For, in the first
place, the identification of the personages in the framework of the
_Heptameron_ depends upon the merest and, as it seems to me, the idlest
conjecture; and, in the second, the interest of the actual
tittle-tattle, whether it could be fathered on A or B or not, is the
least part of the interest of the book. Indeed, the stories altogether
are, as I think, far less interesting than the framework.
Let us see, therefore, if we cannot treat the _Heptameron_ in a
somewhat different fashion from that in which any previous critic, even
Sainte-Beuve, has treated it. The divisions of such treatment are not
very far to seek. In the first place, let us give some account of the
works of the same class which preceded and perhaps patterned it. In
the second, let us give an account of the supposed author, of her other
works, and of the probable character of her connection with this one. In
the third, without attempting dry argument, let us give some sketch of
the vital part, which we have called the framework, and some general
characteristics of the stories.
Pages:
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109