came
to anything. In vain they ran through collections of anecdotes, several
volumes of celebrated trials, and a heap of historical works.

And they dreamed of being acted at the Odeon, had their thoughts fixed
on theatrical performances, and sighed for Paris.

"I was born to be an author instead of being buried in the country!"
said Bouvard.

"And I likewise," chimed in Pecuchet.

Then came an illumination to their minds. If they had so much trouble
about it, the reason was their ignorance of the rules.

They studied them in the _Pratique du Theatre_, by D'Aubignac, and in
some works not quite so old-fashioned.

Important questions are discussed in them: Whether comedy can be written
in verse; whether tragedy does not go outside its limits by taking its
subject from modern history; whether the heroes ought to be virtuous;
what kinds of villains it allows; up to what point horrors are
permissible in it; that the details should verge towards a single end;
that the interest should increase; that the conclusion should harmonise
with the opening--these were unquestionable propositions.

"Invent resorts that can take hold of me,"

says Boileau. By what means were they to "invent resorts?"

"So that in all your speeches passion's dart
May penetrate, and warm, and move the heart."[15]

How were they to "warm the heart?"

Rules, therefore, were not sufficient; there was need, in addition, for
genius. And genius is not sufficient either. Corneille, according to the
French Academy, understands nothing about the stage; Geoffroy disparaged
Voltaire; Souligny scoffed at Racine; La Harpe blushed at Shakespeare's
name.

Becoming disgusted with the old criticism, they wished to make
acquaintance with the new, and sent for the notices of plays in the
newspapers.

What assurance! What obstinacy! What dishonesty! Outrages on
masterpieces; respect shown for platitudes; the gross ignorance of those
who pass for scholars, and the stupidity of others whom they describe as
witty.

Perhaps it is to the public that one must appeal.

But works that have been applauded sometimes displeased them, and
amongst plays that were hissed there were some that they admired.

Thus the opinions of persons of taste are unreliable, while the judgment
of the multitude is incomprehensible.

Bouvard submitted the problem to Barberou. Pecuchet, on his side, wrote
to Dumouchel.

The ex-commercial traveller was astonished at the e