“The detachment of M. de Charlus was total. And, seeing that he was merely a spectator, everything was bound to make him pro-German from the moment when, although not truly French, he started living in France. He was very intelligent, and in all countries most of the people are silly; no doubt if he had been living in Germany he would have been equally irritated by the way the German fools defend, passionately and foolishly, an unjust cause; but living in France, he was no less irritated by the passionate and foolish defence of a cause that that was just. The logic of passion, even if it is in the service of the right, is never irrefutable for somebody who is not passionately committed to it.”
(Proust, Finding Time Again, trans. Ian Patterson, pp. 82–83)
here’s Mayor/Kilmartin/Enright’s fairly alliterative take on it (p. 123):
“[. . .] I could not arrive at detachment. That of M. de Charlus was complete. And given that he was nothing more than a spectator, and that, without being genuinely French, he was living in France, there was every reason why he was likely to be pro-German. In the first place, he was very intelligent and in every country fools form the bulk of the population; no doubt, had he lived in Germany, the German fools defending foolishly and with passion an unjust cause would have irritated him; but living as he did in France, the French fools defending foolishly and with passion a just cause irritated him quite as much. The logic of passion, even if it happens to be in the service of the best possible cause, is never irrefutable for the man who is not himself passionate.â€
The old one’s better – the new one was at hand.
it sure would be interesting to build an overlapping digital version of all the different texts; i wonder how long it would take for the lawyers to get angry