notebook realism quite
different from the universal verity of Balzac, but there are many pages
prompted by an exquisite sympathy or a violent passion in which the
indomitable personality of the author breaks through the impassiveness
imposed by the accepted masters of the craft. Sadness is the prevailing
tone in his work, the sort of sadness that proceeds from pity. Where
sadness does not dominate in Daudet, irony takes its place. These two
qualities, sadness which is inspired by pity for human suffering and irony
which betrays impatience with human folly, these two qualities which are
the heart and soul of Daudet's work are the enemies of that impassiveness
which is the indispensable attitude of the realist, and which Daudet tried
in vain to acquire.

Paris, the war, his intercourse with Flaubert and Goncourt and Zola, were
the influences, then, that transformed Daudet, most easily susceptible to
impressions from without. The Daudet of the great novels is not the real
Daudet, however; the real Daudet is the author of "Les Amoureuses," of the
"Lettres de mon moulin," and of "Tartarin de Tarascon."

But even in the "Tartarin" series he is not entirely himself. The pure
stream of his native simplicity and naivete is already tinged with the
worldly-wiseness of the Parisian. In the "Lettres de mon moulin" the
writer is still in sympathy with his native land, while in the earliest of
the "Tartarin" series, "Tartarin de Tarascon," there is already a spirit
of disdainful raillery which Daudet learned in Paris. Tarascon was piqued
when "Tartarin de Tarascon" appeared. Indeed, there is more than a little
in the book that may well offend local pride.

In "Numa Roumestan" the satire is still less sympathetic and less
good-natured. Numa is utterly detestable. He is a visionary; we readily
forgive such a weakness, and we are amused by this characteristic trait of
the south in Bompard and Tartarin. These two are visionaries and liars;
they are cowards too, boastful and conceited. But they have never had the
happiness of others in their hands. If a true child of the south, such as
Tartarin or Bompard, were placed in a position of trust, he would not
prove equal to the occasion and the result would be a Numa Roumestan. That
is Daudet's verdict, and certainly his decision is not flattering to the
south. Is this the decision of the better Daudet? is it not a Parisian
Daudet, whose sympathy for his native land has been warped by the pla