The case of farce, and its wilder embodiment in harlequinade, is especially important.  That these high and legitimate forms of art, glorified by Aristophanes and Moliere, have sunk into such contempt may be due to many causes:  I myself have little doubt that it is due to the astonishing and ludicrous lack of belief in hope and hilarity which marks modern aesthetics, to such an extent that it has spread even to the revolutionists (once the hopeful section of men), so that even those who ask us to fling the stars into the sea are not quite sure that they will be any better there than they were before.  Every form of literary art must be a symbol of some phase of the human spirit; but whereas the phase is, in human life, sufficiently convincing in itself, in art it must have a certain pungency and neatness of form, to compensate for its lack of reality.  Thus any set of young people round a tea-table may have all the comedy emotions of ‘Much Ado about Nothing’ or ’Northanger Abbey,’ but if their actual conversation were reported, it would possibly not be a worthy addition to literature.  An old man sitting by his fire may have all the desolate grandeur of Lear or Pere Goriot, but if he comes into literature he must do something besides sit by the fire.  The artistic justification, then, of farce and pantomime must consist in the emotions of life which correspond to them.  And these emotions are to an incredible extent crushed out by the modern insistence on the painful side of life only.  Pain, it is said, is the dominant element of life; but this is true only in a very special sense.  If pain were for one single instant literally the dominant element in life, every man would be found hanging dead from his own bed-post by the morning.  Pain, as the black and catastrophic thing, attracts the youthful artist, just as the schoolboy draws devils and skeletons and men hanging.  But joy is a far more elusive and elvish matter, since it is our reason for existing, and a very feminine reason; it mingles with every breath we draw and every cup of tea we drink.  The literature of joy is infinitely more difficult, more rare and more triumphant than the black and white literature of pain.  And of all the varied forms of the literature of joy, the form most truly worthy of moral reverence and artistic ambition is the form called ’farce’—­or its wilder shape in pantomime.  To the quietest human being, seated in the quietest house, there will sometimes come a sudden and unmeaning hunger for the possibilities or impossibilities of things; he will abruptly wonder whether the teapot may not suddenly begin to pour out honey or sea-water, the clock to point to all hours of the day at once, the candle to burn green or crimson, the door to open upon a lake or a potato-field instead of a London street.  Upon anyone who feels this nameless anarchism there rests for the time being the abiding spirit of pantomime.  Of the clown who cuts the policeman in two it may be said (with no darker meaning) that he realizes one