In secret, everybody goes upon the principle that a man is what he looks; but the difficulty lies in its application.  The ability to apply it is partly innate and partly acquired by experience; but no one understands it thoroughly, for even the most experienced may make a mistake.  Still, it is not the face that deceives, whatever Figaro may say, but it is we who are deceived in reading what is not there.  The deciphering of the face is certainly a great and difficult art.  Its principles can never be learnt in abstracto.  Its first condition is that the man must be looked at from a purely objective point of view; which is not so easy to do.  As soon as, for instance, there is the slightest sign of dislike, or affection, or fear, or hope, or even the thought of the impression which we ourselves are making on him—­in short, as soon as anything of a subjective nature is present, the hieroglyphics become confused and falsified.  The sound of a language is only heard by one who does not understand it, because in thinking of the significance one is not conscious of the sign itself; and similarly the physiognomy of a man is only seen by one to whom it is still strange—­that is to say, by one who has not become accustomed to his face through seeing him often or talking to him.  Accordingly it is, strictly speaking, the first glance that gives one a purely objective impression of a face, and makes it possible for one to decipher it.  A smell only affects us when we first perceive it, and it is the first glass of wine which gives us its real taste; in the same way, it is only when we see a face for the first time that it makes a full impression upon us.  Therefore one should carefully attend to the first impression; one should make a note of it, nay, write it down if the man is of personal importance—­that is, if one can trust one’s own sense of physiognomy.  Subsequent acquaintance and intercourse will erase that impression, but it will be verified one day in the future.

En passant, let us not conceal from ourselves the fact that this first impression is as a rule extremely disagreeable:  but how little there is in the majority of faces!  With the exception of those that are beautiful, good-natured, and intellectual—­that is, the very few and exceptional,—­I believe a new face for the most part gives a sensitive person a sensation akin to a shock, since the disagreeable impression is presented in a new and surprising combination.

As a rule it is indeed a sorry sight.  There are individuals whose faces are stamped with such naive vulgarity and lowness of character, such an animal limitation of intelligence, that one wonders how they care to go out with such a face and do not prefer to wear a mask.  Nay, there are faces a mere glance at which makes one feel contaminated.  One cannot therefore blame people, who are in a position to do so, if they seek solitude and escape the painful sensation of “seeing new faces.”  The metaphysical explanation of this rests on the consideration that the individuality of each person is exactly that by which he should be reclaimed and corrected.