WIST Quotations

Moliere -- Don Juan [Dom Juan], Act 1, sc. 2 (1665) [tr. Wilbur (2001)]

Dave — Thu, 13 Nov 2025 21:09:54 +0000

SGANARELLE: Have you no fears about returning here? It was here, Sir, that you killed that Commander, six months ago.

DON JUAN: Why should I be afraid? Didn’t I kill him properly?

[SGANARELLE: Et n’y craignez-vous rien, monsieur, de la mort de ce commandeur que vous tuâtes il y a six mois?

DON JUAN: Et pourquoi craindre? ne l’ai-je pas bien tué?]

Molière (1622–1673) French playwright, actor [stage name for Jean-Baptiste Poquelin]
Don Juan [Dom Juan], Act 1, sc. 2 (1665) [tr. Wilbur (2001)]

(Source (French)). Other translations:

SGANAREL: And are you under no Apprehensions, Sir, about the Death of the Governor you kill'd six Months ago?
D. JOHN: And why Apprehensions? did'nt I kill him fairly?
[tr. Clitandre (1672)]

SGAN.: And you have no fear, sir, for the consequences of the death of that Commander whom you killed six months ago?
D. JU.: Why should I be afraid? Did I not kill him honourably?
[tr. Van Laun (1876)]

SGAN.: And have you no fear, sir, abouit the death of that commandant you killed six months ago?
JU.: What fear can I have? Did I not kill him properly?
[tr. Wall (1879)]

SGAN.: And have you no apprehensions, Monsieur, from the death of the Commander you killed six months ago?
D. JUAN: Why should I be afraid? Did I not kill him honourably?
[tr. Waller (1904)]

SGANARELLE: And have you nothing to fear, sir, from the death of the Commandant whom you killed here six months ago?
DON JUAN: And what should I fear? Was n't he fairly killed?
[tr. Page (1908)]

SGANARELLE: And have you nothing to fear, sir, here, from the death of that Commander you killed six months ago?
DON JUAN: And why fear? Didn I kill him properly?
[tr. Frame (1967)]

Montesquieu -- Persian Letters [Lettres Persanes], Letter 91, Usbek to Ibben (1721) [tr. Davidson (1891)]

Dave — Mon, 13 May 2024 16:56:27 +0000

On this account violence prevails amongst the French; for these laws of honour require a gentleman to avenge himself when he has been insulted; but, on the other hand, justice punishes him unmercifully when he does so. If one follows the laws of honour, one dies upon the scaffold; if one follows those of justice, one is banished for ever from the society of men: this, then, is the barbarous alternative, either to die, or to be unworthy to live.

[Ainsi les François sont dans un état bien violent : car les mêmes lois de l’honneur obligent un honnête homme de se venger quand il a été offensé ; mais, d’un autre côté, la justice le punit des plus cruelles peines lorsqu’il se venge. Si l’on suit les lois de l’honneur, on périt sur un échafaud ; si l’on suit celles de la justice, on est banni pour jamais de la société des hommes. Il n’y a donc que cette cruelle alternative, ou de mourir, ou d’être indigne de vivre.]

Charles-Lewis de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu (1689–1755) French political philosopher
Persian Letters [Lettres Persanes], Letter 91, Usbek to Ibben (1721) [tr. Davidson (1891)]

(Source (French)). Other translations:

So that the French are in a state of great violence: for, on one hand, the laws of honour oblige a man to revenge himself if he is affronted; and, on the other, justice inflicts the most cruel punishments upon him for doing so. If you follow the laws of honour, you lose your head upon a scaffold; if those of justice, you are driven out for ever from the society of men; so that you have only the unhappy choice either of dying, or being unworthy to live.
[tr. Ozell (1760 ed.)]

So that the French are in a great state of violence: for these laws of honour oblige a well bred man to revenge himself when he hath been affronted; but, on the other hand, justice punishes him with the severest penalties when he hath done so. If men follow the laws of honour, they die upon a scaffold \; if those of justice, they are banished for ever from the society of men: there is then only this cruel alternative, either to die, or to be unworthy to live.
[tr. Floyd (1762), # 90]

Accordingly, the French are in a very perturbed condition; for the laws of honor compel a gentleman to avenge himself when he has been insulted; and, on the other hand, justice punishes him with the severest penalties when he has avenged himself. If a man obey the laws of honor, he dies on the scaffold; if he obey the laws of justice, he is forever shunned by his fellow-men; this, then, is the cruel alternative, either to die, or to be unworthy to live.
[tr. Betts (1897)]

And so the French remain in a state of violence, for the laws of honor require a gentleman to avenge himself if insulted; but justice, on the other hand, punishes him cruelly for his vengeance. If you follow the laws of honor, you perish on the scaffold; but to follow the laws of justice means perpetual banishment from the society of men. There is, then, only this harsh alternative: to die or to be unworthy of life.
[tr. Healy (1964)]

So the French find themselves in a most dire situation: for those same laws of honour oblige a gentleman to avenge himself if he has been offended, but, on the other hand, the offices of justice punish him in the harshest manner when he does take his revenge. If he obeys the laws of honour, he dies upon the scaffold; if he obeys the laws of the land, he is banished for ever from the society of men. All he can do, then, is choose between these cruel alternatives: to die, or to be unworthy of living.
[tr. Mauldon (2008), # 88]

Gracián, Baltasar -- The Art of Worldly Wisdom [Oráculo Manual y Arte de Prudencia], § 47 (1647) [tr. Jacobs (1892)]

Dave — Mon, 03 Jan 2022 17:40:42 +0000

There is more valour needed not to take up the affair of honor than to conquer in it. When there is one fool ready for the occasion, one may excuse oneself from being the second.

[Estima por más valor el no empeñarse que el vencer. y ya que haya un necio ocasionado, escusa que con él no sean dos.]

Baltasar Gracián y Morales (1601–1658) Spanish Jesuit priest, writer, philosopher
The Art of Worldly Wisdom [Oráculo Manual y Arte de Prudencia], § 47 (1647) [tr. Jacobs (1892)]

(Source (Spanish)). Other translations:

He finds greater advantage in not engaging, than in overcoming: and though some rash blockhead may be ready to begin, yet he has a care not to make a second.
[Flesher ed. (1685)]

He will deem it better courage not to become ensnarled, than to win, and even should the everpresent fool bob up, he will excuse himself on the ground that he does not wish to be another.
[tr. Fischer (1937)]

There is more courage in avoiding danger than in conquering it. He sees that there is already one rash fool, and avoids adding another.
[tr. Maurer (1992)]

Twain, Mark -- The Autobiography of Mark Twain, Vol. 1, 1864 (2010)

Dave — Sun, 01 Feb 2004 16:00:00 +0000

I thoroughly disapprove of duels. I consider them unwise, and I know they are dangerous. Also, sinful. If a man should challenge me now, I would got to that man and take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet, retired spot, and kill him.

Mark Twain (1835–1910) American writer [pseud. of Samuel Clemens]
The Autobiography of Mark Twain, Vol. 1, 1864 (2010)

Seen paraphrased: "I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."