The essay opens with an epigraph from Religio Medici’s constitution which is broad and inclusive, embracing all things without any idiosyncrasy or prejudice towards national repugnances or prejudices against French, Italian, Spaniard, or Dutch.
The author of the Religio Medici is criticized for being too abstract and focused on theoretical concepts, rather than acknowledging the individual differences and characteristics of mankind. The author confesses to being overly sensitive to the differences between people and having strong likes and dislikes.
The author expresses difficulty in liking Scottish people and suggests that they also do not like him. The author contrasts their own suggestive and incomplete thinking with the more comprehensive and precise thinking of a “true Caledonian” (a person from Scotland).
The author highlights the straightforwardness and love of truth that he perceives in Scottish people, but also finds them tedious and easily offended. The author mentions his admiration for the poetry of Robert Burns, but notes that expressing this admiration to Scottish people often leads to resentment rather than appreciation.
The author expresses no disrespect for Jews in general but admits to having old prejudices and being uncomfortable in their synagogues. The author believes that centuries of historical conflicts between Jews and Christians cannot be easily overcome by mere words of reconciliation.
The author finds the growing trend of friendly relations between Jews and Christians hypocritical and unnatural. The author questions the sincerity of Jews who convert to Christianity but still maintain some form of separation.
The author admires the Jewish physiognomy but feels uneasy about associating with them due to their race. The author has a deep appreciation for Quaker ways and principles but feels that their simplicity and lack of worldly interests would not suit his own sophisticated tastes and desires.
The author explains the tendency of Quakers to give indirect answers to questions. This is not due to evasion or equivocation, but rather to their careful consideration of their words and their commitment to maintaining their character of veracity. Quakers are exempt from taking oaths, which leads to a distinction between truth bound by an oath and truth in everyday conversation.
In ordinary conversation, a certain latitude for incorrectness and inadvertency is tolerated, but Quakers do not make this distinction. Their simple affirmation holds value even in the most trivial matters. This strictness in their words is a result of the knowledge that any slip-up could forfeit their claim to exemption.
The essay also mentions the presence of mind and composure displayed by Quakers, which can be attributed to their self-watchfulness and religious constancy. An anecdote is shared about Quakers calmly disputing a bill and ultimately leaving without paying, without offering any justification for their actions. The essay concludes with a question about indigo prices, which diverts attention from the previous incident.
Critical Analysis of Kazuo Ishiguro Remains of the Day Novel
One Reply to “Charles Lamb Imperfect Sympathies Summary”