Baudelaire2 observed， famously， that “every one of Balzac’s characters， even the janitors， has some sort of genius.” Balzac， rather like Victor Hugo， outrageously was possessed by a genius， a daemonic will that drove him through the ninety novels and novellas that constitute The Human Comedy， deliberate rival to Dante’s Divine Comedy.3 Reading the admirable Graham Robb’s4 Balzac： A Biography， one comes away with the startled impression that Balzac cannot always be distinguished from his daemon. Since genius is my sole subject in this book，5 I will feel free to mix observations on Balzac himself with my account of his extraordinary character-of-characters， the master criminal Vautrin， also known as Jacques Collin and as the Abbé Carlos Herrera. Vautrin is crucial in Père Goriot （1834—35）， Lost Illusions （1937—43）， dominant in A Harlot High and Low （1838—47）， and was the herovillain of the playVautrin （1840）， banned after one performance by the Ministry of the Interior， to no great aesthetic loss.
　　Henry James， a superb literary critic except when he felt himself menaced （as by Hawthorne， Dickens， George Eliot）， was at his best on Balzac， who for James possessed “a kind of inscrutable perfection.”6 This appeared to James the prime lesson that Balzac taught other novelists：

　　The lesson of Balzac， under this comparison， is extremely various， and I should prepare myself much too large a task were I to attempt a list of the separate truths he brings home7. I have to choose among them， and I choose the most important； the three or four that more or less include the others. In reading him over， in opening him almost anywhere today， what immediately strikes us is the part assigned by him， in any picture， to the conditions of the creatures with whom he is concerned. Contrasted with him other prose painters of life scarce seem to see the conditions at all. He clearly held pretended portrayal as nothing， as less than nothing， as a most vain thing， unless it should be， in spirit and intention， the art of complete representation.“Complete” is of course a great word， and there is no art at all， we are often reminded， that is not on too many sides an abject8 compromise. The element of compromise is always there； it is of the essence； we live with it， and it may serve to keep us humble. The formula of the whole matter is sufficiently expressed perhaps in a reply I found myself once making to an inspired but discouraged friend， a fellow-craftsman who had declared in his despair that there was no use trying， that it was a form， the novel， absolutely too difficult. “Too difficult indeed； yet there is one way to master it-which is to pretend consistently that it isn’t.” We are all of us， all the while， pretending-as consistently as we can-that it isn’t， and Balzac’s great glory is that he pretended hardest. He never had to pretend so hard as when he addressed himself to that evocation of the medium， that distillation of the natural and social air， of which I speak， the things that most require on the part of the painter preliminary possession-so definitely require it that， terrified at the requisition when conscious of it， many a painter prefers to beg the whole question.9 He was thus， this ingenious person， to invent some other way of making his characters interesting-some other way， that is， than the arduous way， demanding so much consideration， of presenting them to us. They are interesting， in fact， as subjects of fate， the figures round whom a situation closes， in proportion as， sharing their existence， we feel where fate comes in and just how it gets at them. In the void they are not interesting-and Balzac， like Nature herself， abhorred a vacuum. Their situation takes hold of us because it is theirs， not because it is somebody’s， any one’s， that of creatures unidentified. Therefore it is not superfluous that their identity shall first be established for us， and their adventures， in that measure， have a relation to it， and therewith an appreciability.10 There is no such thing in the world as an adventure pure and simple； there is only mine and yours， and his and hers-it being the greatest adventure of all， I verily11 think， just to be you or I， just to be he or she. To Balzac’s imagination that was indeed in itself an immense adventure-and nothing appealed to him more than to show how we all are， and how we are placed and built-in for being so. What befalls us is but another name for the way our circumstances press upon us-so that an account of what befalls us is an account of our circumstances. 　　The lesson of Balzac， under this comparison， is extremely various， and I should prepare myself much too large a task were I to attempt a list of the separate truths he brings home7. I have to choose among them， and I choose the most important； the three or four that more or less include the others. In reading him over， in opening him almost anywhere today， what immediately strikes us is the part assigned by him， in any picture， to the conditions of the creatures with whom he is concerned. Contrasted with him other prose painters of life scarce seem to see the conditions at all. He clearly held pretended portrayal as nothing， as less than nothing， as a most vain thing， unless it should be， in spirit and intention， the art of complete representation.“Complete” is of course a great word， and there is no art at all， we are often reminded， that is not on too many sides an abject8 compromise. The element of compromise is always there； it is of the essence； we live with it， and it may serve to keep us humble. The formula of the whole matter is sufficiently expressed perhaps in a reply I found myself once making to an inspired but discouraged friend， a fellow-craftsman who had declared in his despair that there was no use trying， that it was a form， the novel， absolutely too difficult. “Too difficult indeed； yet there is one way to master it-which is to pretend consistently that it isn’t.” We are all of us， all the while， pretending-as consistently as we can-that it isn’t， and Balzac’s great glory is that he pretended hardest. He never had to pretend so hard as when he addressed himself to that evocation of the medium， that distillation of the natural and social air， of which I speak， the things that most require on the part of the painter preliminary possession-so definitely require it that， terrified at the requisition when conscious of it， many a painter prefers to beg the whole question.9 He was thus， this ingenious person， to invent some other way of making his characters interesting-some other way， that is， than the arduous way， demanding so much consideration， of presenting them to us. They are interesting， in fact， as subjects of fate， the figures round whom a situation closes， in proportion as， sharing their existence， we feel where fate comes in and just how it gets at them. In the void they are not interesting-and Balzac， like Nature
　　An exquisite account of Balzac’s other characters， does this work for the master criminal Vautrin， Balzac’s alter ego，12 perhaps his daemon？ Rastignac， Lucien de Rubempré， Cousin Pons， Old Goriot， Eugénie Grandet， Baron Hulot，13 and all the other grand protagonists are indebted to Balzac for his showing how they are， and how they are placed. Vautrin is larger， as Balzac himself is， Graham Robb writes， “Balzac is both the embodiment of his age and its most revealing exception.” I transpose14 that to： Vautrin is both the embodiment of The Human Comedy and its most revealing exception. The outcast Vautrin， Satan of the criminal life of Paris， ends as head of the S？reté15. Balzac， the hack writer from Tours， received the final tribute at his funeral from the inevitable Victor Hugo， his only literary rival in sublime madness and unbelievable fecundity.16 　　（translated by Burton Raffel）

　　“The highest of all human powers” here is the art of the great dramatist， Shakespeare or Molière， in representing sudden change in great characters， an Iago or a Tartuffe，29 or a Vautrin. Balzac’s apotheosis in this art comes with “The Last Incarnation of Vautrin，”30 the final section of A Harlot High and Low. Vautrin， bereft of Lucien through the poet’s suicide， is transformed， phase after phase， from the Satan of the underworld to the God of the Parisian police establishment. Balzac dazzles the reader throughout the shock of this transformation， but he leaves me very uncertain what has happened to Vautrin’s Rousseau31 -inspired lifelong battle against society. Vautrin goes over to Balzac’s side， thus becoming a legitimist， a royalist， and a prime preserver of the oligarchy.32 Though Vautrin has been all but33 traumatized by Lucien’s suicide， his conversation to the established order does not seem a reaction to this loss. Perhaps the explanation is the Balzacian energetic of power. Vautrin is now older， and even his diabolic energy may be on the verge of waning， while presumably the power of enforcement requires less strain than the power of subversion. Or again， perhaps the act of usurpation is the supreme accolade for Vautrin， Balzac’s prime surrogate.34
　　One of Balzac’s great inventions is the intricate dance of recruitment that is performed by Granville， the dignified and honorable attorney-general， and the endlessly metamorphic35 Vautrin， who in a sense is seduced by Granville’s authentic moral grandeur. The greatness of Vautrin recognizes， and is raised to a state of exaltation by， the rival greatness of Granville. As a reader， I sorrow at losing Vautrin to the state； it is rather as though Satan repented fully in Paradise Lost36， and rejoined the angelic orders. But Balzac was guiding his genius to safe harbor； he lived only three years beyond Vautrin’s metamorphosis from Death-Dodger to society’s ultimate weapon against disorder. He needed Vautrin to be an allegory of his own posthumous destiny： to become a guardian of the human comedy he had so exuberantly imagined.37
　　波德萊尔有一句著名的评论：“巴尔扎克笔下的每一个人物，哪怕是门房，都具备某种天才。”巴尔扎克很像维克多·雨果，不可思议地受到天赋异禀的支配，那是一种恶魔附体般的意志力，驱使他接连创作出总称为《人间喜剧》的90部中、长篇小说，刻意与但丁的《神曲》（《神圣喜剧》）媲美。格雷厄姆·罗布那本精彩的《巴尔扎克传》给读者留下了骇人的印象：巴尔扎克常常与他的“恶魔精神”浑融一体，无分彼此。鉴于“天才”是拙著唯一的主题，我将在评论巴尔扎克本人的同时，自由穿插对于伏脱冷的分析。这位又名雅克·柯兰或者卡洛斯·埃雷拉神甫的犯罪大师是巴尔扎克人物塑造的神来之笔。伏脱冷是《高老头》（1834—35）和《幻灭》（1837—43）的关键人物，《交际花盛衰记》（1838—47）的头号主角，还是戏剧《伏脱冷》（1840）里的“英雄恶棍”（这个戏才上演了一次就被内政部给禁掉了，不过这在艺术上也算不得多大的损失）。 　　亨利·詹姆斯是一流的文学批评家，除非是感到自己的文学成就受到了威胁（比如来自霍桑、狄更斯和乔治·艾略特的威胁），他批评其他作家都很精当，论巴尔扎克则至为精彩。詹姆斯认为，巴尔扎克拥有“一种神秘莫测的完美”。对于詹姆斯来说，这是巴尔扎克教给其他小说家的最重要的创作经验：
　　相形之下，巴尔扎克的创作经验包罗万象，他所昭示的真谛举不胜举。笔者只能择其要者而论，好在我选择的三点或四点也多多少少涵盖了其他方面。在今天，细读巴尔扎克，随便翻开他作品里的几乎每一頁，一下子就打动我们的，是他展现的每一幅画卷都特别讲究将他所关注的人物放置在特定环境当中。和他相比，其他描绘生活场景的小说家对特定环境的观察还很不到家。巴尔扎克旗帜鲜明地提出，虚有其表的描绘，倘若究其旨趣不是为了创造出“完满表现的艺术”，就只能是空言、败笔和矫饰。“完满”当然是一种崇高的境界。经常有人提醒我们，没有哪件艺术品不是在万不得已的情况下多方妥协的产物。妥协的成分从来都存在；这就是创作的本质；我们无可奈何地忍受这个，由此常怀谦卑之心。关于此规律，我曾经在给一位朋友的回信中予以充分表述。他也是作家，富于灵感却倍感挫折，曾绝望地声称：再怎么尝试也不管用，长篇小说这种体裁确实是太难了。“说实在的，太难了；要掌握它只有一个办法——就是始终自欺欺人：写这个并不难。”我们每一个作家在创作的每一刻都在竭力假装写长篇小说并不难，而巴尔扎克之所以伟大，正是因为他假装得最卖力。当他致力于以文字的魔咒召唤人物的生活环境，对自然状况和社会风习进行艺术提炼的时候，他这种假装委实是卖力到了无以复加的程度。要做到我所说的召唤环境、提炼风习，描绘生活场景的作家必须从一开始就着魔似地不遗余力。真正做到这一点谈何容易，许多描绘生活场景的作家都知难而退，故意回避了整个问题的关键所在。巴尔扎克却灵思巧构，独辟蹊径，塑造出众多引人入胜的人物形象——所谓独辟蹊径，就是不凭死力气，不求面面俱到，也能将人物鲜活地呈现给读者。事实上，巴尔扎克的人物之所以引人入胜，是因为他们受命运拨弄。随着某种情势向这些人物步步逼近，我们能够感同身受地认识到命运在何处介入以及如何支配他们。离开了特定环境，这些人物就变得索然寡味——犹如大自然本身，巴尔扎克厌恶真空。人物所处的情势牢牢吸引了我们，不是因为这种情势属于随便某个人，属于所有人，或者属于身份暧昧不明的人，而是因为每个人自有其特殊的情势，绝不雷同。故此，人物甫一出场就要交代清楚身份的写法并非赘笔，他们的探险奇遇无不与之密切相关，不预作交代就要影响读者的理解。这个世界不存在简单划一的奇遇，只有你我他她各不相同的奇遇。我坚信，任何一种奇遇，只要是充分个性化的，就是最了不起的。巴尔扎克的想象力本身，就是一场规模宏大的探险奇遇。他最大的乐趣，就是展现众生百态，还有人物所置身和嵌入的环境对此起到的决定作用。个人遭际无非是环境如何压迫个人的代名词，故此，描写个人遭际也就是描写特定环境。
　　以上论述能够精妙地诠释巴尔扎克笔下的其他人物，可是用于解读犯罪大师伏脱冷依然奏效吗？伏脱冷是巴尔扎克的第二自我，或许就是他的恶魔精神的化身。通过展现众生百态，揭示他们如何受环境摆布，巴尔扎克塑造出拉斯蒂涅、吕西安·德·吕邦泼雷、邦斯舅舅、高老头、欧也妮·葛朗台、于勒男爵等一系列栩栩如生的主要人物。但伏脱冷比他们都要伟大，正如巴尔扎克本人比其同辈小说家都要伟大。格雷厄姆·罗布写道：“巴尔扎克既是时代精神的化身，又是其最发人深省的例外。”我将这句话改为：“伏脱冷既是《人间喜剧》的化身，又是其最发人深省的例外。”伏脱冷是社会体制的弃民、巴黎黑社会的撒旦，最后却当上了巴黎秘密警察的头目。巴尔扎克来自图尔城，以卖文为生，维克多·雨果却一定要在他的葬礼上敬献悼词的礼赞。论起对诗性崇高的痴狂和令人难以置信的多产，也只有雨果足以和他媲美。
　　巴尔扎克和狄更斯一样，一直写作到生命的最后一息，不过他不曾像狄更斯那样时常在公众面前朗诵表演自己的作品。巴尔扎克总是负债累累，担忧末日将至，不得不疯狂写稿，有时一晚上只睡两个小时，靠拼命喝咖啡硬撑着。他经常处于一种听觉和视觉的迷幻状态当中，令人联想到那句老话：天才距离疯子仅一步之遥。巴尔扎克和雨果一样，都是不可一世的偏执狂，都具备自然的伟力和神秘主义的创作能量。不过，巴尔扎克是纯粹的小说家，所以看似比雨果要理智一些（雨果写过几部长篇小说巨著，但严格说来，他原本是诗人，法语世界里最伟大的诗人，虽说这么描述他在我们这个缺乏品位的时代显得非常不合时宜）。
　　当我们在《高老头》里初次遭遇伏脱冷的时候，并没有很准确地意识到在他韬光隐迹的外表下隐藏着怎样的泰坦精神，可是小说告诉我们，这个40岁的狠角色“不时流露的性格颇有些可怕的深度”。如果追溯伏脱冷的文学谱系，浪漫主义高峰期的色彩要胜过哥特体小说的色彩：他是拜伦式的英雄恶棍，只不过屡次死里逃生。在拜伦笔下没有任何一个人物可以活到40岁，而伏脱冷在黑道上的诨名之一就是“鬼上当”。伏脱冷不是探险立功的骑士，他在和一个他所蔑视的社会作战，但另一方面，无论何时、何地、对于哪个国家政权，他都是颠覆性力量。在实践上他是一个无政府主义者，可是这当中充满了自相矛盾，因为他一手缔造了整个黑社会并实行独裁统治。由于他是巴黎人，而不是西西里人，他那种撒旦式的桀骜不驯与其说是来自家族的影响，不如说是个性使然。他喜欢年轻貌美的男弟子，表现出同性恋的本能欲望，可是这种欲望究竟是基于性欲呢，还是一种父爱的移情，小说对此交代得很暧昧。巴尔扎克本人的性倾向或许也是如此。伏脱冷从不争风吃醋，只要他的小伙子们爱上并与之发生浪漫关系的是女人。
　　伏脱冷的犯罪天才是契合戏剧表现艺术的：他想要把巴尔扎克笔下的人物拉斯蒂涅和诗人吕西安改造成上流社会精英，又出色地搭建了舞台。在《高老头》第三章里，伏脱冷中了警察的埋伏，他抑制住了自身的狂怒，凭此非凡技艺死里逃生：
　　“兹以法律与国王陛下之名……”一个警务人员这么念着，以下的话被众人一片惊讶的声音盖住了。