first book as refuting my theory regarding the modernity of true love.  They seemed to think, with the Persian poet, that there must be something particularly wonderful and elevated in the feelings of a lover who is indifferent to the usual charms of femininity and prefers ugliness.  This, indeed, is the prevalent sentiment on the subject, though the more I think of it, the more absurd and topsy turvy it seems to me.  Do we commend an Eskimo for preferring the flavor of rancid fish oil to the delicate bouquet of the finest French wine?  Does it evince a particularly exalted artistic sense to prefer a hideous daub to a Titian or Raphael?  Does it betoken a laudable and elevated taste in music to prefer a vulgar tune to one that has the charms of a romantic or classical work of acknowledged beauty?  Why, then, should we specially extol Mujnun for admiring a woman who was devoid of all feminine charms?  The confusion probably arises from fancying that she must have had mental charms to offset her ugliness, but nothing whatever is said about such a notion, which, in fact, would have been utterly foreign to the Oriental, purely sensual, way of regarding women.

Fix the attention on the man in the story instead of on the woman and the mystery vanishes.  Mujnun becomes infatuated with an ugly woman simply because he has no taste, no sense of beauty.  There are millions of such men the world over, just as there are millions who cannot appreciate choice wines, good music, and fine pictures.  Everywhere the majority of men prefer vulgar tunes, glaring chromos, and coarse women—­luckily for the women, because most of them are coarse, too.  “Birds of a feather flock together”—­there you have the philosophy of preference so far as such love-affairs are concerned.  How often do we see a bright, lovely girl, with sweet voice and refined manners, neglected by men who crowd around other women of their own rude and vulgar caste!  Most men still are savages so far as the ability to appreciate the higher secondary sexual qualities in women is concerned.  But the exceptions are growing more numerous.  Among savages there are no exceptions.  Romantic love does not exist among them, both because the women have not the secondary sexual qualities, and because, even if they had them, the men would not appreciate them or be guided by them in their choice of mates.

II.  MONOPOLISM

Whenever she speaks, my ravished ear
No other voice but hers can hear,
No other wit but hers approve: 
Tell me, my heart, if this be love?

          
                                                        —­Lyttleton.

Every lover of nature must have noticed how the sun monopolizes the attention of flowers and leaves.  Twist and turn them whichever way you please, on returning afterward you will find them all facing the beloved sun again with their bright corollas and glossy surface.  Romantic love exacts a similar monopoly of its devotees.  Be their feelings as various, their thoughts as numerous, as the flowers in a garden, the leaves in a forest, they will always be turned toward the beloved one.