The innate aesthetic principle of the semeiotics of the shoulder was at last clearly demonstrated to me, and no more doubt or uncertainty upon that point seemed to me possible.  I might safely formulate the following rule: 

When a man says to you in interjective form:  “I love, I suffer, I am delighted,” etc., do not believe him if his shoulder remains in a normal attitude.  Do not believe him, no matter what expression his face may assume.  Do not believe him—­he lies; his shoulder denies his words.  That negative form betrays his thoughts; and, if he expresses ardent passion, you have merely to consult the thermometer which, all unwittingly, he himself offers to your inspection.  See, it marks zero! therefore he lies; doubt it not, he lies! but his shoulder does not lie.  He amiably puts it at your disposal—­read, read at your ease; it bears inscribed in living letters his deceit and craft.  It can never cheat you, and when the gentleman accosts you with such words as:  “Dear friend! how charmed I am to see you!” say to yourself as you look at his thermometer:  “Traitor, your delight as well as your friendship is below zero!  You try to deceive me, but in vain; henceforth you have no secrets from me, clumsy forger!  You do not see, as with one hand you proffer the false jewel which you would sell me, that the other at the same instant gives me the touch-stone which reveals your tricks; your right hand thus incessantly exposing to me the secrets of your left hand!”

What an admirable thing is this mechanism of the body working in the service of the soul!  With what precision it reveals the least movements of its master!  What magnificent things it lays bare!  Voluntarily or involuntarily, everything leads to truth under the action of the translucid light which breaks forth in the working of each of our organs!

And yet, well founded as the preceding theory may be, solid as are the bases upon which it rests, is it free from any and all objection?  May not some oppose to it, for instance, the impassibility of men and women of the world, among whom it would be difficult to find the movements of the shoulder, which such people deem so ungraceful in others as to deprive them of all desire to imitate them?  Now what conclusions are we to draw from the absence of this movement in those who are known as aristocrats?  Must we tax them all indiscriminately with falsehood?

Here I might, and without hesitation, answer by the affirmation, Yes, all aristocrats lie!  The medium which they constitute and which is called the world is nothing but a perpetual lie.  Civility itself rests upon a lie.  Nay, more, it insists upon deceit as a duty.  Heavens, what would become of the world if truth were a necessity!  Quarter of an hour of sincerity would be intolerable; ... the inhabitants would slay each other!