THE ROMANCE OF MY
CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH

Léopold Flameng sc

[vii]

PREFACE

AT the present time, the interest which a writer’swork may have lies greatly in the study ofthose first impulses which gave it birth, of the surroundingsamid which it was elaborated, and ofthe connection between the end pursued and theachievement.

In former times a writer’s personality was ofsmall importance. His works were deemed sufficient.The duality presented by a study of thecauses of production, and the production itself, wasa matter of interest only to a small minority ofreaders.

By degrees, however, with the writer’s own consent,indiscreet glances were thrown into the personallives of those whose mission it was to direct,enlighten, or amuse the lives of other people.

Forty or fifty years ago the public first readthe book, and judged a writer by his writings, andthen would often base their judgments on theopinion of some great critic, who had slowly givenproof of his knowledge, and whose ideas werefound worthy of adoption.

To-day it is quite the contrary. A new book[viii]is so generally and indiscreetly announced that thelarger portion of the public is quite aware bothof the book and of the process of its production.A number of small reviews of the volume are read;they often are, in fact, just so many interviewswith the author, and, under the general impressionthus imparted, the book is read—a great favourfor the writer are such notices, for people mightspeak of a book and criticise it in that way withoutever having read it.

General curiosity is insatiable with regard to thesmall details concerning the habits and customs ofan author if he is already celebrated, or is likelyto achieve success.

But, on the other hand, if the present customweakens to an infinite degree the elements of personalappreciation of any work, it adds to knowledgeof the author’s portrait, which stands outfrom all these inquiries and indiscretions, withtraits of physiognomy that possess, perhaps, morelively interest.

We must obviously submit to the custom, andask ourselves whether, by means of much observationof both the author and his work, we may notobtain a broader and more enlightened criticism,uniting the author’s i