![]() ![]() From this inconsiderate, and unconsidered, opinion the derogatory and catachrestic adjective “catty” has been derived, an adjective which when used in its ordinarily accepted sense I find particularly abhorrent, for who should be described as catty unless it be some gracious and graceful female, dignified and reserved, redolent of beauty and charm and the mystery of love? The cat-lovers on their side, so ardent, indeed, that in France they have earned the sobriquet of félinophiles enragés, have not been guiltless. The dog-lovers, in the opposition sense (for it is really possible to care for both dogs and cats, just as it is possible to read “Pendennis” and “Bleak House” with equal delight), say of the soft puss that he is sly and deceitful, thieving and ungrateful, fickle and cruel, and friend to home and not to man. WHENEVER the subject comes up, and it may be said, speaking with moderation, that it comes up forty times a day, someone invariably declares, “No, I don’t like cats, I like dogs.” The cognate dichotomous remark, which is equally popular, prevalent, and banal, is “No, I don’t like Dickens, I like Thackeray.” As James Branch Cabell has conveniently pointed out for all time, “to the philosophical mind it would seem equally sensible to decline to participate in a game of billiards on the ground that one was fond of herring.” Nevertheless both controversies continue to rage and careless thinkers continue to force Dickens and the cat into categories. ![]() “Dieu a fait le chat pour donner à l’homme le plaisir de caresser le tigre.” – MÉRY Varieties, Breeding, Care, and DiseasesĬHAPTER ONE. Literary Men Who Have Loved Catsīibliography 3. Ailurophobes and Other Cat-HatersĬhapter 12. By Way of Correcting a Popular PrejudiceĬhapter 3. ![]() THE TIGER IN THE HOUSE - Carl von VechtenĬhapter 1. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |