FLATTERY.

Western Star, Issue 143, 3 June 1876, Page 7

FLATTERY.

It is often said that the Joto of flattery is a mark of what Mr Swinburne has not unhappily termed parvanimity. According to this current view, it is one of the surest signs of a higher moral and intellectual culture to dislike flattery, and to feel contempt for those who offer it. But though this admirable theory is so frequently advocated in words, wo much doubt whether many persons, even among the more refined classes of society, consistently hold by it in practice. Although it is doubtless true that certain forms of naked adulation have long since become distasteful in good society, a close observer will still be able to detect traces of refined appreciation of this easy kind of lip-service. Very few, wo suspect, even of the polite classes are wholly unsusceptible to the charms of a gracefully executed stroke of flattery, and it seems to be rather an affectation of extraordinary moral severity to denounce the flatterer’s art as something radically vicious. Perhaps a common sense investigation of the matter may show that, after all, there is nothing so very terrible in this fondness for the sweets of artfully-arranged adulation ; that, although it is to bo classed among the frailties of human nature, it is not. the vulgar and despicable vice which our fine maxims appear to represent it as being. Flattery may for our present purposes be roughly defined as a bestowal of praise by complimeatry word or action to a degree not actually supported by the girer’s deliberate conviction. There are obviously two things to be distinguished here —the desire to praise and the insincerity of the laudatory action. Now praise itself is clearly a pleasant thing universally desired, and it is only a suspicion of its genuineness which makes it of doubtful value. If in any way all grounds for this suspicion can be removed or hidden from sight, it is evident that the flatterer may carry on his soothing art with perfect success. As a matter of fact, wo find many persons of undoubted character and intellectual ability who are extremely slow to detect the hollowness of any piece of praise accorded to them. More especially, we may observe, among men of certain renown in art or science, and among - public officials, there are many who. appear to take all kinds of adulation quite as a matter of course, and who, so far from rigidly scrutinising the nature of the sweets thus tendered, seem to count on a certain amount of flattering attention as a perquisite of their elevated position. It is only necessary that a man be deeply impressed with a sense of his own merits in order to derive this amount of gratification from the unsifted praises of others. Biographies of eminent persons abundantly illustrate the facility with which even ;pcnctrating minds allow themselves to bo hoodwinked when flatterers present their full-flavoured cup. It looks as if such minds were so readily agitated by the pleasant excitement amour projpre as to have no space for t-'ie intrusion of critical doubts. They are so accustomed to indulge in a gentle admiration of their own personal excellence that all external praise, by harmonising so well with their own sentiments, finds easy acceptance. But again, even when-popple are not thus habitually uncritical in receiving praise, but show a fair amount of skill in discriminating the genuine coin from its counterfeits, they do not necessarily lose their relish for flattery. All who look closely into human nature must wonder at its capacity for living on half-recegnisod illusions. It is quite possible for a person to go on drawing comfort from a pleasing supposition, as, for instance, that ho is in possession of a certain moral dignity, and yet to bo fully aware that the supposition is .extremely doubtful. Those psychologists who lay stress on grades of distinct and indistinct consciousness might probably find an illustration of their favourite theory in this simultaneous play of a feeling and a suspicion of its legitimacy. If only the particular sentiment can secure a firm footing within' the boundaries of clear consciousness, it will not be soon disturbed by any number of unwelcome reflections which flit around the belt of obscure consciousness. Thus it is that we cannot but like the graceful compliment even when there is a nascent recognition of its partial insincerity and when only a moment’s unfettered reflection would assure us of the fact. In the rapid flow of conversation there is. little time for such reflection. The well-inserted allusion has just time to awaken a pleasurable glow of satisfaction, and is then expelled by new subjects of thought before it can have been submitted to a critical analysis. It would be a very lofty style of mind indeed which could execute this duty of critical investigatisn before indulging for an instant in the pleasurable sensations which such pretty illusions immediately awaken.

Nor is even this all that can be urged in explanation of, if not in excuse for, the widespread taste for flattery of a certain order. Even after there has been time for reflection, and when the liazy suspicion of the instant is transformed into a calm and settled acceptance of a probability, the compliment which was so delicious at the moment of its utterance does not necessarily lose all its piquant flavour. For it is exceedingly easy to find considerations which servo to reduce the probability to a minimum, and so to render it inoperative. For example, the person who is thus reflecting on a recently-bestowed compliment is frequently baffled in his attempt to estimate its exact value by the vagueness of the language used. The utterances of the flatterer are essentially indefinite. They commonly owe their point to a particular emphasis of voice or manner, or at least to the employment of an exceedingly indefinite superlative term. Few, if any, of tho customary forms of praise are susceptible of exact measurement. They seek rather to express a feeling in tho speaker’s mind than to gauge tho precise dimensions of tho object of the praise, and all affirmations which aim at expressing emotion are in their nature vague propositions. Suppose, for instance, that a lady has just been complimented in emphatic terms on tho excellence of a musical performance. On coal reflection she will bo apt to doubt, either from previous experience of flattery or from certain circumstances in tliis particular case, tho sincerity of tho praise. Still, she will find it hard to say whether the language used palpably overstepped the limits of the speaker’s feeling at the moment. Strictly speaking, this could-' only bo known with approximate certainty after a very full acquaintance with the particular person’s modes of speech. Very warm language, which would bo fulsome, if not ridiculous, on tho lips of an habitually stolid person, may be quite sincere when employed by a lively and demonstrative man. — Saturday Eoviow.