read aloud; it was tied up with green silk; after a certain number of years it was published for the infinite delectation of posterity. But your letter, on the contrary, will have to be burnt. It only cost three–halfpence to send. Therefore you could afford to be intimate, irreticent, indiscreet in the extreme. What you tell me about poor dear C. and his adventure on the Channel boat is deadly private; your ribald jests at the expense of M. would certainly ruin your friendship if they got about; I doubt, too, that posterity, unless it is much quicker in the wit than I expect, could follow the line of your thought from the roof which leaks (“splash, splash, splash into the soap dish”) past Mrs. Gape, the charwoman, whose retort to the greengrocer gives me the keenest pleasure, via Miss Curtis and her odd confidence on the steps of the omnibus; to Siamese cats (“Wrap their noses in an old stocking my Aunt says if they howl”); so to the value of criticism to a writer; so to Donne; so to Gerard Hopkins; so to tombstones; so to gold–fish; and so with a sudden alarming swoop to “Do write and tell me where poetry’s going, or if it’s dead?” No, your letter, because it is a true letter—one that can neither be read aloud now, nor printed in time to come—will have to be burnt. Posterity must live upon Walpole and Madame de Sévigné. The great age of letter–writing, which is, of course, the present, will leave no letters behind it. And in making my reply there is only one question that I can answer or attempt to answer in public; about poetry and its death.

But before I begin, I must own up to those defects, both natural and acquired, which, as you will find, distort and invalidate all that I have to say about poetry. The lack of a sound university training has always made it impossible for me to distinguish between an iambic and a dactyl, and if this were not enough to condemn one for ever, the practice of prose has bred in me, as in most prose writers, a foolish jealousy, a righteous indignation—anyhow, an emotion which the critic should be without. For how, we despised prose writers ask when we get together, could one say what one meant and observe the rules of poetry? Conceive dragging in “blade” because one had mentioned “maid”; and pairing “sorrow” with “borrow”? Rhyme is not only childish, but dishonest, we prose writers say. Then we go on to say, And look at their rules! How easy to be a poet! How strait the path is for them, and how strict! This you must do; this you must not. I would rather be a child and walk in a crocodile down a suburban path than write poetry, I have heard prose writers say. It must be like taking the veil and entering a religious order—observing the rites and rigours of metre. That explains why they repeat the same thing over and over again. Whereas we prose writers (I am only telling you the sort of nonsense prose writers talk when they are alone) are masters of language, not its slaves; nobody can teach us; nobody can coerce us; we say what we mean; we have the whole of life for our province. We are the creators, we are the explorers. . . . So we run on—nonsensically enough, I must admit.

Now that I have made a clean breast of these deficiencies, let us proceed. From certain phrases in your letter I gather that you think that poetry is in a parlous way, and that your case as a poet in this particular autumn Of 1931 is a great deal harder than Shakespeare’s, Dryden’s, Pope’s, or Tennyson’s. In fact it is the hardest case that has ever been known. Here you give me an opening, which I am prompt to seize, for a little lecture. Never think yourself singular, never think your own case much harder than other people’s. I admit that the age we live in makes this difficult. For the first time in history there are readers—a large body of people, occupied in business, in sport, in nursing their grandfathers, in tying up parcels behind counters—they all read now; and they want to be told how to read and what to read; and their teachers—the reviewers, the lecturers, the broadcasters—must in all humanity make reading easy for them; assure them that literature is violent and exciting, full of heroes and villains; of hostile forces perpetually in conflict; of fields strewn with bones; of solitary victors riding off on white horses wrapped in black cloaks to meet their death at the turn of the road. A pistol shot rings out. “The age of romance was over. The age of realism had begun”—you know the sort of thing. Now of course writers themselves know very well that there is not a word of truth in all this—there are no battles, and no murders and no defeats and no victories. But as it is of the utmost importance that readers should be amused, writers acquiesce. They dress themselves up. They act their parts. One leads; the other follows. One is romantic, the other realist. One is advanced, the other out of date. There is no harm in it, so long as you take it as a joke, but once you believe in it, once you begin to take yourself seriously as a leader or as a follower, as a modern or as a conservative, then you become a self–conscious, biting, and scratching little animal whose work is not of the slightest value or importance to anybody. Think of yourself rather as something much humbler and less spectacular, but to my mind, far more interesting—a poet in whom live all the poets of the past, from whom all poets in time to come will spring. You have a touch of Chaucer in you, and something of Shakespeare; Dryden, Pope, Tennyson—to mention only the respectable among your ancestors—stir in your blood and sometimes move your pen a little to the right or to the left. In short you are an immensely ancient, complex, and continuous character, for which reason please treat yourself with respect and think twice before you dress up as Guy Fawkes and spring out upon timid old ladies at street corners, threatening death and demanding twopence–halfpenny.

However, as you say that you are in a fix (“it has never been so hard to write poetry as it is to–day and that poetry may be, you think, at its last gasp in England the novelists are doing all the interesting things now”), let me while away the time before the post goes in imagining your state and in hazarding one or two guesses which, since this is a letter, need not be taken too seriously or pressed too far. Let me try to put myself in your place; let me try to imagine, with your letter to help me, what it feels like to be a young poet in the autumn of 1931. (And taking my own advice, I shall treat you not as one poet in particular, but as several poets in one.) On the floor of your mind, then—is it not this that makes you a poet?—rhythm keeps up its perpetual beat. Sometimes it seems to die down to nothing; it lets you eat, sleep, talk like other people. Then again it swells and rises and attempts to sweep all the contents of your mind into one dominant dance. To–night is such an occasion. Although you are alone, and have taken one boot off and are about to undo the other, you cannot go on with the process of undressing, but must instantly write at the bidding of the dance. You snatch pen and paper; you hardly trouble to hold the one or to straighten the other. And while you write, while the first stanzas of the dance are being fastened down, I will withdraw a little and look out of the window. A woman passes, then a man; a car glides to a stop and then—but there is no need to say what I see out of the window, nor indeed is there time, for I am suddenly recalled from my observations by a cry of rage or despair. Your page is crumpled in a ball; your pen sticks upright by the nib in the carpet. If there were a cat to swing or a wife to murder now would be the time. So at least I infer from the ferocity of your expression. You are rasped, jarred, thoroughly out of temper. And if I am to guess the reason, it is, I should say, that the rhythm which was opening and shutting with a force that sent shocks of excitement from your head to your heels has encountered some hard and hostile object upon which it has smashed itself to pieces. Something has worked in which cannot be made into poetry; some foreign body, angular, sharp–edged, gritty, has refused to join in the dance. Obviously, suspicion attaches to Mrs. Gape; she has asked you to make a poem of her; then to Miss Curtis and her confidences on the omnibus; then to C., who has infected you with a wish to tell his story—and a very amusing one it was—in verse. But for some reason you cannot do their bidding. Chaucer could; Shakespeare could; so could Crabbe, Byron, and perhaps Robert Browning. But it is October 1931, and for a long time now poetry has shirked contact with—what shall we call it?—Shall we shortly and no doubt inaccurately call it life? And will you come to my help by guessing what I mean? Well then, it has left all that to the novelist. Here you see how easy it would be for me to write two or three volumes in honour of prose and in mockery of verse; to say how wide and ample is the domain of the one, how starved and stunted the little grove of the other. But it would be simpler and perhaps fairer to check these theories by opening one of the thin books of modern verse that lie on your table. I open and I find myself instantly confused. Here are the common objects of daily prose—the bicycle and the omnibus. Obviously the poet is making his muse face facts. Listen:

Which of you waking early and watching daybreak
Will not hasten in heart, handsome, aware of wonder
At light unleashed, advancing; a leader of movement,
Breaking like surf on turf on road and roof,
Or chasing shadow on downs like whippet racing,
The stilled stone, halting at eyelash barrier,
Enforcing in face a profile, marks of misuse,
Beating impatient and importunate on boudoir shutters
Where the old life is not up yet, with rays
Exploring through rotting floor a dismantled mill—
The old life never to be born again?

Yes, but how will he get through with it? I read on and find:

Whistling as he shuts
His door behind him, travelling to work by tube
Or walking to the park to it to ease the bowels,

and read on and find again

As a boy lately come up from country to town
Returns for the day to his village in EXPENSIVE SHOES—

and so on again to:

Seeking a heaven on earth he chases his shadow,
Loses his capital and his nerve in pursuing
What yachtsmen, explorers, climbers and BUGGERS ARE AFTER.

These lines and the words I have emphasized are enough to confirm me in part of my guess at least. The poet is trying to include Mrs. Gape. He is honestly of opinion that she can be brought into poetry and will do very well there. Poetry, he feels, will be improved by the actual, the colloquial. But though I honour him for the attempt, I doubt that it is wholly successful. I feel a jar. I feel a shock. I feel as if I had stubbed my toe on the corner of the wardrobe. Am I then, I go on to ask, shocked, prudishly and conventionally, by the words themselves? I think not. The shock is literally a shock. The poet as I guess has strained himself to include an emotion that is not domesticated and acclimatized to poetry; the effort has thrown him off his balance; he rights himself, as I am sure I shall find if I turn the page, by a violent recourse to the poetical—he invokes the moon or the nightingale. Anyhow, the transition is sharp. The poem is cracked in the middle. Look, it comes apart in my hands: here is reality on one side, here is beauty on the other; and instead of acquiring a whole object rounded and entire, I am left with broken parts in my hands which, since my reason has been roused and my imagination has not been allowed to take entire possession of me, I contemplate coldly, critically, and with distaste.

Such at least is the hasty analysis I make of my own sensations as a reader; but again I am interrupted. I see that you have overcome your difficulty, whatever it was; the pen is once more in action, and having torn up the first poem you are at work upon another. Now then if I want to understand your state of mind I must invent another explanation to account for this return of fluency. You have dismissed, as I suppose, all sorts of things that would come naturally to your pen if you had been writing prose—the charwoman, the omnibus, the incident on the Channel boat. Your range is restricted—I judge from your expression—concentrated and intensified. I hazard a guess that you are thinking now, not about things in general, but about yourself in particular. There is a fixity, a gloom, yet an inner glow that seem to hint that you are looking within and not without. But in order to consolidate these flimsy guesses about the meaning of an expression on a face, let me open another of the books on your table and check it by what I find there. Again I open at random and read this:

To penetrate that room is my desire,
The extreme attic of the mind, that lies
Just beyond the last bend in the corridor.
Writing I do it. Phrases, poems are keys.
Loving’s another way (but not so sure).
A fire’s in there, I think, there’s truth at last
Deep in a lumber chest. Sometimes I’m near,
But draughts puff out the matches, and I’m lost.
Sometimes I’m lucky, find a key to turn,
Open an inch or two—but always then
A bell rings, someone calls, or cries of “fire”
Arrest my hand when nothing’s known or seen,
And running down the stairs again I mourn.

and then this:

There is a dark room,
The locked and shuttered womb,
Where negative’s made positive.
Another dark room,
The blind and bolted tomb,
Where positives change to negative.
We may not undo that or escape this, who
Have birth and death coiled in our bones,
Nothing we can do
Will sweeten the real rue,
That we begin, and end, with groans.

And then this:

Never being, but always at the edge of Being
My head, like Death mask, is brought into the Sun.
The shadow pointing finger across cheek,
I move lips for tasting, I move hands for touching,
But never am nearer than touching,
Though the spirit leans outward for seeing.
Observing rose, gold, eyes, an admired landscape,
My senses record the act of wishing
Wishing to be
Rose, gold, landscape or another—
Claiming fulfilment in the act of loving.

Since these quotations are chosen at random and I have yet found three different poets writing about nothing, if not about the poet himself, I hold that the chances are that you too are engaged in the same occupation. I conclude that self offers no impediment; self joins in the dance; self lends itself to the rhythm; it is apparently easier to write a poem about oneself than about any other subject. But what does one mean by “oneself”? Not the self that Wordsworth, Keats, and Shelley have described—not the self that loves a woman, or that hates a tyrant, or that broods over the mystery of the world. No, the self that you are engaged in describing is shut out from all that. It is a self that sits alone in the room at night with the blinds drawn. In other words the poet is much less interested in what we have in common than in what he has apart. Hence I suppose the extreme difficulty of these poems—and I have to confess that it would floor me completely to say from one reading or even from two or three what these poems mean. The poet is trying honestly and exactly to describe a world that has perhaps no existence except for one particular person at one particular moment. And the more sincere he is in keeping to the precise outline of the roses and cabbages of his private universe, the more he puzzles us who have agreed in a lazy spirit of compromise to see roses and cabbages as they are seen, more or less, by the twenty–six passengers on the outside of an omnibus. He strains to describe; we strain to see; he flickers his torch; we catch a flying gleam. It is exciting; it is stimulating; but is that a tree, we ask, or is it perhaps an old woman tying up her shoe in the gutter?

Well, then, if there is any truth in what I am saying—if that is you cannot write about the actual, the colloquial, Mrs. Gape or the Channel boat or Miss Curtis on the omnibus, without straining the machine of poetry, if, therefore, you are driven to contemplate landscapes and emotions within and must render visible to the world at large what you alone can see, then indeed yours is a hard case, and poetry, though still breathing—witness these little books—is drawing her breath in short, sharp gasps. Still, consider the symptoms. They are not the symptoms of death in the least. Death in literature, and I need not tell you how often literature has died in this country or in that, comes gracefully, smoothly, quietly. Lines slip easily down the accustomed grooves. The old designs are copied so glibly that we are half inclined to think them original, save for that very glibness. But here the very opposite is happening: here in my first quotation the poet breaks his machine because he will clog it with raw fact. In my second, he is unintelligible because of his desperate determination to tell the truth about himself. Thus I cannot help thinking that though you may be right in talking of the difficulty of the time, you are wrong to despair.

Is there not, alas, good reason to hope? I say “alas” because then I must give my reasons, which are bound to be foolish and certain also to cause pain to the large and highly respectable society of necrophils—Mr. Peabody, and his like—who much prefer death to life and are even now intoning the sacred and comfortable words, Keats is dead, Shelley is dead, Byron is dead. But it is late: necrophily induces slumber; the old gentlemen have fallen asleep over their classics, and if what I am about to say takes a sanguine tone—and for my part I do not believe in poets dying; Keats, Shelley, Byron are alive here in this room in you and you and you—I can take comfort from the thought that my hoping will not disturb their snoring. So to continue—why should not poetry, now that it has so honestly scraped itself free from certain falsities, the wreckage of the great Victorian age, now that it has so sincerely gone down into the mind of the poet and verified its outlines—a work of renovation that has to be done from time to time and was certainly needed, for bad poetry is almost always the result of forgetting oneself—all becomes distorted and impure if you lose sight of that central reality—now, I say, that poetry has done all this, why should it not once more open its eyes, look out of the window and write about other people? Two or three hundred years ago you were always writing about other people. Your pages were crammed with characters of the most opposite and various kinds—Hamlet, Cleopatra, Falstaff. Not only did we go to you for drama, and for the subtleties of human character, but we also went to you, incredible though this now seems, for laughter. You made us roar with laughter. Then later, not more than a hundred years ago, you were lashing our follies, trouncing our hypocrisies, and dashing off the most brilliant of satires. You were Byron, remember; you wrote Don Juan. You were Crabbe also; you took the most sordid details of the lives of peasants for your theme. Clearly therefore you have it in you to deal with a vast variety of subjects; it is only a temporary necessity that has shut you up in one room, alone, by yourself.

But how are you going to get out, into the world of other people? That is your problem now, if I may hazard a guess—to find the right relationship, now that you know yourself, between the self that you know and the world outside. It is a difficult problem. No living poet has, I think, altogether solved it. And there are a thousand voices prophesying despair. Science, they say, has made poetry impossible; there is no poetry in motor cars and wireless. And we have no religion. All is tumultuous and transitional. Therefore, so people say, there can be no relation between the poet and the present age. But surely that is nonsense. These accidents are superficial; they do not go nearly deep enough to destroy the most profound and primitive of instincts, the instinct of rhythm. All you need now is to stand at the window and let your rhythmical sense open and shut, open and shut, boldly and freely, until one thing melts in another, until the taxis are dancing with the daffodils, until a whole has been made from all these separate fragments. I am talking nonsense, I know. What I mean is, summon all your courage, exert all your vigilance, invoke all the gifts that Nature has been induced to bestow. Then let your rhythmical sense wind itself in and out among men and women, omnibuses, sparrows—whatever come along the street—until it has strung them together in one harmonious whole. That perhaps is your task—to find the relation between things that seem incompatible yet have a mysterious affinity, to absorb every experience that comes your way fearlessly and saturate it completely so that your poem is a whole, not a fragment; to re–think human life into poetry and so give us tragedy again and comedy by means of characters not spun out at length in the novelist’s way, but condensed and synthesised in the poet’s way–that is what we look to you to do now. But as I do not know what I mean by rhythm nor what I mean by life, and as most certainly I cannot tell you which objects can properly be combined together in a poem—that is entirely your affair—and as I cannot tell a dactyl from an iambic, and am therefore unable to say how you must modify and expand the rites and ceremonies of your ancient and mysterious art—I will move on to safer ground and turn again to these little books themselves.

When, then, I return to them I am, as I have admitted, filled, not with forebodings of death, but with hopes for the future. But one does not always want to be thinking of the future, if, as sometimes happens, one is living in the present. When I read these poems, now, at the present moment, I find myself—reading, you know, is rather like opening the door to a horde of rebels who swarm out attacking one in twenty places at once—hit, roused, scraped, bared, swung through the air, so that life seems to flash by; then again blinded, knocked on the head—all of which are agreeable sensations for a reader (since nothing is more dismal than to open the door and get no response), and all I believe certain proof that this poet is alive and kicking. And yet mingling with these cries of delight, of jubilation, I record also, as I read, the repetition in the bass of one word intoned over and over again by some malcontent. At last then, silencing the others, I say to this malcontent, “Well, and what do YOU want?” Whereupon he bursts out, rather to my discomfort, “Beauty.” Let me repeat, I take no responsibility for what my senses say when I read; I merely record the fact that there is a malcontent in me who complains that it seems to him odd, considering that English is a mixed language, a rich language; a language unmatched for its sound and colour, for its power of imagery and suggestion—it seems to him odd that these modern poets should write as if they had neither ears nor eyes, neither soles to their feet nor palms to their hands, but only honest enterprising book–fed brains, uni–sexual bodies and—but here I interrupted him. For when it comes to saying that a poet should be bisexual, and that I think is what he was about to say, even I, who have had no scientific training whatsoever, draw the line and tell that voice to be silent.

But how far, if we discount these obvious absurdities, do you think there is truth in this complaint? For my own part now that I have stopped reading, and can see the poems more or less as a whole, I think it is true that the eye and ear are starved of their rights. There is no sense of riches held in reserve behind the admirable exactitude of the lines I have quoted, as there is, for example, behind the exactitude of Mr. Yeats. The poet clings to his one word, his only word, as a drowning man to a spar. And if this is so, I am ready to hazard a reason for it all the more readily because I think it bears out what I have just been saying. The art of writing, and that is perhaps what my malcontent means by “beauty,” the art of having at one’s beck and call every word in the language, of knowing their weights, colours, sounds, associations, and thus making them, as is so necessary in English, suggest more than they can state, can be learnt of course to some extent by reading—it is impossible to read too much; but much more drastically and effectively by imagining that one is not oneself but somebody different. How can you learn to write if you write only about one single person? To take the obvious example. Can you doubt that the reason why Shakespeare knew every sound and syllable in the language and could do precisely what he liked with grammar and syntax, was that Hamlet, Falstaff and Cleopatra rushed him into this knowledge; that the lords, officers, dependants, murderers and common soldiers of the plays insisted that he should say exactly what they felt in the words expressing their feelings? It was they who taught him to write, not the begetter of the Sonnets. So that if you want to satisfy all those senses that rise in a swarm whenever we drop a poem among them—the reason, the imagination, the eyes, the ears, the palms of the hands and the soles of the feet, not to mention a million more that the psychologists have yet to name, you will do well to embark upon a long poem in which people as unlike yourself as possible talk at the tops of their voices. And for heaven’s sake, publish nothing before you are thirty.

That, I am sure, is of very great importance. Most of the faults in the poems I have been reading can be explained, I think, by the fact that they have been exposed to the fierce light of publicity while they were still too young to stand the strain. It has shrivelled them into a skeleton austerity, both emotional and verbal, which should not be characteristic of youth. The poet writes very well; he writes for the eye of a severe and intelligent public; but how much better he would have written if for ten years he had written for no eye but his own! After all, the years from twenty to thirty are years (let me refer to your letter again) of emotional excitement. The rain dripping, a wing flashing, someone passing—the commonest sounds and sights have power to fling one, as I seem to remember, from the heights of rapture to the depths of despair. And if the actual life is thus extreme, the visionary life should be free to follow. Write then, now that you are young, nonsense by the ream. Be silly, be sentimental, imitate Shelley, imitate Samuel Smiles; give the rein to every impulse; commit every fault of style, grammar, taste, and syntax; pour out; tumble over; loose anger, love, satire, in whatever words you can catch, coerce or create, in whatever metre, prose, poetry, or gibberish that comes to hand. Thus you will learn to write. But if you publish, your freedom will be checked; you will be thinking what people will say; you will write for others when you ought only to be writing for yourself. And what point can there be in curbing the wild torrent of spontaneous nonsense which is now, for a few years only, your divine gift in order to publish prim little books of experimental verses? To make money? That, we both know, is out of the question. To get criticism? But you friends will pepper your manuscripts with far more serious and searching criticism than any you will get from the reviewers. As for fame, look I implore you at famous people; see how the waters of dullness spread around them as they enter; observe their pomposity, their prophetic airs; reflect that the greatest poets were anonymous; think how Shakespeare cared nothing for fame; how Donne tossed his poems into the waste–paper basket; write an essay giving a single instance of any modern English writer who has survived the disciples and the admirers, the autograph hunters and the interviewers, the dinners and the luncheons, the celebrations and the commemorations with which English society so effectively stops the mouths of its singers and silences their songs.

But enough. I, at any rate, refuse to be necrophilus. So long as you and you and you, venerable and ancient representatives of Sappho, Shakespeare, and Shelley are aged precisely twenty–three and propose—0 enviable lot!—to spend the next fifty years of your lives in writing poetry, I refuse to think that the art is dead. And if ever the temptation to necrophilize comes over you, be warned by the fate of that old gentleman whose name I forget, but I think that it was Peabody. In the very act of consigning all the arts to the grave he choked over a large piece of hot buttered toast and the consolation then offered him that he was about to join the elder Pliny in the shades gave him, I am told, no sort of satisfaction whatsoever.

And now for the intimate, the indiscreet, and indeed, the only really interesting parts of this letter. . . .

Written in 1932
Virginia Woolf: The Death of the Moth, and other essays

kempis poetry magazine

Gedicht Ton van Reen: De straat is van de mannen

Ton van Reen

De straat is van de mannen

De mannen van Gondar slenteren over straat

want de straat is van de mannen

hand in hand lopen ze op en neer

lachend maken ze grappen over elkaar

soms staan ze stil, om te praten

met de mannen die ze juist hebben ontmoet

toen ze de andere kant op liepen

want elke ontmoeting is weer nieuw

Tientallen keren treffen ze elkaar

en elke keer is er weer wat te verhalen

over wat ze zojuist van andere mannen

over weer andere mannen hebben gehoord

in Gondar is de straat van de mannen

omdat mannen onder elkaar willen zijn

en zoveel over elkaar te zeggen hebben

Ze slenteren door tot ver na middernacht

er komt geen einde aan het praten

want ze hebben elkaar steeds weer opnieuw

zo ontzettend veel over elkaar te vertellen

pas tegen het ochtendgloren, bekaf van het praten

gaan ze naar huis met de tong op de schoenen

hun buik plat van de honger, om te slapen

en de dag lang te dromen over de komende avond

wanneer ze weer alles over elkaar kunnen horen

Ton van Reen: De naam van het mes. Afrikaanse gedichten

kempis poetry magazine

More in: -De naam van het mes, Reen, Ton van

Older Entries »« Newer Entries

Thank you for reading Fleurs du Mal - magazine for art & literature

Fleurs du Mal Magazine

In this category:

All categories

FICTION: SHORT STORIES

Mark Twain: Amended Obituaries

Virginia Woolf: The Mark on the Wall

J.-K. Huysmans: 13 – Ballade en l’honneur de ma tant douce tourmente (Le Drageoir aux épices)

Multatuli: Idee Nr. 632

Mark Twain: A Telephonic Conversation

FRANZ KAFKA: Ein Bericht für eine Akademie

MULTATULI: Idee Nr. 78

J.-K. Huysmans: 12 – L’Extase (Le Drageoir aux épices)

Franz Kafka: Ein Traum

Mark Twain: The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County

Virginia Woolf: A Letter to a Young Poet

Gedicht Ton van Reen: De straat is van de mannen