Wednesday, 20 August 1879

I dreamed of Cassagnac's wife with red hair, and fat. I went to paint in the countryside, I slept little, I am very tired and ugly. I no longer share as vividly my anger of yesterday, vexation and humiliation followed by tears on the dirty red velvet sofa of my room.
I believe it affected me less a year ago. They do say that violent impressions fade quickly. I no longer remember where I supposed that I would have a passion for this gentleman, which would form little by little and which would be eternal, over which many things could pass without... I shall look for the passage. Do you remember the sort of horoscope that the son-in-law of Mme la Comtesse Couvelet cast for me the first or second time he dined at 71 Champs-Elysees? It is not that I am convinced it has come to pass but I should very much like to know... moreover I do not think I could ever feel a sentiment in which ambition is not mingled. I despise people who are nothing.
New piece of verse, in French this time, received this morning by post.
I believe that all sentiments are made of something and I would not esteem someone who loves a body... I do not explain myself well... it depends on characters, one sometimes loves ordinary private individuals, noblemen or bourgeois who have done nothing in their lives and whom one cannot yet call a doll or a body. A beautiful soul, wit... what am I, myself.
Now, people of talent belong to another genre and have a prestige apart. As for men of genius, great men... we shall not speak of them, the Deceased not being one of their number. They say he is a braggart paid by Chislehurst. How stupid! It is quite natural that he, having almost nothing, should be helped by his masters in his elections or they pay the newspaper's deficit [but this] does not happen often, the newspaper generally covering its costs.
That he should receive money for living is not honorable but that one gives it for the needs of the Cause is quite simple. They also say that women have given him money, that is a great infamy and one would have to see to believe. Moreover it is his enemies who slander him, that is quite natural. The reactionaries certainly say that Gambetta is a thief, etc., they treat the governing republicans as malefactors, forgers, etc., etc. These are courtesies one owes one another; note that I place Gambetta above Cassagnac, Gambetta had made himself the recognized and admired leader of the majority while the knight is only a noisy, brilliant, and troublesome personality; qualities that entail many enemies in the ranks of mediocre, timid and ugly friends.