French author Guy de Maupassant (1850-1893), master of the short story, wrote fiction covering the entire range of human experience, from the light and lyrical to the dark and disturbing and everything in between. One of his most macabre, dark and deeply disturbing works is Diary of a Madman, a three-page tale that can be read on a number of different levels, one level being a meditation on the nature of evil. This will be the focus of my review.

We are given the facts upfront: a distinguished magistrate, irreproachable pillar of society with a reputation for being a protector of the weak, a man commanding respect from all those in the legal profession and beyond, dies at age eighty-two. Mourners weep at his grave. All well and good but for one small ominous discovery made by a notary: a strange paper in his desk listing two dozen brief diary entries over the course of ten months entitled: Why?.

The magistrate begins his entries with remarks of a philosophical nature, noting how killing should be a great pleasure since destroying life is closely akin to creating; that is, creating and destroying are the two prime forces in the universe. Picking up on this theme, he then states the mission of every being is to kill - children kill insects, beasts kills beasts, man kills beasts for nourishment, man kills beasts for sport, man has performed human sacrifices, not to mention how man has killed other men in bloody wars throughout years and years of human history - a bloodbath in accord with the natural rhythms of life. Indeed, by the magistrate’s reasoning, there is nothing more beautiful and honorable than killing.

Then, the diary takes on a decidedly more direct and graphic tone. We read: “3rd July. It must be a pleasure, unique and full of zest, to kill; to have there before one the living, thinking being; to make therein a little hole, nothing but a little hole, to see that red thing flow which is the blood, which makes life; and to have before one only a heap of limp flesh, cold, inert, void of thought!”

After this entry, the magistrate is overtaken by the irresistible urge to see the blood of his murder victim. He starts small. He cuts the throat of his servant’s goldfinch. The magistrate enjoys the act of killing, the suffering of his servant at his loss, the memory that he has taken a life and the fact that he is beyond suspicion.

From there the magistrate moves on to other acts of murder, first an innocent young boy and then a harmless fisherman. He enjoys every single aspect of his murders, including, in the first case, watching the boy’s parents weep and in the second case, sentencing an innocent nephew of the fisherman to the guillotine. And then witnessing the actual guillotining of the nephew is a sort of icing on his blood-soaked cake. The manuscript ends and Maupassant’s tale concludes with the sentence: “Alienist physicians to whom the awful story has been submitted declare that there are in the world many undiscovered madmen as adroit and as much to be feared as this monstrous lunatic.”

No doubt, Maupassant has portrayed evil in one of its most diabolical forms. So, how has such evil been explained within the Western monotheistic tradition, which is, of course, the tradition in which Guy de Maupassant belonged? Simply stated, the dilemma is: How can such evil exist in a world where there is an all knowing, all powerful, all good God?

In an attempting to answer this question, enough books have been written to fill a small library. Usually the answers revolve around the concept of free will or ultimate purpose. Evil is seen as a falling away from the good or God, or, in other words, evil doesn’t have any claim to existence apart from a good God.

The ancient Gnostics and the old Manichaean religion from the Middle East took a different stance. These religious traditions viewed evil as a counterforce in its own right; evil as a reality independent of any good deity or God. For me, this Maupassant tale of the bloodthirsty magistrate gives me pause – it certainly has the feel that evil is a powerful force in itself and those ancient Gnostics and Manichaeans were closer to the truth.

Link to this Maupassant tale, Diary of a Madman: https://americanliterature.com/author/guy-de-maupassant/short-story/the-diary-of... ( )

French author Guy de Maupassant (1850-1893), master of the short story, wrote fiction covering the entire range of human experience, from the light and lyrical to the dark and disturbing. One of his most macabre, dark and deeply disturbing works is Diary of a Madman. This 3-page tale can be read on a number of different levels, one level being a meditation on the nature of evil. This will be the focus of my review.

We are given the facts upfront: a distinguished magistrate, irreproachable pillar of society with a reputation for being a protector of the weak, a man commanding respect from all those in the legal profession and beyond, dies at age 82. Mourners weep at his grave. All well and good but for one small ominous discovery made by a notary: a strange paper in his desk listing two dozen brief diary entries over the course of 10 months entitled: Why?.

The magistrate begins his entries with remarks of a philosophical nature, noting how killing should be a great pleasure since destroying life is closely akin to creating; that is, creating and destroying are the two prime forces in the universe. Picking up on this theme, he then states the mission of every being is to kill -- children kill insects, beasts kills beasts, man kills beasts for nourishment, man kills beasts for sport, man has performed human sacrifices and man has killed other men in wars throughout history – this bloodbath is in accord with the natural rhythms of life; indeed, by the magistrate’s reasoning, there is nothing more beautiful and honorable than killing.

Then, the diary takes on a decidedly more direct and graphic tone. We read: “3rd July. It must be a pleasure, unique and full of zest, to kill; to have there before one the living, thinking being; to make therein a little hole, nothing but a little hole, to see that red thing flow which is the blood, which makes life; and to have before one only a heap of limp flesh, cold, inert, void of thought!”

After this entry, the magistrate is overtaken by the irresistible urge to see the blood of his murder victim. He starts small. He cuts the throat of his servant’s goldfinch. The magistrate enjoys the act of killing, the suffering of his servant at his loss, the memory that he has taken a life and the fact that he is beyond suspicion. From there the magistrate moves on to other acts of murder, first an innocent young boy and then a harmless fisherman. He enjoys every single aspect of his murders, including watching the boy’s parents weep and sentencing an innocent nephew of the fisherman to the guillotine. Witnessing the actual guillotining of the nephew is a sort of icing on his blood-soaked cake. The manuscript ends and Maupassant’s tale concludes with the sentence: “Alienist physicians to whom the awful story has been submitted declare that there are in the world many undiscovered madmen as adroit and as much to be feared as this monstrous lunatic.”

No doubt, Maupassant has portrayed evil in one of its most diabolical forms. So, how has such evil been explained within the Western monotheistic tradition, which is, of course, the tradition in which Guy de Maupassant belonged? Simply stated, the dilemma is: how can such evil exist in a world where there is an all knowing, all powerful, all good God? In an attempting to answer this question, enough books have been written to fill a small library. Usually the answers revolve around the concept of free will or ultimate purpose. Evil is seen as a falling away from the good or God, or, in other words, evil doesn’t have a reality in its own right.

The ancient Gnostics and the old Middle Eastern Manichaean religion took a different stance. These religions viewed evil as a counterforce in its own right; evil as a reality independent of any good Deity or God or Gods. For me, this Maupassant tale of the bloodthirsty magistrate gives me pause – it certainly has the feel that evil is a powerful force in itself and those ancient Gnostics and Manichaeans were closer to the truth.



( )