I will soon post an article about La Fontaine’s Preface to his first collection (Recueil) of Fables. He uses The Fox and the Goat as an example, hence the picture above. The Goat should be in the well, not the Fox. The Fox and the Goat were on friendly terms, and both entered the well to quench their thirst. The Fox climbed out of the well using the Goat’s shoulders and horns. He then preached and left without helping the Goat, his companion, escape.
The War in Ukraine
But that Fox is Vladimir Putin who invaded Ukraine for reasons that cannot justify the deaths of Ukrainians and their flight out of their country to escape. Putin’s army is also destroying public and private quarters. It could be that we are seeing the natural face of Vladimir Putin, but something may have gone very wrong. I doubt very much that he will win this war. He is also silencing Russian citizens who oppose the war. He has too few, if any, supporters. We cannot afford a Third World War,
—ooo—
Illness
It has been a long illness, but I have started to feel better. The pain is less severe, so I will attempt to return to normal activities.
I do not regret being vaccinated against Covid, but I could not have imagined how painful and disabling Pericarditis could be. I am now medicated, but I have not been prescribed a pain killer, except briefly, in Magog. Moreover, this illness is in its 5th month, so I suspect Pericarditis will recur.
I have been in Magog for a week but will return to Sherbrooke on 17th March 2022. Sherbrooke is home, and work must be done to my bathroom. I was asked to remove the old whirlpool bathtub because it could leak. Replacing the whirlpool tub was extremely expensive. Moreover, I must fight the Domino effect. The faucets are different; a hand shower is included. The tub surround was wood, which will not do unless the wood is treated. I considered buying an oval shower rod. But my idea was not popular. I should also replace the large vanity, the shower, and everything else, to match the tub. I must resist.
We are about to read the Preface to Jean de La Fontaine’s first collection of fables. The first collection (Recueil) consisted of six books published in 1668. The second collection, five books, was published ten years later, in 1678. In 1793, La Fontaine published his third collection, one book. He was born in 1621 and died in 1695, shortly after his third collection was published.
The apparently incoherent Preface validates Milo Winter’s illustration. Unfortunately, I have not found a picture of The Fox and the Goat by Félix Lorioux.
Milo Winter illustrated the Æsop for Children. In both Æsop’s fable and La Fontaine’s The Fox and the Goat (III.5), the Fox climbs out of the well using the shoulders and horns of the Goat. Therefore, the Goat should be inside the well.
The Æsopic moral of the fable is the ell knows: “Look before you leap.” La Fontaine’s is « En toute chose il faut considérer la fin. » (“In every matter we should mind the end.”)
My computer crashed, so I had to put it together again from scratch. It was a matter of passwords. Microsoft’s employees would not help me retrieve my password.
We are returning to Molière, but not immediately. First, we will read one more post on Confederation. It is almost ready to publish. We will read two short plays by Molière, his La Critique de l’École des femmes (1st June 1663), and L’Impromptu de Versailles (the Fall of 1663). These are often considered Molière’s “theoretical” plays, but they are performed and constitute essential reading. After reading these two plays, we will have read all plays written by Molière, but some are not presented with an English translation.
Our discussion of these two one-act plays will be followed by a reading of Madame de La Fayette‘s Princesse de Clèves (1678). You may remember that Molière depicts the harms of jealousy. Our best example is Dom Garcie de Navarre, but Amphitryon is the model most remember. In La Princesse de Clèves, jealousy precludes reciprocated love. The French wars of religion are its backdrop. Henri II is the King of France. He is married to Catherine de’ Medici, but loves his mistress, Diane de Poitiers. One of Catherine and Henri II’s sons was Henri III. He died in 1589, which is when Henri III de Navarre became Henri IV of France (La Henriade). As King of Navarre, he had been a Huguenot. He converted to Catholicism and proclaimed the Edict of Nantes (1598).
For the last few months, I have been updating my page listing Fables by La Fontaine. France has a new “site officiel” dedicated to La Fontaine, which means that links no longer take a reader to the fable under discussion.
There have been many Dandins. I remember François Rabelais‘ Perrin Dandin (Pantagruel, Third Book XLI), perhaps an early Dandin. Given the oral tradition, this Perrin Dandin may not be the first.
However, there is a Perrin Dandin in Racine’s Les Plaideurs (1668) and in La Fontaine’s “L’Huître et les Plaideurs” (“The Oyster and the Litigants”). La Fontaine’s “Oyster and the Litigants” was published in his second volume of fables (1678), but may date back to the early 1670s.
Perrin Dandin is a simple citizen in the “Pantagruel” of Rabelais, who seats himself judge-wise on the first stump that offers, and passes off hand a sentence in any matter of litigation; a character who figures similarly in a comedy of Racine’s, and in a fable of La Fontaine’s.
Ironically, Jean Racine‘s Les Plaideurswas first performed in November 1668, at l’Hôtel de Bourgogne, Paris’ most prominent venue. It therefore premiered, in Paris, the same month as Molière’s George Dandin. Molière’s George Dandin is not a judge, but whenener he runs to his in-laws, he brandishes a contract. I have pointed out that in Paris, George Dandin was no longer a comédie-ballet and pastoral. It was a three-act farce in which a peasant lived the consequences of a marriage which, he thought, would elevate him to gentilhommerie. George Dandin’s Gentilhommerie is the Sotenvilles. “Sot” means stupid (and related adjectives).
A sotie is classified as a medieval farce and morality. Some argue, however, that it is a separate genre. Marrying Angélique, whom he had not courted (galanterie), was unesottise (foolish or silly) on the part of George Dandin. Could he not see sot in her parents’ name? They are Monsieur and Madame de Sotenville (from sot), and Madame de Sotenville was born a La Prudoterie, from prude. In Molière’s Le Misanthrope, Arsinoé is the opposite of Célimène. The prude is the opposite of the mondaine. Moreover, names such as Sotenville do not seem real. They seem and may be allegorical.
Whereas the characters in a farce would be distinguished individuals with proper names, the characters in the soties were pure allegories. The characters had names such as “First Fool” and Second Fool”, or “Everyman”, “Pilgrim” etc. Sometime there would be a leader of the fools, called “Mother Fool” (Mère Sotte).[1]
(See Sotie, Wikipedia.) [1]Mère Sotte was the papacy. Soties were banned.
The above Dandin is not Molière’s George Dandin. It is Jean Racine’s Perrin Dandin featured in Les Plaideurs (1668). Racine’s Dandin is a besotted judge who has to judge at all times. While judging dogs, he allows his son Léandre to marry Chicanneau’s daughter Isabelle.
DANDIN : judge, LÉANDRE : son of Dandin, fils de Dandin. CHICANNEAU : bourgeois. ISABELLE : Chicanneau’s daughter, fille de Chicanneau (chinanery). LA COMTESSE. PETIT JEAN : portier. L’INTIMÉ : secrétaire. LE SOUFFLEUR (prompt).
LA FONTAINE
L’Huître et les Plaideurs
In my opinion, the best-known Dandin is Jean de La Fontaine’s. He is featured in L’Huître et les Plaideurs (The Oyster and the Litigants). Two pèlerins find an oyster. They both claim ownership of the oyster. Perrin Dandin walks by our pèlerins who decide he should judge who is the owner of the oyster. Perrin Dandin eats the oyster and takes our pilgrims’ money.
Un jour deux Pèlerins sur le sable rencontrent Une Huître que le flot y venait d’apporter : Ils l’avalent des yeux, du doigt ils se la montrent ; A l’égard de la dent il fallut contester. (read more)
Pendant tout ce bel incident, Perrin Dandin arrive : ils le prennent pour juge. Perrin fort gravement ouvre l’Huître, et la gruge, Nos deux Messieurs le regardant. Ce repas fait, il dit d’un ton de Président : Tenez, la cour vous donne à chacun une écaille Sans dépens, et qu’en paix chacun chez soi s’en aille. Mettez ce qu’il en coûte à plaider aujourd’hui ; Comptez ce qu’il en reste à beaucoup de familles ; Vous verrez que Perrin tire l’argent à lui, Et ne laisse aux plaideurs que le sac et les quilles.
JEAN DE LA FONTAINE
Livre 9, fable 9
1678
Two pilgrims on the sand espied
An oyster thrown up by the tide.
In hope, both swallowed ocean’s fruit;
But before the fact there came dispute.
(read more)
Amidst this sweet affair, Arrived a person very big, Ycleped Sir Nincom Periwig.
They made him judge, to set the matter square.
Sir Nincom, with a solemn face,
Took up the oyster and the case:
In opening both, the first he swallowed,
And, in due time, his judgment followed.
“Attend: the court awards you each a shell
Cost free; depart in peace, and use them well.”
Foot up the cost of suits at law,
The leavings reckon and awards,
The cash you’ll see Sir Nincom draw,
And leave the parties—purse and cards. JEAN DE LA FONTAINE
Book 9, Fable 9
1678
I wrote that comedy has redeeming mechanisms, such as the deceiver deceived, or trompeur trompé. In l’École des femmes, despite raising a wife, Agnès, Arnolphe loses her when she meets young Horace. Her instinct leads Agnès to fall in love with Horace and find safety in his presence. Yet, one sympathizes with Arnolphe. He loves Agnès, but he doesn’t know galanterie. The comedy ends in the traditional marriage. But comedy has more than one plot formula. Farces are circular. Dandin will forever plead his cause, but what if he had opened the bolted door when Angélique was desperate, and comforted her. Beauty loves Beast.
But suddenly I remembered the medieval soties, not to mention Reynard the Fox, its comic trial and Bruin losing the skin of his nose when it gets wedged in an opening in a log. But it’s “no skin off my nose,” as it grows back. It’s like a cartoon. Jill Mann,[2] who translated the Ysengrimus, the birthplace of Reynard the Fox, into English, compares this phenomenon to the flattened cat of cartoons who fluffs up again. In the world of cartoons, injuries may be reversible.
George Dandin lived before cartoons, but Molière knew the sotie and the cartoonish Reynard the Fox (Le Roman de Renart).
The Wikipedia entry on sotie compares the genre to carnivals. Mikhail Baktin, who studied Rabelais, identified the carnivalesque in Rabelais, a world upside down. Molière has not broken any rule. The carnivalesque is a constante in literature. However, Molière has a way of humanizing fools and vice versa. The Misanthrope is the epitome in this æsthetics.
I will make these words, my last words on George Dandin who is both right and wrong. But he is less a fool than the Sotenvilles, or is it the reverse?
By the way, “se dandiner” means to waddle and Dandin is a family name. George Dandin’s name is not allegorical.
____________________ [1]Mère Sotte was the papacy. Soties were banned. [2]Jill Mann, “The Satiric Fiction of the Ysengrimus,” in Kenneth Varty (ed.), Reynard the Fox: Social Engagement and Cultural Metamorphoses in the Beast Epic from the Middle Ages to the Present (New York, Oxford: Berghahn Books, 2000), p. 11.
Amants, heureux amants, voulez-vous voyager ?
Que ce soit aux rives prochaines ;
Soyez-vous l’un à l’autre un monde toujours beau,
Toujours divers, toujours nouveau ;
Tenez-vous lieu de tout, comptez pour rien le reste [.]
Ah, happy lovers, would you roam?
Pray, let it not be far from home.
To each the other ought to be
A world of beauty ever new;
In each the other ought to see
The whole of what is good and true.
These works feature a story teller (Pilpay or Bidpai). They are frame stories. The characters are animals and the stories are told by a story teller, not the author. Such a structure serves two purposes. First, it engages the reader by leading him or her to a storyteller: Pilpay. It is as though the author stepped aside spelling a cast. Second, Pilpay’s characters are animals, whose eloquence is based on silence. Animals do not speak. They may say nearly everything. This literary device is often called obliqueness.
Interestingly, Montesquieu’s Persian Letters, 1721, Les Lettres persanes, feature Usbek and Rica, Persian noblemen visiting France. Their comments are the comments of strangers. As such, they may be dismissed, freeing the author to be critical of the land he inhabits, but in a discreet manner and with impunity.
Whatever the origin of Les Deux Pigeons, the lines I have quoted have no source other than the poet’s soul. La Fontaine gives his two pigeons/doves fine advice: be everything unto one another. There’s always a person who makes all the difference and whom we must always cherish.
Les Grenouilles qui demandent un roi is the fourth fable in book three of La Fontaine’s first volume of Fables (1668) (IX.2). His second volume, containing five books, was published in 1678. The twelfth book was published in 1694, shortly before his death. The same fable is also one of Æsop’s Fables, classified as number 44 in the Perry Index(the classification of Æsop’s Fables).
Les Grenouilles qui demandent un roi tells the story of “silly and frightened” frogs who live in a democracy, but, tired of democracy, ask Jupiter for a monarch. Jupiter acquiesces. From the skies descends a peace-loving king who makes a huge noise as he lands. This king is often represented as a beam or log.
Frightened by the din, the frogs go into hiding, only to return slowly to look at the king. The peace-loving king is a beam, which is not very kingly. The frogs start jumping on the beam-king, which the king tolerates as Jupiter grumbles. The beam-king is a kindly monarch, but he does not move.
Dissatisfied, the people go back to Jupiter to ask for a king who moves. So Jupiter sends them a crane that starts eating them up. In Æsop’s telling of this fable, the crane is a stork.
In Phædrus‘ Latin translation of this fable by Æsop, a second king is sent to the frogs. It is a water snake. There is no second king in La Fontaine.
Our silly frogs complain, and Jupiter tells them, first, that they should have kept their government (a democracy), second, that they should have been pleased to be sent a gentleman-king, the beam-king, and, third, to settle for the king they have for fear of encountering a worse one, La Fontaine’s celui-ci (this one) pointing to the voracious crane.
In Æsop, as noted above, the crane is a stork.
KING LOG & KING STORK
The Frogs prayed to Jove for a king:
“Not a log, but a livelier thing.”
Jove sent them a Stork,
Who did royal work,
For he gobbled them up, did their king.
One of the morals of this fable is the eternal “Leave well enough alone,” but we are also reading a “beware-of-your-wishes-as-they-may-come-true” narrative. The moral of this fable is also a defense of the status quo, the state of affairs.
If all is well, a change is not necessary. If forewarned of possible dangers, a change may be dangerous. Knowing there are very real dangers, one does not jump into uncertainty. In a serious election, one cannot say “I’ll give him or her a chance.” Acting in such a manner reflects a somewhat flawed understanding of democracy. As I wrote above, La Fontaine calls the frogs who are not pleased with the good king log, a beam: “gent fort sotte et fort peureuse,” very silly and very frightened people.
We do not know the exact origin of this fable. Æsop retold fables told in the Near East, Middle East and India, including Buddhist tales. The most likely source is the Sanskrit Panchatantraby Vishnu Sharma, written in the 3rd century BCE. The storyteller is Pilpay or Bidpai. Bidpai’s stories were translated by Persian scholar Ibn al-Muqaffa as Kalīlah wa Dimnah. Moreover, Æsopic fables translated into Latin, by Phædrus, or Greek, by Babrius, were retold several times after Phædrus and Babrius. There are modern references to the Frogs Who Desired a King or King Log & King Stork. Under The Frogs Who desired a King, Wikipedia quotes New Zealand author James K. Baxter who wrote:
A democratic people have elected
King Log, King Stork, King Log, King Stork again.
Because I like a wide and silent pond
I voted Log. That party was defeated.
“While the mighty quarrel, the humble pay the cost.”
I chose today’s subject matter, an Aesopian fable entitled “The Frogs and the Fighting Bulls,” because it brings to mind the plight of Syrians seeking refuge in a reticent Europe.
Four million Syrians have fled their country because their homes, if they are still standing, are not habitable and their government is no longer operative. Syria is a battlefield.
Where have the Mighty been? And will the Mighty now sit at a table and do their very best to fix the problem. I fear they may be politicians first and statesmen second, if ever they become statesmen, and “let the humble pay the cost.”
My kindest regards to all of you.♥
Aesop, with a fox, from the central medallion of a kylix, c. 470 BCE; in the Gregorian Etruscan Museum, Vatican City. 600 BCE – 501 BCE (Photo credit: the Encyclopaedia Britannica)
The Perry Index of Aesopian Fables
In the Perry Index of Aesopian fables, “The Frog and the Fighting Bulls” is fable number 485 and is entitled: “The Frogs Dread the Battle of the Bulls.” Its source is Phaedrus (1st century CE) but I borrowed the text from An Argosy of Fables, 1921 (p. 130), selected by Frederic Taber Cooper(1864 – 1937) and illustrated byPaul Bransom (1885 – 1979). However, this post includes Jean de La Fontaine’s[1]“Les Deux Taureaux et une Grenouille” and its English translation: “The Two Bulls and the Frog.”
You may remember that Phaedrus (1st century CE)[2] is the Latin author who versified Aesop‘s[3] fables, thereby removing them from an oral tradition. (See Oral-formulaic composition, Wikipedia). Babrius (2nd century CE) also took Aesopian fables away from oral literature but he wrote Aesop’s fables in the Greek language.
Subsequent writers of fables have used both Phaedrus and Babrius to publish Aesopian fables in Latin or Greek, or French, or English, or other languages. We are reading a translation of Phaedrus’ Latin collection, but Frederic Taber Cooper has not provided his readers with the name of a translator.
The Frogs and the Fighting Bulls
A FROG, sitting at the edge of a swamp, was watching a battle between two Bulls in an adjoining field. “Alas! what deadly danger threatens us,” he said. Another Frog, overhearing him, asked what he meant, when the Bulls were merely fighting to decide which should lead the herd, and the cattle passed their lives quite apart from the home of the Frogs. “It is true,” rejoined the first Frog, “that they are a different race and live apart from us. But whichever Bull is beaten and driven from his leadership in the woods will come to find some secret hiding place; and I fear that many of us will be trampled to pieces under his hard hoofs. That is why I say that their battle means death and destruction to us.”
Deux Taureaux combattaient à qui posséderait.
Une Génisse avec l’empire.
Une Grenouille en soupirait:
« Qu’avez-vous ? se mit à lui dire
Quelqu’un du peuple croassant.
Et ne voyez-vous pas, dit-elle,
Que la fin de cette querelle
Sera l’exil de l’un ; que l’autre, le chassant,
Le fera renoncer aux campagnes fleuries ?
Il ne régnera plus sur l’herbe des prairies,
Viendra dans nos marais régner sur les roseaux,
Et nous foulant aux pieds jusques au fond des eaux,
Tantôt l’une, et puis l’autre, il faudra qu’on pâtisse
Du combat qu’a causé Madame la Génisse. »
Cette crainte était de bon sens.
L’un des Taureaux en leur demeure
S’alla cacher à leurs dépens :
Il en écrasait vingt par heure. Hélas! on voit que de tout temps Les petits ont pâti des sottises des grands.
Two bulls engaged in shocking battle,
Both for a certain heifer’s sake,
And lordship over certain cattle,
A frog began to groan and quake.
“But what is this to you?”
Inquired another of the croaking crew.
“Why, sister, don’t you see,
The end of this will be,
That one of these big brutes will yield,
And then be exiled from the field?
No more permitted on the grass to feed,
He’ll forage through our marsh, on rush and reed;
And while he eats or chews the cud,
Will trample on us in the mud.
Alas! to think how frogs must suffer
By means of this proud lady heifer!”
This fear was not without good sense.
One bull was beat, and much to their expense;
For, quick retreating to their reedy bower,
He trod on twenty of them in an hour. Of little folks it often has been the fate To suffer for the follies of the great.
A Boy was bathing in a river and got out of his depth, and was in great danger of being drowned. A man who was passing along a road heard his cries for help, and went to the riverside and began to scold him for being so careless as to get into deep water, but made no attempt to help him. “Oh, sir,” cried the Boy, “please help me first and scold me afterwards.”
Give assistance, not advice, in a crisis.
The Boy Bathing
A BOY bathing in a river was in danger of being drowned. He called out to a passing traveler for help, but instead of holding out a helping hand, the man stood by unconcernedly, and scolded the boy for his imprudence. ‘Oh, sir!’ cried the youth, ‘pray help me now and scold me afterwards.’
Counsel without help is useless.
The Boy Bathing, G. F. Townsend, translator, Harrison Weir, illustrator, 1867 (Photo credit: Gutenberg [EBook #21])
Æsop (c. 620 – 564 BCE)
Phædrus (c. 15 BC – c. 50 CE)
Babrius (c. 2nd century CE)
Fables[i] are a source of wisdom and La Fontaine‘s, little jewels. There are several sources of fables, but the above, A Boy Bathing is an Æsopic or Æsopian fable retold by translators of Phædrus (Latin) and Babrius (Greek). Babrius, however, was a Roman.
Æsop, assuming there was an Æsop, was a freed Greek slave who did not write fables. We do not have a manuscript of Æsop’s fables. The fables told by Æsop were therefore transmitted through an oral tradition. They were not written down until Phædrus and Babrius committed them to paper in Latin and in Greek, at which point they entered the learned tradition.[ii]
Doubt lingers as to whether or not there ever lived an Æsop. La Fontaine wrote a life of Æsop and so did other writers. In the case of La Fontaine, writing a biography of Æsop was a way of negating authorship of his own fables.
Under Louis XIV, a friend of Nicolas Fouquet could not chronicle the excesses of his century in a direct manner. To protect himself, La Fontaine borrowed the subject matter of fables and usually featured anthropomorphic animals, humans in disguise. Never would Louis XIV, Sun King, have suggested that he was the lion king of La Fontaine’s Fables.
There may not have been an Æsop, but there is a body of fables called Æsopic or Æsopian. An index of Æsopic fables was compiled by Ben Edwin Perry (1892 – 1968), a teacher at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, from 1924 to 1960.
The Wikipedia entry on the Perry Index lists 584 fables, but Wikipedia provides a list of “extended,” fabulists (585, etc.), three of whom are Paulus Diaconus (Paul the Deacon; c. 720s – 13 April probably 799), Odo of Cheriton (c. 1185 – 1246/47), and Romulus FR.
Characteristics of Fables
they usually feature talking animals;
in ancient Greece, fables that featured animals were called Æsopic and those that featured humans, Sybaritic;
for Isidore of Seville, fables were Æsopic (animals [souls], or “cities, trees, mountains, rocks, and rivers” [no souls]) or Libystic, “Libystic fables are those in which there is a verbal interchange of men with animals or animals with men.”[iii]
fables are an example, but there is a genre called Exemplum;
the example is the story. Humans remember stories because they illustrate. We are reminded of illuminated manuscripts;
the animals used in fables are anthropomorphic. They are humans in disguise, as animals;
anthropomorphism both shows and hides human behaviour;
children may think that the animals are quite foolish and believe that the manner in which they behave is just fine;
many authors have written fables but are not known as fabulists;
beast literature overrides genres; &c
Conclusion
I have posted a complete list of the fables discussed on this blog, but there is so much more to say. Fables are very complex and may have several morals.
I must close, but not without saying that I am so sorry we lost Steven Sotloff. His poor family! Next, they will kill a British citizen.
I have endeavoured to collect all my posts on Jean de La Fontaine (8 July 1621 – 13 April 1695), most of which are also discussions of Æsop‘s Fables. We have now discussed many fables by La Fontaine and Æsop. My list may therefore be incomplete.
Crane was influenced by Japonisme: ukiyo-e prints. In England, Japonism was called the Anglo-Japanese Style. The Alphabet of Old Friends, shown above, one of Crane’s toy books, is an example of Japonism both from the point of view of subject matter (e.g. the heron or crane, the oranges) and style: flat colours, etc.
Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood and the Arts and Crafts Movement
The Healthy and Artistic Dress Union
However, Crane is usually associated with the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood (middle of 19th century) and the Arts and Crafts Movement (1860 and 1910), movements that incorporated the decorative arts and design. William Morris (24 March 1834 – 3 October 1896), a leading member of both movements, designed wallpaper and tiles. Interestingly, Walter Crane designed not only wallpaper, etc., but clothes for women, looser-fitting clothes. He was in fact a Vice President of the Healthy and Artistic Dress Union. This, I would not have suspected.
At first sight, Walter Crane’s moral for the “Fox and the Grapes” seems rather negative, if one focuses on the word disappointment: “The grapes of disappointment are always sour.” However, this moral may serve to lessen cognitive dissonance, if the grapes are deemed sour. Since Æsop‘s Fables are for anyone to retell, morals may differ from author to author.
La Fontaine’s illustrators
Walter Crane was a fine artist. He is the creator of “Neptune’s Horses,” an artwork that is somewhat reminiscent of Hokusai‘s Great Wave off Kanagawa. “Neptune’s Horses” is featured at the very bottom of this post. However, although Crane illustrated Æsop‘s Fables, and, by extension, some of La Fontaine’s Æsopic fables, the most famous illustrators of La Fontaine’s Fables are Jean-Baptiste Oudry, FrançoisChauveau, Jean Ignace Isidore Gérard Grandville, Gustave Doré, and others, some of whom I have already mentioned and some I will mention in future posts.
The Video
YouTube has a lovely video featuring Walter Crane’s art. However, it does not show his illustrations of fables. It does not fully belong to this post. The music is Franz Schubert‘s (31 January 1797 – 19 November 1828) Ständchen, D. 957.
FABLES by Jean de La Fontaine (& Æsop)
(listed in alphabetical order: Boy, Cat, Cock, Fox…
The following list is mostly alphabetical (cha, che, coq, bel). It simply provides the title La Fontaine gave to his Fables. My post are written in English. Sometimes the fable is named in both French and English. They are listed as book (of XII [12]) and number (XII.14)
A rooster, while scratching for grain,
Found a Pearl. He just paused to explain
That a jewel’s no good
To a fowl wanting food,
And then kicked it aside with disdain.
[EBook #25433]
It is within the nature of fables, and literature, to be ambiguous, but not necessarily impenetrably closed. Although Jean de La Fontaine‘s “The Cock and the Pearl” suggests that we do not always see an object’s intrinsic worth nor, for that matter, a person’s intrinsic worth, it may be interpreted differently. “The Cock and the Pearl” presents a riddle as does Walter Crane‘s shortened “Cock and Pearl,” a limerick, or five-line poem, with the rhyme scheme aabba. Its moral is not altogether apparent: “If he ask bread will ye give him a stone?” However, the exemplum, or illustration, makes the limerick clearer. This cock needs food more than he needs jewels.
As for La Fontaine’s full length but very short “Cock and the Pearl,” it has a second exemplumthat further illustrates the first exemplum. This doubling is intentional. In “Le Bûcheron et Mercure” (“The Woodman and Mercury” [1.V.1]), La Fontaine writes that he sometimes provides a “double image,” or second exemplum, which is the case in “The Cock and the Pearl.” Having told about the cock who gives a pearl to a jeweller in exchange for a “crumb of bread,” La Fontaine also tells about a “dunce” who finds a rare manuscript, takes it to a bookstore, and leaves it there in exchange for a gold coin (un ducaton). In “The Cock and the Pearl,” the fabulist himself, transforms the cock into a “dunce.” As a result, the fable is not altogether anthropomorphic.
The First Exemplum
In the first exemplum, or “ìmage,” the finder knows he has unearthed a precious jewel. He would not otherwise take the pearl to a jeweller saying “I think it fine,” « Je la crois fine ». La Fontaine’s translator also writes that the cock scratched up “a pearl of purest ray” and he refers to the jeweller as a beaupremier Lapidaire, i.e. someone the cock does not know or someone who was not recommended to him. La Fontaine then resets his narrative using a mirror-image esthetics or “double image” (“The Woodman and Mercury” [V.1]).
The Second Exemplum
In the second image, a “dunce,” now a man, finds a “manuscript of merit,” takes it to a bookstore and leaves it there in exchange for a gold coin. The word “dunce” is derived from the name of John Duns Scotus[ii] (c. 1266 – 8 November 1308) and, by calling someone a “dunce,” un ignorant or ignoramus, La Fontaine himself provides his fable with an interpretation. The fable is about a dunce or un ignorant. Consequently, although the moral is not summed up in a sentence judiciously placed at the end or beginning of the fable, in “The Cock and the Pearl,” the protagonist of the moral, a cock or a man, is un ignorant or a dunce.
Yet, the “The Cock and the Pearl” invites other interpretations, but the use of the word “dunce” (un ignorant, or ignoramus) could say it all, or almost. Fables may be very unkind to humans who often deserve a lesson or two.
The Cock and the Pearl
A cock scratched up, one day,
A pearl of purest ray,
Which to a jeweller he bore.
“ I think it fine,” he said,
“ But yet a crumb of bread
To me were worth a great deal more. ”
So did a dunce inherit
A manuscript of merit,
Which to a publisher he bore.
“ It’s good,” said he, “I’m told,
Yet any coin of gold
To me were worth a great deal more. ”
Wenceslaus Hollar, illustrator
However, in the Middle Ages, “The Cock and the Jewel” was the first fable of a widely-used grammar book. (See “The Cock and The Jewel,” Wikipedia). In France, this grammar book was called the Ysopet-Avionnet,[i] which suggests a combination of the two traditions of Æsopic fables: the Latin tradition and the Greek. At one point, it was believed the word ‘Ysopet’ [a diminutive of Ésope] stood for the Latin tradition and that the word ‘Avionnet’ [also a diminutive] referred to Avianus’ popular collection of 42 fables written in Latin, but substantially rooted in the Greek tradition, Babrius’ fables. According to the presentation page of the online Ysopet-Avionnet(please click on the Ysopet-Avionnet) I have used, “[t]he title Ysopet-Avionnet was originally given to the fables of Avianus alone.”
Avianus
However, because the Ysopet-Avionnet contained and still contains 64 Æsopic fables, translated by “Romulus,” and 18, translated by Avian or Flavius Avianus, there had to be a Romulus or a person using the name Romulus as a pseudonym. It would appear, however, that the fables contained in the Ysopet-Avionnet are rooted in both the Latin tradition, the fables of Phædrus (c. 15 BC – c. 50 AD), and the Greek tradition, the fables of Babrius (c. 2nd Century CE).
Avianus lived in the 5th century CE, the 400s. His collection of 42 fables, translated into Latin, proved a success. Famed English printer and translator William Caxton (ca. 1415~1422– ca. March 1492) printed Avianus’ 42 fables in the 15th century (1484) and then translated them into English naming his collection TheFables of Avian.
Le Coq et la Perle
Un jour un Coq détourna
Une Perle, qu’il donna
Au beau premier Lapidaire.
“ Je la crois fine, dit-il ;
Mais le moindre grain de mil
Serait bien mieux mon affaire.”
Un ignorant hérita
D’un manuscrit, qu’il porta
Chez son voisin le Libraire.
“Je crois, dit-il, qu’il est bon ;
Mais le moindre ducaton
Serait bien mieux mon affaire.”
(Photo credit: Gutenberg [EBook #18732])
The Moral
“The Cock and the Jewel” is the first fable of the Ysopet-Avionnet where it is entitled “Du coc et de l’esmeraude” (“The Cock and the Emerald”), in old French, and “De Gallo et Iaspide,” in Latin. “The Cock and the Emerald” most certainly owes some of its prominence to its being the opening fable in a widely-used textbook. The Ysopet-Avionnet can be read online (please click on the title) but the jewel is an emerald rather than a pearl and the fable entitled “Du coc et de l’esmeraude,” “The Cock and the Emerald” (“De Gallo et Iaspide”). Therefore, the pearl is a function and so is the cock himself. In other words, the pearl’s role could be played by any precious jewel. As for the cock, La Fontaine transforms him into a human being before our very eyes.
“Du coc et de l’esmeraude:” The Moral
More importantly, however, “Du coc et de l’esmeraude” has a moral. Unlike more modern translations of Æsop’s fables, “Du coc et de l’esmeraude” does not present a riddle. It has in fact a long moral according to which the stone, the emerald, means wisdom and the cock, folly. The fool is foreover a fool and he cannot stay still. Fools have no stability, or fermeté. The online edition I have used is dated 1919, and is based on three manuscripts of the 14th century (Brussels, Bibl. roy. 11193; Brit. mus. Add. 33781; Paris, Bibl. nat. fonds franç. 1594). It was edited by Kenneth McKenzie and A. Oldfather and published by the University of Illinois. However, the French is old French. (See Ysopet-Avionnet.)
Jean de La Fontaine
Which takes us back to La Fontaine. The moral of his “Cock and Pearl” is somewhat veiled, but thinly so. As noted above, the finder goes to the beaupremier Lapidaire (jeweller) and is called un ignorant (ignoramus). He is a “dunce,” in an English translation. Fables being anthropomorphic, i.e. humans in disguise, the “dunce” fares poorly among humans. If such persons can settle for a “crumb of bread,” they are unlikely to choose a good leader or a good spouse. As well, it would also be difficult for a “dunce” to tell right from wrong. Dunces may, in fact, be so foolish as to believe they are harming others when they are harming themselves. To La Fontaine’s “double image,” or two exempla, we could add a third or a fourth exemplum. But the moral of the fable would always be that fools are fools and will forever remain fools. Other fabulists have offered different interpretations, but it could well be that “The Cock and the Pearl” is about human folly and fools. Fools cannot see the intrinsic value of an object or human being.
“The Cock and the Pearl” is also the first fable of Marie de France‘s (1160-1210) famous collection, where “The Cock and the Pearl” is entitled “Del cok e de la gemme” (“The Cock and the Gem”). Normandy-born Marie de France lived in England. She will be discussed in a later post. However, in closing, I should point out that according to Wikipedia’s entry on “The Cock and the Jewel,” this fable can be compared to Zen Buddism‘s kōan, a story, dialogue, question, or statement, that may provoke “great doubt.” (See kōan, Wikipedia.) I must end this post as it is already far too long. However, I will first provide the English translation, by Harriet Spiegel,[iii] of Marie de France’s moral for “Del cok e de la gemme.” True to anthropomorphism, the moral begins with a “Many people are like this…”
The Cock and the Gem
Many people are like this
When something does or suit their wish.
What for the cock and gem is true
We’ve seen with men and women too:
They neither good nor honour Prize;
The worst they seize; the best, despise.
Marie de France, illuminated manuscript
(Photo credit: Wikipedia)
(Please click on the image to enlarge it.)_________________________[i] The Ysopet-Avionnet is available in English, from Amazon.France[ii] “He was known as “Doctor Subtilis” because of the subtle distinctions and nuances of his thinking. Later philosophers in the sixteenth century were less complimentary about his work, and accused him ofsophistry. This led to his name, “dunce” (which developed from the name “Dunse” given to his followers in the 1500s) to become synonymous for ‘somebody who is incapable of scholarship’.” (SeeDuns Scotus, Wikipedia.)
[iii] Harriet Spiegel, editor and translator, Marie de France, Fables (Toronto: the University of Toronto Press, 2000 [1994]), pp. 31-32.
No one is perfect. But President Obama has been keeping his nation afloat and growing. Given the burden he inherited, he has in fact done very well. Were it not for President Obama and members of his administration, it would be extremely difficult for the international community to trust the US. At the moment, the credibility of the US within the world community is based almost entirely on the intellectual and moral principles of its President.
This is cutting one’s nose to spite one’s face and it is petty, in the utmost.
A lot of people are like the cock of the fable told below, by Jean de La Fontaine (8 July 1621 – 13 April 1695). They cannot tell quality.
A cock scratched up, one day,
A pearl of purest ray,
Which to a jeweller he bore.
“I think it fine,” he said,
“But yet a crumb of bread
To me were worth a great deal more.”
So did a dunce inherit
A manuscript of merit,
Which to a publisher he bore.
“It’s good,” said he, “I’m told,
Yet any coin of gold
To me were worth a great deal more.”
Jean de La Fontaine (I.20)
Le Coq et la Perle (I.20)
Post on the United States
Here are two lists of posts and two posts. The second list is not complete.
![The Boy Bathing Arthur Rackham (Photo credit: [EBook #11339]](https://michelinewalker.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/untitled.png)
Micheline's Blog 
