Chapter 2 - Page 2

knew nothing of its rules, and had never
even seen it played.

In the first place, everything about it seemed to me so foul--so
morally mean and foul. Yet I am not speaking of the hungry,
restless folk who, by scores nay, even by hundreds--could be seen
crowded around the gaming-tables. For in a desire to win quickly
and to win much I can see nothing sordid; I have always
applauded the opinion of a certain dead and gone, but cocksure,
moralist who replied to the excuse that " one may always gamble
moderately ", by saying that to do so makes things worse, since,
in that case, the profits too will always be moderate.

Insignificant profits and sumptuous profits do not stand on the
same footing. No, it is all a matter of proportion. What may
seem a small sum to a Rothschild may seem a large sum to me, and
it is not the fault of stakes or of winnings that everywhere men
can be found winning, can be found depriving their fellows of
something, just as they do at roulette. As to the question
whether stakes and winnings are, in themselves, immoral is
another question altogether, and I wish to express no opinion
upon it. Yet the very fact that I was full of a strong desire to
win caused this gambling for gain, in spite of its attendant
squalor, to contain, if you will, something intimate, something
sympathetic, to my eyes: for it is always pleasant to see men
dispensing with ceremony, and acting naturally, and in an
unbuttoned mood. . . .

Yet, why should I so deceive myself? I
could see that the whole thing was a vain and unreasoning
pursuit; and what, at the first glance, seemed to me the ugliest
feature in this mob of roulette players was their respect for
their occupation--the seriousness, and even the humility, with
which they stood around the gaming tables. Moreover, I had
always drawn sharp distinctions between a game which is de
mauvais genre and a game which is permissible to a decent man.
In fact, there are two sorts of gaming--namely, the game of the
gentleman and the game of the plebs--the game for gain, and the
game of the herd. Herein, as said, I draw sharp distinctions.
Yet how essentially base are the distinctions! For instance, a
gentleman may stake, say, five or ten louis d'or--seldom more,
unless he is a very rich man, when he may stake, say, a thousand
francs; but, he must do this simply for the love of the game
itself--simply for sport, simply in order to observe the process
of winning or of losing, and, above all things, as a man who
remains quite uninterested in the possibility of his issuing a
winner. If he wins, he will be at liberty, perhaps, to give vent
to a laugh, or to pass a remark on the circumstance to a
bystander, or to stake again, or to double