ethical principles.

In the last epoch, however, such misunderstanding became impossible,
because the authors began to write, either in the name of their
personal convictions, directly opposite to social principles and ties,
or with objective analysis, which, in its action of life, marks the
good and the evil as manifestations equally necessary and equally
justified. France--and through France the rest of Europe--was
overflowed with a deluge of books, written with such lightheartedness,
so absolute and with such daring, not counting on any responsibility
toward people, that even those who received them without any scruples
began to be overcome with astonishment. It seemed that every author
forced himself to go further than they expected him to. In that way
they succeeded in being called daring thinkers and original artists.
The boldness in touching certain subjects, and the way of interpreting
them, seemed to be the best quality of the writer. To that was joined
bad faith, or unconscious deceiving of himself and others. Analysis!
They analyzed in the name of truth, which apparently must and has the
right to be said, everything, but especially the evil, dirt, human
corruption. They did not notice that this pseudo-analysis ceases to be
an objective analysis, and becomes a sickish liking for rotten things
coming from two causes: in the first place from the corruption of the
taste, then from greater facility of producing striking effects.

They utilized the philological faculty of the senses, on the strength
of which repulsive impressions appear to us stronger and more real
than agreeable, and they abused that property beyond measure.

There was created a certain kind of travelling in putridness, because
the subjects being exhausted very quickly, there was a necessity to