“Our vanities differ as our noses do”

“Our vanities differ as our noses do” is the passage’s compact image for the distinctive forms that self-conceit can take. Vanity may be widespread, but it is not uniform: its shape reflects the particular construction of each person’s mind. The analogy turns an abstract moral category into a visible difference, preparing the reader to judge Tertius Lydgate not by a generic label but by the specific character of his pride.

The Analogy and Its Particularity

The comparison follows the narrator’s insistence that Lydgate’s faults have their own recognizable manner and expression. His conceit is described as massive in its claims and benevolently contemptuous rather than simpering or impertinent. He imagines that he could do much for people he considers foolish while remaining certain they could not exert power over him; in Paris, he had even considered joining the Saint-Simonians in order to turn them against some of their doctrines. The image of differing noses thus serves a precise argument: one shared human failing does not make every instance alike.

Lydgate’s Mixed Character

The passage sets Lydgate’s arrogance beside substantial virtues. At twenty-seven he is generous in his resolve to act beneficently, intellectually ambitious, and interested in ideas beyond expensive social pursuits. Yet his distinction of mind does not extend equally to his feelings and judgments. His intellectual ardor does not free him from ordinary prejudices about furniture, women, or the importance of being recognized as better born than other country surgeons. His imagined furniture, in particular, would still have to be the best. The analogy makes this mixture legible: conceit is not a single, all-explaining defect but a personal trait that inhabits the same character as generosity and purpose.

Narrative Significance

The narrator refuses both to idealize Lydgate’s good intentions and to reduce him to his faults. The surrounding account stresses that character remains in process, capable of expanding or shrinking under circumstance. Against that open future, the expression’s homely comparison gives moral variation a memorable form: distinctions of character may be as individual as differences of face, and admirable aims do not erase commonplace assumptions. It therefore sharpens the passage’s warning that a person’s virtues and ambitions cannot be taken as proof of sound judgment in every part of life.